I was going to cover this late yesterday but let it slip through the cracks. John Richardson backstops me nicely with this article entitled "Interesting Suggestions," based on this post at CleanUpATF.org by an ATF agent with the moniker "Epic Failure."
Money quote: "There is an extraordinary amount of crime events and homicides that you do not know about, and will not know about, unless you demand the reports and make Melson himself certify their accuracy."
Epic Failure's post:
Senator Grassley and Congress, demand the documents and make Ken Melson explain them!
Demand that ATF produce and certify documents that list the crime scene recovery location and the crime event of every single gun that has been allowed to hit the streets since the inception of project gunrunner and recovered in any type of crime. That needs to include the New Orleans, Houston, Dallas, Phoenix and Los Angeles Field Divisions.
ATF has this information within their databases and it can be accessed quickly and easily using specific search parameters. Melson brags to congress on ATF's assistance to Mexico in establishing the Mexican e-Trace program. He claims ATF has spent years and millions of dollars helping Mexico establish the same ballistics matching technology that is used by ATF in the U.S. let him show you how well the systems work by generating for you the information that they are designed to produce.
There is also something called a "time to crime" report. You need that. It tells what amount of time has elapsed from when a gun is first purchased until it is recovered in a crime. A short time-to-crime indicates that the gun was purchased for the specific intent of being used in a crime and that the criminals wasted no time in doing so.
ATF agents use this information all the time as a part of an intelligently conducted trafficking investigation. The problem here is that ATF never imagined that its lead development hardware, software and programs would be utilized to show the failures of their operations. You are going to be infuriated with what you find.
Double check ATF's work. It will most likely be deceptive. You've already seen you cannot trust them to tell you the truth. Then demand that Melson himself answer for the findings instead of allowing him to insult you by sending a flunky to be his bag man.
Thousands of guns have been "walked" and gotten into the open during gunrunner. People don't commit gun trafficking crimes for an end user who is a common citizen wanting an AK-47 for home protection. By the very design of the straw purchaser/lying and buying crime schemes, those guns are intended for the hands of persons who have a predisposed violent and murderous and criminal intent and need firearms to further their crimes.
There is an extraordinary amount of crime events and homicides that you do not know about, and will not know about, unless you demand the reports and make Melson himself certify their accuracy.
If you really want to put an end to the crimes committed by ATF management in name of the American people and while wasting our tax dollars, this is where you start.
5 comments:
Drudge heard from..............
http://azstarnet.com/news/local/crime/article_681d29cf-845a-5aea-9f34-3837d70b8a31.html
"ATF has this information within their databases and it can be accessed quickly and easily using specific search parameters."
Could this be Gunwalkergate's equivalent of the oval office tape recording system? I can hardly wait for the missing 18 minutes of data...
III N TN
That sounds like very good advice and I hope to hell the good Senator follows it.
One question, though. What mechanism is in place to FORCE the ATF brass to comply? What kind of teeth does a Senator- even a very senior one - really have? Assuming a worst-case scenario, where ATF backed by DOJ tells Grassley to piss up a rope again, what can the Senator REALLY do?
From where I sit, the executive seems to have the bit between its teeth and basically is doing what it wants to do. What sort of means - apart from elements of DOJ - does the Legislative branch have to enforce its dictates upon the Executive? And no I am not just being a gloomy gus. I just do not trust the executive branch - at ANY level all the way down here to SAPD and Bexar County Sheriff's Dept - any farther than I can shot-put a locomotive. Any time I catch 'em doing what they're supposed to I am pleasantly surprised.
Illumine me, oh fellow followers of the redoubtable Dutchman.
Bad Cyborg X
"Assuming a worst-case scenario, where ATF backed by DOJ tells Grassley to piss up a rope again, what can the Senator REALLY do?"
Appointment to office by the executive branch is with the "advice and consent" of the Senate. The Senate has power to remove Holder and/or Melson from office. Alternately, the Senate can defund either agency.
From where I sit, the executive seems to have the bit between its teeth and basically is doing what it wants to do. What sort of means - apart from elements of DOJ - does the Legislative branch have to enforce its dictates upon the Executive?
One word answer: Impeachment. In practice, other more subtle means are employed, such as behind-the-scenes arm twisting.
It's a bad idea to screw with the Senate. They can thwart any policy goal put forth by the President.
MALTHUS
Malthus, how would the Senate go about removing either Holder or Melson from office? My understanding of "advise and consent" takes the Senate out of the loop once an appointment is confirmed. Holder was duly confirmed by the Senate and sworn into office. Wouldn't removing him require impeachment? I can (sort of, if I squint really hard) see the House indicting Holder but I do not see any way in HELL that the Senate is going to have 51 votes to convict. Other than by impeachment, what other mechanism exists to remove an existing cabinet-level appointee.
Melson is just an interim appointee and has never been confirmed by the Senate. How wold they go about removing him? And what are the chances of enough turncoat Dems voting with the Repubs to give them 51 votes?
Arm twisting only hurts if you have sufficient leverage. I think the "defunding option" suffers from the same weakness as impeachment. You gotta go against Reid and get 51 votes to do it. Plus, Reid could just fillibuster or threaten to. Fortunately for him now, he failed to get the rules changed last month.
By what mechanism can the Senate "thwart any policy goal put forth by the President"? I thought that was what executive orders were for. And if the FCC and EPA can exercise power not given them by statute, what's to stop the Executive from doing whatever it wants.
Oh and while 2012 is, indeed, approaching, a canny wanna-be dictator should have no problem finding or ginning up an excuse to declare martial law and suspend the election for the duration of the emergency. Hell, dickheads like Woody Allen would probably APPLAUD him for it.
Bad Cyborg X
Post a Comment