Tag Archives: Eric Holder

Did attorney general Eric Holder know about Operation Fast and Furious?

From Investors Business Daily.

Excerpt:

As hearings reveal the attorney general to be either a charlatan or a boob, word comes of possible FBI complicity in letting guns “walk” into Mexico, ordered by an administration pushing gun control.

If there was any doubt that Project Gunrunner and its offshoot, Operation Fast and Furious, had little to do with stopping gun-trafficking into Mexico and a lot to do with creating an atmosphere for more gun control, it ended with the revelation by Fox News that two convicted felons were allowed to buy and move more than 300 guns into Mexico, something the FBI should have caught but didn’t.

Under current federal law, people with felony convictions are not permitted to buy weapons, and those with felony arrests are typically flagged while the FBI conducts a thorough background check through its National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).

According to court records reviewed by Fox News, two of the 20 defendants indicted in the Fast and Furious investigation — and, yes, there have been indictments — have felony convictions. Jacob Wayne Chambers and Sean Christopher Stewart obtained more than 360 weapons despite criminal records that should have prevented them from buying even one gun.

When asked about the breakdown, Stephen Fischer, a spokesman for the NICS System, said the FBI had no comment. We are not surprised. Since day one, you could here crickets chirp every time the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives or the Department of Justice was asked about an operation that got two U.S. agents killed.

We suspect the FBI was ordered to look the other way just as ATF agents were told to every time they had a chance to interdict weapons going to Mexico, allegedly the whole purpose of the operation. That order could only have come from Attorney General Eric Holder.

One wonders how far up the chain this operation went. The Democrats are desperate to impose gun control measures, and this operation would have given them their chance, if it had not been exposed as government-supported arms dealing.

Related posts

Civil rights commission finds that Obama administration has racist double standard

Remember the New Black Panthers voter intimidation story?

Here’s a re-cap from the Wall Street Journal.

Excerpt:

President Obama’s Justice Department continues to stonewall inquiries about why it dropped a voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party.

The episode—which Bartle Bull, a former civil rights lawyer and publisher of the left-wing Village Voice, calls “the most blatant form of voter intimidation I’ve ever seen”—began on Election Day 2008. Mr. Bull and others witnessed two Black Panthers in paramilitary garb at a polling place near downtown Philadelphia. (Some of this behavior is on YouTube.)

One of them, they say, brandished a nightstick at the entrance and pointed it at voters and both made racial threats. Mr. Bull says he heard one yell “You are about to be ruled by the black man, cracker!”

In the first week of January, the Justice Department filed a civil lawsuit against the New Black Panther Party and three of its members, saying they violated the 1965 Voting Rights Act by scaring voters with the weapon, uniforms and racial slurs. In March, Mr. Bull submitted an affidavit at Justice’s request to support its lawsuit.

When none of the defendants filed any response to the complaint or appeared in federal district court in Philadelphia to answer the suit, it appeared almost certain Justice would have prevailed by default. Instead, the department in May suddenly allowed the party and two of the three defendants to walk away.

Well, an investigation just completed, and now we have the facts on why the charges were dropped by the Obama administration.

Jennifer Rubin explains why in the left-wing Washington Post. (H/T The Heritage Foundation)

Excerpt:

The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights came out in December with a draft of its interim report on the New Black Panthers Party scandal. Earlier today a final report was posted on the commission’s website, and with it, a flurry of rebuttals and separate statements from a number of the commissioners. The import of these statements should not be minimized.

The statements indicate several points: 1) the New Black Panther Party case brought by career Justice Department employees was meritorious on the law and the facts; 2) there is voluminous evidence of the Obama administration’s political interference in the prosecution of the New Black Panther Party case; 3) there is ample evidence that the Obama administration directed Justice Department employees not to bring cases against minority defendants who violated voting rights laws or to enforce a provision requiring that states and localities clean up their voting rolls to prevent fraud; 4) the Justice Department stonewalled efforts to investigate the case; and 5) vice chairman Abigail Thernstrom has, for reasons not entirely clear, ignored the evidence and tried to undermine the commission’s work.

The rest of the article has specific comments from the investigators of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

CRISIS: Is Obama’s Department of Justice enabling voter registration fraud?

First, from The Other McCain, a 3-minute summary of the case.

To get a longer summary of the case, you really need check out this PJTV interview with several people connected to the case – Peter N. Kirsanow, who is on the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, former Department of Justice attorney Hans von Spakovsky, Todd F. Gaziano who is also on the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, and another former Department of Justice attorney J. Christian Adams.

The smaller story is that the New Black Panther voter intimidation case was dismissed by political appointees of the Obama administration.

Excerpt:

President Barack Obama’s handpicked U.S. Justice Department officials are ignoring civil rights cases in which the alleged victims are whites and they abandoned a voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party that resulted in a “travesty of justice.”

Christopher Coates, former voting chief for the department’s Civil Rights Division, testified at a hearing before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, after outcries from citizens’ groups and public-interest organization over the Justice Department’s stonewalling a full investigation.

Coates alleges that DOJ officials, for political reasons, dismissed intimidation charges against New Black Panther members who were videotaped outside a Philadelphia polling place in 2008 dressed in military-style uniforms—one was brandishing a nightstick—and allegedly hurling racial slurs.

However, the Justice Department reportedly prevented him from testifying and subsequently transferred him to the U.S. Attorney’s Office in South Carolina.

But what is the worst thing in the Coates testimony? I think it’s this thing below, which Spakovsky mentioned in the PJTV video.

From Verum Serum. (H/T Ace of Spades)

Excerpt from Coates’ testimony:

In June 2009, the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) issued its bi-annual report concerning which states appeared not to be complying with Section 8′s list maintenance requirements. The report identified eight states that appeared to be the worst in terms of their non-compliance with the list maintenance requirements of Section 8 [of the Voting Rights Act]. These were states that reported that no voters had been removed from any of their voters’ list in the last two years. Obviously this is a good indication that something is not right with the list maintenance practice in that state. As Chief of the Voting Section, I assigned attorneys to work on this matter, and in September 2009, I forwarded a memorandum to the CRD Front Office asking for approval to go forward with Section 8 list maintenance investigations in these states.

During the time that I was Chief, no approval was given to this project, and my understanding that approval has never been given for that Section 8 list maintenance project to date. That means that we have entered the 2010 election cycle with eight states appearing to be in major noncompliance with the list maintenance requirements of Section 8 of the NVRA, and yet the Voting Section which has the responsibility to enforce that law has yet to take any action.

Ooops, here’s another bombshell in Coates’ testimony, from Hot Air.

Excerpt:

It contains at least one bombshell, which is that Obama appointee Loretta King ordered Coates to stop asking applicants whether they supported race-neutral enforcement of the Voting Rights Act.  The question became necessary because of resistance in the Civil Rights division from career attorneys to enforce the law when it resulted in African-American defendants rather than victims…

Coates says:

In the spring of 2009, Ms. King, who had by then been appointed Acting AAG for Civil Rights by the Obama Administration, called me to her office and specifically instructed me that I was not to ask any other applicants whether they would be willing to, in effect, race-neutrally enforce the VRA.  Ms. King took offense that I was asking such a question of job applicants and directed me not to ask it because she does not support equal enforcement of the provisions of the VRA and had been highly critical of the filing and prosecution of the Ike Brown case.

Stay tuned. And this may explain why the Democrats are able to win elections despite not being competent to govern.

And don’t forget Obama’s former employer ACORN, which is also being investigated for voter fraud. And the NAACP was also mentioned in the PJTV video.

UPDATE: Gateway Pundit notes that Robin Carnahan, who is now for a Senate seat in Missouri, refused to clear dead people from voter roles. Gateway Pundit has a nice picture of Obama hugging Robin Carnahan.