Gunrunner update: AP covers the story

While the AP tries real hard to remain neutral – funny how that always happens when the story hurts the left, huh – the fact remain that they have been the only ones covering the”Gunrunner” scandal and the involvement of the DOJ & the WH in the whole sordid affair. The rest of the MSM has simply been ignoring this to cover for team Obama. Breibart news has another in the latest & greatest AP stories covering “operation Fast & Furious a.k.a. Gunrunner”. It’s a must read (and read it all), because it is damning.

I however want to focus on the latest and newest revelation that came out of this story, and that’s the role played by gun dealers and their reaction to demands from the ATF – which got its orders from the DOJ and they got theirs it now looks from the WH – to basically ignore their concerns that these weapons could not be tracked and would end up in the hands of the Cartels:

But soon, the agents weren’t the only ones voicing concerns. Gun dealers also grew wary as more and more weapons were sold. Speaking on condition of anonymity because of ongoing inquiries, one dealer described the pace of the sales as “unprecedented … It had never happened like that before.”

Still another said that because of the volume, “our sales people would go behind the door and have a direct dial to ATF, speak to somebody and they’d say, `Yup, they’re on our list. Go ahead and make the sale.’ Otherwise, we probably wouldn’t have.”

One dealer even met with Voth and the lead prosecutor on the case, Assistant U.S. Attorney Emory Hurley, to seek assurances that guns weren’t going south of the border. That same dealer emailed Voth in June 2010, saying he was worried for friends who were Border Patrol agents. “I want to help ATF with its investigation but not at the risk of (agents’) safety,” wrote the dealer.

What this revelation tells me is that despite the left’s constant attempt to paint dealers as part of the problem when they where selling the whole “weapons are to easy to get in the US, and these weapons are being sent south where they are used in the Mexican drug war” meme, that the problem lay with them and this scandalous operation. Dealers seemed to be far more responsible and concerned about what was going on than most at the ATF, or those driving the operation from higher up levels like the DOJ and the WH, and when you apply Ockham’s razor here, the only reason left why this could be the case simply leaves you shuddering.

The attempts to cover-up and misdirect, from the Obama Administration, are in high gear, and most in the LSM are ignoring the story, but the facts are coming out. I am starting to think that it’s time for a special prosecutor.

Comments are closed.

  1. Poosh

    This story, that has left 100s dead (unlike the Murdoch smear stories) has barely if at all been mentioned in the UK.

    If this was Bush, it would be one of the main stories.

    Thumb up 0

  2. Poosh

    You know, from when you sell automatic weapons, probably quite good ones, to drug cartels in a country that has a bigger kill count than Iraq and Afghanistan…

    Thumb up 0

  3. Poosh

    Links please? What do you even mean? Links please? You want me to provide a link that shows and proves every single drug-cartel related murder in Mexico and then a small number of them to the 2000, guns used through this operation?

    It’s a logical inference. The death rate via drug cartels is horrific – it is a sickening crime that is almost never reported. From wiki,

    “During the operation, at least 2,000 guns were released and tracked by ATF agents into Mexico, many of which have been linked to at least 150 shootings. Of the 2,000 guns knowingly released by ATF agents, only 600 have been recovered by officials. The remaining 1,400 guns have not been recovered and possibly remain in the hands of drug gangs.”

    So we have 150 shootings, at least. Seriously this is the most idiotic sting operation idea ever. And we have an unknown 1,4000 missing guns > god knows how much pain those weapons have inflicted.


    Tamaulipas burst onto the drug war scene in 2010 with 1,209 deaths in 2010 compared to “only” 90 in 2009, an increase of 1243%

    Not surprisingly, Chihuahua, led all other states with 10,135 deaths during the four year period, almost 30% of the total. In 2010 alone 4,427 were killed in Chihuahua, up 32% from 2009.

    I’m not suggesting that any increase is the result of the US government’s sting operation. I put those quotes to simply demonstrate the deaths from drug-related violence in Mexico – some 34,612 murders from Dec 2006 to Dec 2010.

    I think assuming a hundred maybe were killed by this Operation alone is hardly outrageous. After all, the 600 guns found were involved in 150 shootings. 1,400 left?

    Why isn’t the international community trying to help Mexico ffs. This isn’t cultural or religion, it’s based on the bullshit of men, f’cking greed.

    Thumb up 0


    these were civilian legal semi-autos, unless you are talking about the military arms sold via the State Department to a Mexican company that was a front for the Zetas.

    Thumb up 0


    if one wants to extrapolate the likelihood that these weapons were used in crimes and not being used as mantel pieces or for pig hunting, yeah a 100-200 is not a unreasonable number to shoot for.
    Has for hard facts and numbers.. ugh that would require a lot of field work.
    but these added guns most certainly, helped up the end totals.

    Thumb up 0

  6. AlexInCT *

    You must not have been following the news reports about how the last couple of years or so, what goes on in Mexico is making Faluja look like a walk in the park, huh?

    Thumb up 0

  7. hist_ed

    Really, as was pointed out above, the gun runner weapons were semi-automatic. The cartels and their thugs have shown a definite preference for automatic weapons and have generally not had too many problems getting them.

    During the operation, at least 2,000 guns were released and tracked by ATF agents into Mexico, many of which have been linked to at least 150 shootings

    “linked to”? What does that mean? Maybe one group of ten hit men killed a dozen people while one of them carried a gun runner AK clone and the rest were armed with auto weapons from other sources?

    Look this program was really stupid. I don’t dismiss Alex’s contention that it may have been entirely political-stir up more gun violence connected to US weapons and use that to argue for more stringent gun control laws (I also don’t have enough info to agree with it yet). But making definitive claims about hundreds of dead without hedging a little (“probably” is a good word) or providing real information to back up those claims is stupid. You don’t know for sure and neither does anyone else. Stop being sloppy and more people will take you seriously.

    Thumb up 0

  8. hist_ed

    And as numerous gun bloggers and the NRA have pointed out, the vast majority of guns used in crime in Mexico do not come from US gun stores.

    Thumb up 0

  9. Kimpost

    I see that hist_ed has made my point, already. I’d be careful citing hundreds of dead, before that’s been investigated and confirmed. I personally find those kind of numbers highly unlikely, but mostly I just don’t know.

    I’ve also said that Fast & Furious was bad enough without the grandest of grand conspiracies. The whole thing probably wasn’t a nefarious gun grabber scheme, but more likely a case of bureaucrats trying to lead field work, without knowing what the fuck they were doing. Astonishing really.

    Anyway. I trust and hope that heads will roll because of it. If not for anything else than for making sure that it doesn’t happen again.

    Thumb up 0

  10. Poosh

    I find it odd that you regard that number as “stupid and sloppy”. Call it conjecture if you like, yes I should have said ‘probably’. One trained american has been murdered with a weapon from this operation, so I don’t think the fact that they aren’t automatics is of concern, then again … I was wrong about them being automatic weapons, but I’m not too bothered. With 30,000 at least dead I don’t think 100 is a stretch, it is impossible to know though, given they lost most of them, but unless people (fine I should have said probably) make sure people are aware that 100 or more might have been directly killed by these weapons, and it’s more than likely quite frankly, then this scandal is even less likely to be imprinted into the minds of everyone.

    I think the actual deaths caused are more probable than Obama-Admin machiavellianism. My original point still remains: You sell hundreds of weapons to gangs that spread terror and intimidation, admittedly with good intentions PROBABLY, you’re gonna help with the death and terror that is widespread there. You think they waste automatic ammunition on an execution? My original point: why is this scandal, which 100s died (probably, whatever, conjecture, fine, but a good inference), get almost no news coverage, yet the Murdoch ‘scandal’ was plastered over most places – no one died, or was even hurt.

    No, it’s not factual, nor is there a way to get positive facts, but it’s a good inference based on the information available.

    Thumb up 0

  11. AlexInCT *

    The point hist_ed was that the guns that OUR GOVERNMENT send to Mexico as part of this operation within an operation – the fake claim Fast & Furious was about tracking guns so the feds could do something about the persistent problem they said existed, while the real mission was to send guns down there so they could say “see, here is the evidence the guns are there” – have killed people. Lots of people! I now am convinced that was the intent of the operation: to have people get killed with these guns they cold then claim through an “investigation” to trace back to the US, and then to say we needed stricter gun control laws. I am also convinced that most guns from the US are there and being used – there are exceptions, of course – are likely there because of our government getting them there.

    Thumb up 0

  12. AlexInCT *

    Maybe I am not giving you your due credit, but to me it looks like you keep focusing on minutia that give the criminals that where behind this operation a pass, while ignoring why they obviously did what they did.

    These guns, and likely a lot more we don’t know of yet, went to Mexico despite protests and questions from agents in the ATF, the gun dealers, and everyone that wasn’t a political hack involved in this disaster. They have been used to kill people.

    While I am not dismissing the count of bodies, the fact remains our government ran an illegal and criminal operation to deprive citizens of their rights. That’s not just fucking outright Machiavellian, it is illegal, and we need investigations and people sent to jail so these bastards never again dare pull shit like this. Nobody has been able to present a ligitimate reason for why the WH/DOJ/ATF did what they did, and I doubt we will get it without a special prosecutor.

    Can you imagine if Bush had done something like this to one of the cornerstones of liberal belief? How the LSM would be all over the WH, the DOJ, and demanding impeachments?

    Thumb up 0

  13. hist_ed

    I find it odd that you regard that number as “stupid and sloppy”.

    What else would you call a number that you pulled out of your ass?

    Call it conjecture if you like, yes I should have said ‘probably’.

    Ahh, the beginning of wisdom . . .

    If you want to come up with a reasonable estimate, you could probably do so in 10 or 15 minutes. Here is your route:

    One: establish number of annual gun deaths in Mexico.
    Two: establish percentage that are caused by “assault rifles”
    Three: establish number of “assault rifles” in private hands
    Four: divide number 1400 by number three above-this will give you the ratio of assault rifles in Mexico to Gunrunner supplied assault rifles.

    Multiply number two above by the percent found in number four.

    While the number generated from this exercise will be an estimate and ought to have several qualifiers attached (like that word “probably” that I mentioned), the number would be better for purposes of discussion that the first method I mentioned above: pulling a number out of your ass. It will have the added advantage of smelling much better given its source material.

    If you accept this challenge, please provide links to the documentation that you find. As we all know, 76% of statistics found on the internet are made up.

    Here is my basic objection to your number and why I think it is exaggerated. Mexico is awash with weapons. The cartels have been buying up firearms for years. Who knows how many they have, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it numbered in the hundreds of thousands.* These criminal organizations seem to prefer military grade weapons-full auto rifles (note that almost all of these can be switched to semi-auto fire for those cartel members concerned about saving precious resources while engaged in execution style murder–or course, more resources would be saved by forgoing the rifle and executing with a handgun–and there have been a number of beheadings of late down south, haven’t there? I suppose a machete is the ultimate in sustainable murder equipment). Given that 1400 is a much smaller number than the number of actual weapons in the hands of the cartels, the percentage of murders committed using that 1400 seems like it would be pretty small.

    *note the language I use in the sentence. It is a nice polite way of saying that I pulled the number out of my ass.

    Thumb up 0

  14. hist_ed

    I understand all of this Alex and agree with most of it. While the political motivation for this idiotic program seems to be the most likely explanation, I would wait for more evidence before making a definitive statement about it. My quibble, such as it is, is with the habit of pulling numbers out of one’s ass to try to make a point. As I said above it is sloppy and reduces the credibility of the ass puller.

    What do you, Alex, think of those who mindlessly (or maybe mindfully) rant about the US violating the Geneva Conventions in its treatment of Jihadi asswipes that it captures on the battlefield? You and I both know that they are not covered by the Geneva Conventions. If one is arguing against waterboarding, acknowledging that jihadi asswipes are not covered by the Geneva Conventions engenders a lot more respect from knowledgable opponents because the arguer doesn’t seem to be just grabbing whatever argument comes to hand, they are actually trying to argue using the facts.

    Thumb up 0

  15. Poosh

    What you call pulling out of your ass, I call a good inference!

    I do find it a little suspicious that out of all the weapons these cartels have, your boarder agent was brought down with what I assume was a pistol? That apparently is rarely used? Yes? Just a fluke, I guess.

    Thumb up 0

  16. Poosh

    You’re mixing up deduction and induction.

    Claims about those killed in regard to above is an inductive claim – there is likely no possible way to ever know the truth. You’re not happy with that fine.

    But the Geneva Convention is a matter of record and fact (more or less). There is no use of induction. You are either right or wrong and it IS possible to know the truth.

    Thumb up 0

  17. AlexInCT *

    I understand all of this Alex and agree with most of it. While the political motivation for this idiotic program seems to be the most likely explanation, I would wait for more evidence before making a definitive statement about it.

    That’s where we disagree hist_ed. I am now convinced that they are in CYA mode and want to bury this whole thing. If we want more facts, we need an investigation. And we are not going to get that if we let them just tell us not to look behind the curtain.

    What do you, Alex, think of those who mindlessly (or maybe mindfully) rant about the US violating the Geneva Conventions in its treatment of Jihadi asswipes that it captures on the battlefield?

    I see your attempt to make a point, but I do not buy the comparison. Terrorists are not protected by the Geneva convention, despite the attempt to impose that solely on the US – the European states sure as hell do not confer any Geneva convention protections on their terrorists – and in this scenario the government, if it where to give such an order, would be doing it to protect people and the troops. What we have here is our government doing something to steal the rights of the citizens.

    Besides, it is the same people that accused the military of war crimes that are now behind another likely freedom robbing criminal act. And funny how all their concern about the Geneva convention went out the door as soon as their guy was in charge. And neither of those are a coincidence with the “the end justifies the means” crowd.

    Thumb up 0