ICC and ATF Implicated in ‘Fast and Furious’ Collaboration with Eric Holder’s DOJ


The cover-ups by the federal government are coming so ‘fast and furious’ (excuse the pun) -  from Benghazi , to the the massive federal spending on wasteful and irrelevant programs while essential services are being cut, and the ongoing purchase of massive numbers of guns and ammunition that the DHS refuses to explain – that we may be forgetting the first cover-up that set the stage for the profound secrecy that veils our government’s activities. The administration’s blatant disregard for promised transparency and for the law itself threatens the integrity of our nation. 

Eric Holder, for example, is still Head of the Department of Justice, despite his participation in massive straw purchases of firearms, and his withholding massive numbers of critical documents regarding the illegal gun-running program known as “Fast and Furious”. This program put well over two thousand US guns, including AK-47 rifles and .50-caliber guns, into the hands of the Mexican drug cartels and gangs, and were responsible for hundreds of deaths in Mexico and the murder of at least two American federal agents. Two Fast and Furious AK-47s were found at the murder scene on American soil of U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry  in December 2010.

The following article reports one more situation covered up by the administration in which lower level ICE and ATF officials colluded with the DOJ to implement the Fast and Furious program.  It is altogether possible that lower level personnel will now be made scapegoats for the senior level elite, but there may also have been a break in the chain of command or, even more likely, a fear of reprisal from senior officials that caused the lack of communication detailed below. Whatever the reason, there is no excuse for the  irresponsible programs for which the initiators and facilitators are not held accountable and which are covered up rather than cleaned up.

Where is the outrage?  Why are so many Americans willing to accept this unacceptable behavior from our government without comment, and ignore the arrogance and unaccountability that seems to be running rampant throughout the federal government?

As with Benghazi, no one has been held accountable for the tragedies that were the direct result of malfeasance at the  highest levels of our government.

——–  Ilana Freedman, Editor


ICE Investigators Violated Policy to Help “Fast and Furious” Gun-Running Program


Agents with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) violated their agency’s own policy by cooperating with the Department of Justice’s “Fast and Furious” operation that allowed guns to wind up in the hands of drug traffickers.

The purpose of Operation Fast and Furious was to spy on people who were illegally buying firearms on behalf of others and then turning them over to drug cartels. Investigators did, in fact, follow weapons from their purchase to their transfer. But once the illegal connection was proven, surveillance ceased. About 1,430 firearms remain missing. Two were found at the scene of the December 2010 murder of Border Patrol agent Brian Terry.

Homeland Security Inspector General Charles K. Edwards and his team uncovered the improper cooperation by ICE. According to his report, the cooperation between lower level ICE officials and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), which was running the controversial operation, was not communicated to senior Homeland Security officials until three months after Terry was killed.

ICE agents reportedly told Edwards that they believed they were supposed to go along with “Fast and Furious” because the Office of the Assistant Attorney General asked an ICE investigative unit in Arizona to stop its investigations into weapons smuggling that could have disrupted ATF’s operation.

Read the original article here.


Posted in US
2 comments on “ICC and ATF Implicated in ‘Fast and Furious’ Collaboration with Eric Holder’s DOJ

    Ilana, we agree that ‘fast and furious’ was a monumental screw up. No doubt. But, as for the cover up is concerned, that is open to opinion and has yet to be proven….and there are many who would like to prove a cover up, but have not. And further, no one to my knowledge has brought a suit alleging our laws had been broken.
    As far as Benghazi is concerned, while it was indeed sad, has not risen either to the level of a conspiricy or cover up! Same reasoning as above. And, the allegation that there were no consequences are just false. There were at least two senior State Department people who resigned as I seem to remember.

    • Ilana says:

      Bert, the whole point behind what I called a cover-up is that in what was supposed to be the most transparent administration in history there has been a series of situations involving several agencies, where information requested by Congressional committees was withheld, or delivered so heavily redacted that they are unreadable.

      When Eric Holder appeared before the House Judiciary Committee, he gave conflicting testimony, he dodged questions, and refused to turn over hundreds of requested documents. Even the President got involved and invoked executive privilege to protect Holder, in clear contravention of the law. In the end, Holder was held in contempt of Congress for his lack of cooperation in the investigation. When the head of the Department of Justice is cited for contempt for refusing to provide answers to questions the committee has every right to know, it is indeed the sign of a cover up.

      Similarly, regarding the Benghazi attacks, the investigating Congressional committees have not been able to get a straight story from anyone in the administration. They have not had access to the survivors, or gotten any detailed accounts of what actually happened that night. They have not received satisfactory answers to questions like why repeated requests for added security were ignored, why the families of the murdered Americans have been warned by the government to keep quiet, or what if any remediation or retaliation has occurred since then. This too is a sign of a very large cover-up and it should, in my opinion, enrage Americans who are entitled to know why their Ambassador and three other Americans were murdered that night in Benghazi.

      The fact that law suits have not been filed is not an indication that malfeasance has not occurred. The process in these situations is through Congressional hearings, unless the victims or their families take their grievances to court. But it is very difficult, if not impossible, to sue the federal government, as you may know, and if, into the mix, you are warned by that government to keep quiet, your options would be very limited.

      The absence of legal action is not proof of innocence. In these cases, all the evidence points in a very different direction, and seems to lead to the top of the administration (Why, for example, did the President sleep through the Benghazi attacks, even while his leaderless agency heads presumably sat up all night in the situation room, watching the satellite feeds?)

      Unfortunately, Bert, there are still far more questions than answers.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>