Tuesday, September 3, 2013

He's not a snitch, he's just my special NFATCA friend.

Testimony under oath by Richard Vasquez, former grand poobah in ATF's Firearms Technology Branch, in the case of United States of America vs. Randolph Benjamin Rodman and Idan C. Greenberg, November 28, 2012.
Question by Mr. Sanders, trying to get to the truth of why John Brown of the NFATCA got special treatment from ATF.
Q. He supplied e-mails from a party in litigation with ATF and you supplied -- and you supplied them to the ATF counsel and prosecutors of that case; isn't that right?
A. That is correct. Like I said, John Brown's friendship was a friendship. Anything to do with ATF business, there was nothing hidden so any information given to me, I immediately passed it on.
. Q. M'hum. And you would not consider that being an informant?
A. Absolutely not.
Q. What would you consider it?
A. Passing on information that had to do with an -- it wasn't even an investigation. It was -- I guess a term, litigation.
Q. It was a case in progress?
A. It was not a case. It was not a criminal case.
Q. It was a forfeiture?
A. Yes, that's correct.
Q. And you passed the information on to the --
A. Absolutely.

5 comments:

Anonymous said...


Mike, could you post a link back to the original article showing the special treatment Brown received? Some people might not be familiar with the whole story.

Anonymous said...

It's called "The Buddy System"....

If you've got a buddy
Tried and true
"Stick" your buddy
Before he "sticks" you!

Anonymous said...

He is just trying to catch up with the "Small Arms Review" folk that helped get R.A. Bear special attention...Yes, many a FUDD owns NFA. Actually, a large percentage of them are FUDD-LIKE, including a number of SOTs I have known, most especially the ones that do a lot of LEO/Mil business.

Welcome to the land of "I got mine and don't care if you can get yours..."

Anonymous said...

I got into an argument with one of their representatives on February 27th and 28th this year and he tried to make it seem like they were trying to trade our Trust rights for losing the cleo sign off. Looks like he only succeeded in getting half done, but who cares he got his stuff, right? These are people who are fine with us losing our rights because they are trying to protect their own interests. I believe the whole schpeil about eliminating the CLEO sign off was just a cover for what they were really trying to achieve, limiting who can be a NFA collector. This in my opinion is contemptible and they need to be called out about this every opportunity we get. NFATCA is only in it for the NFATCA and thats it. They are not your friend.

Anonymous said...

I canceled my SAR magazine subscription over this - and you can bet i'll not be buying any more nfacta raffle tickets or anything for that matter