At least he has so far . . .

John Richardson reports on "An Odd Coincidence."

"What struck me about Caulfield's plans for ATF was how closely it corresponds to the efforts of the current ATF managers - especially the William Newell's and David Voth's - to grab attention for ATF. Some things it seems never change."

Sipsey Street Exclusive: Send in the clown. The truth about Katherine Eban Finkelstein. A "feminist" who wrote for Playboy and a "journalist" more interested in compromising other writers' sources than the truth. "Calling Eban a 'journalist' is an insult to honest journalists everywhere."

Katherine Eban has a follow-up to her her big splash of last week timed to disrupt the Holder contempt vote, "The truth about the Fast and Furious scandal."

Eban's piece has been debunked by several several defenders of the Issa investigation, including Grassley staffer Jason Foster on PBS, Senator Grassley himself, Katie Pavlich and Robert VerBruggen, who did a radio show with Eban and then asked: "Did Fast and Furious Not Happen?" Teri O'Brien declared sarcastically: "Pravda Has Spoken: ATF Never Allowed Gunwalking."

Of course ATF DID allow gunwalking and Fast and Furious DID happen, but that hasn't stopped the administration mouthpieces from trumpeting the Eban piece in Fortune as proof positive that it didn't. Always in these accounts Eban is treated as a serious reporter with gravitas, which ignores her political prejudices and incidents in her past that cast doubt on her "journalistic impartiality."

Who then is Katherine Eban? Well, to begin with, for much of her career she was known as Katherine Eban Finkelstein. From her wedding announcement in the New York Times in 2002:

Katherine Eban Finkelstein, a daughter of Elinor Fuchs of Brooklyn and Michael O. Finkelstein of Manhattan, was married yesterday evening to B. Kenneth Levenson II, the son of Bruce Levenson of Truro, Mass., and the late Arline A. Levenson. Rabbi Sarah Reines officiated at the Angel Orensanz Foundation Center for the Arts in Manhattan.

The bride, 35, will be known as Katherine Eban. She is a staff writer for The New York Sun and until recently was a reporter for The New York Times.

The bride graduated from Brown University and received a master's degree in Renaissance poetry from Oxford, where she was a Rhodes Scholar. She also received a master's degree in creative writing from the University of East Anglia in Norwich, England. The bride's father is a corporate lawyer in Manhattan. Her mother is a professor at the Yale School of Drama.

Mr. Levenson, also 35, is an architect in Manhattan. He graduated from Pratt Institute. His father, who is retired, and his mother owned the former Cupola Ski Shop in West Dover, Vt.

Last year, the couple bought a 2,358-square-foot house built in 1899 located in the Park Slope Historic District of Brooklyn for $1.17 million.

My own contact with Eban began with this email back in December:

-----Original Message-----

From: Katherine Eban

To: georgemason1776

Sent: Mon, Dec 5, 2011 1:18 pm

Subject: Fortune Magazine journalist contacting you

Dear Mr. Vanderboegh,

I am a journalist with Fortune Magazine, hoping to speak with you for an article I am writing about ATF, and the Fast & Furious operation. I was hoping to discuss with you some details of the F&F operation, as well as to try and better understand how the whole issue came to the attention of the Congress. My understanding from reading Dennis Wagner's recent piece in the Arizona Republic is that you played a role in that.

Would you have some time available in the next couple of days? I would be happy to call you, if you would provide me with a number, or you can reach me at 718-636-4672.

Thanks, Katherine Eban

--

Katherine Eban

ph: 718-636-4672

cell: 917-821-9634

fax: 347-382-9520

www.katherineeban.com

Author of Dangerous Doses: a true story of cops, counterfeiters and the contamination of America's drug supply

I told her I was pressed for time, since I was headed to the Congressional hearing in DC that Thursday. She proposed called me that afternoon. I agreed, with this caveat:

"Understand, I always tape my interviews to avoid disputes on misquotes or misinterpretations. Alabama is a one party state and I don't have to tell reporters that, but I always do, having had a number of negative experiences in the past. If that's a problem then let's just do it by email. That also works."

She called me later that evening, and from that long, tape-recorded interview she came up with this paragraph in her "bombshell":

It had also attracted gun-rights activists loosely organized around a blog called the Sipsey Street Irregulars, run by a former militia member, Mike Vanderboegh, who has advocated armed insurrection against the U.S. government. It was an incendiary combination: the disgruntled ATF agents wanted to punish and reform the bureau; the gun-rights activists wanted to disable it. After the item about Terry appeared, the bloggers funneled the allegations through a "desert telegraph" of sorts to Republican lawmakers, who began asking questions.

A. I have never "advocated armed insurrection against the U.S. government." Search through everything I have written and you will not find it. I believe in the resort to the righteous self-defense of "Second Amendment remedies" in response to tyranny, but if I had in fact advocated pro-active armed insurrection, I would have been arrested long ago on a sedition charge.

B. As I have written many times, absent the repeal of the gun control laws of the United States, I do not seek the abolishment -- or "disabling" -- of the ATF, nor the transfer of its functions to another agency, viewing that as a greater disaster. I have written that I prefer "the devil I know in rehab to the devil I don't know."

C. The "Desert Telegraph" was -- and is -- an email chain between the whistleblowers and those of us who sought to help them -- the Coalition of Willing Lilliputians as I dubbed them. We certainly didn't need that sort of means to communicate with the GOP senators, or later with the Committee.

So, we have one paragraph and three major errors. All these things Eban knew if she was paying attention. The paragraph is simply designed to smear the investigation with my name and notoriety. I will be happy to compare my audio tape to her notes. As it turns out, I am not the only victim of Eban's "journalistic skills," but more on that in a minute. Let us return to the original question: Who then is Katherine Eban Finkelstein?

In her own words, Eban told of her early experiences in an interview from 2007 titled How Rhodes Scholars Think. It begins:

Katherin Eban

Brown University, 1989, BA; English Literature with a minor in Creative Writing

University of Oxford, 1990, M. Phil., English Literature

University of East Anglia, 1991, M.A., Creative Writing

Katherine Eban grew up in Brooklyn, New York. She is the younger of two daughters. Her father practices and teaches law, but he is also a statistician. Her mother is a theater scholar and critic. Katherine is an investigative reporter focusing on public health and homeland security issues. Her work has appeared in the Nation, the New Republic, the New Yorker, and Vogue. In her first book, Dangerous Doses, published in 2005, she unveiled the spread of counterfeit prescription drugs in the American supply chain. Her most current piece appears in the July issue of Vanity Fair. In the article called “Rorschach and Awe”, she exposes the role of CIA-contracted psychologists in military interrogations and torture.

Here's some selections from the Q&A:

Obviously, you’re intelligent, but what drove you to do more than the average teenager?

I don’t know if I did more than the average teenager. I was interested and I wanted to be involved. I had a lot of opportunities. And if we’re going to assume average teenagers do less, I think a lot of them don’t have the opportunities that I had. . .

What kinds of activities did you enjoy growing up?

I was in the circus. That was actually my qualification for athletic prowess [for the Rhodes Scholarship].

What did you do in the circus?

Trapeze, acrobatics, and clowning.

How did you get into it?

My mom sent me to clown camp one summer, because she had to get the floors redone and wanted us all out of the house.

Which part did you enjoy the most? Clowning? The trapeze?

I liked it all. There were a number of tremendous lessons to be drawn from clown camp, and my essay for the Rhodes was about clowning. The essence of clowning is that you’re always a child in a state of discovery looking at everything as new. There’s nothing familiar to a clown. Your whole world has to be learned—all the time—over and over again. So if you encounter a ladder, you act as if you’ve never seen it before, even if you just encountered it a minute ago. That was just a great approach to life. I also had training on the tightrope. We were trained on what is called a slack wire, which is a loose dangling rope. They teach you how to take a nap on it. You should learn to sleep on it, before you walk on it. You get such a sense of balance. . . The other lesson of clowning is never take yourself seriously. One thing I cannot bear about the Rhodes Scholarship is all the seriousness surrounding it. I don’t necessarily accept there is something God-givenly spectacular about us scholars. I totally reject that.

Are there any aspects of the qualities the Rhodes committee looks for that you continue to value in any way?

There’s one where I’m torn whether I live up to, or not — which is community service. I am not volunteering at something separate now. My work is basically exposing injustice and inequity so I’m not sitting in a corporate law firm and doing pro bono work to assuage my conscience. One might argue that my work is community service, but I always feel like should I be doing something else. It’s a little tough, because as an investigative reporter I can’t really join anything. I can’t really sign anything. I’m constantly in an odd relationship to society. I can’t be partial. So it’s a little bit of a tough one. . . I had a lot of opportunity. And frankly, I came from an upper middle class family. It is far easier for me to worry about my fellow man, if I have the financial wherewithal, than for other people [without the resources] to do that. It’s just something to think about.

Did you have a strong religious background?

My extended family was very religious and my great uncle was a very famous rabbi. But I don’t think I had any particular belief system. . .

. . . After my first year at Oxford, I got a summer job for Ira Magaziner (a former Rhodes Scholar) doing research on health care for the elderly in Europe. It had nothing to do with what I was studying. I didn’t know a thing about it, but he wanted cheap labor so I took the job. When I got back to New York [in 1991], I was working on a novel and it was getting rejected everywhere. I was so depressed and living in a tiny apartment. It was a $250 apartment with the deal that I take care of a depressed bird named Fred — a parakeet. He had a girlfriend, I guess, who had died. He was clinically depressed. His mood was affecting me, too.

I had to get a job. I was broke. So I applied for a variety of jobs and one of the people forwarded my résumé to Mark Green, the New York City Public Advocate (basically, the city’s watchdog). Because I had that one summer job on my résumé, he hired me as his health care policy analyst. While working for him, I investigated New York City hospitals. One report I wrote for him wound up with front-page coverage in the New York Times. So my reports started getting press pick-up. I had always been a writer, but I always thought I would be a fiction writer. But it turned out that I was a very good investigative reporter. Basically, one thing led to another and I ended up being a reporter focusing on health care.

Eban went on to write about health care for the New York Observer and for magazines including The New Republic, The Nation and The New York Times Magazine. Some of her work was supported by the Fund for Investigative Journalism.

In 1994, Eban, describing herself as "Katherine Eban Finkelstein worked on the New York Clinton campaign, and writes about art and politics," wrote an article for On The Issues Magazine entitled, "The Politics of the Possible: What Women Can Gain Under Clinton. Her politics in this article are plain. She writes as a supporter of Clinton and a feminist.

Under George Bush, the halls and rooms of the White House were closed to us. We were always in a defensive mode, struggling to hold on to what we had," recalls Julia Scott, Director of the National Black Women's Health Project.

The 1992 elections brought the need for a defensive feminist posture to a close. Activists for women's rights, along with millions of never-before-active women, successfully changed the face of American politics. EMILY's List grew into the nation's best-financed political action committee. A historic number of women were elected to Congress. And, for the first time in history, women, voting in their own self-interest, were pivotal in electing the new President (53% of women but only 48% of men voted for Clinton).

But along with the elation and hopefulness that culminated in the Clinton inaugural has come a kind of success anxiety. Being an "against-er" during the frankly anti-woman Reagan/Bush years was, at least, an easily defined position. Today, with a so-called friend in the White House, feminists are facing the insider's subtle challenge. We've earned our right to the President's ear. But reciting a litany of the problems women face is no longer a sufficient political statement. Our demands need to be made concrete and complete with strategic ideas for their accomplishment. The question now is not "What can Clinton do for us?" but "What can we do to ensure that women really make gains under the new administration?"

On The Issues Magazine describes itself as "a progressive, feminist quarterly print publication" (now succeeded by On the Issues Magazine Online) which ran from 1983 to 1999. OTI was and is published by Merle Hoffman, President and CEO of Choices Women’s Medical Center, in Long Island City, New York. It is one of the largest and longest running abortion providers in the country. Hoffman's autobiography is entitled Intimate Wars: The Life and Times of the Woman Who Brought Abortion from the Back Alley to the Board Room.

That was 1994. But in August 1997, the self-identified feminist published her first big article in the arguably misogynist Playboy magazine, entitled "Deadly Morals."

Nestled in amongst photos of Playmate of the Month Kalin Olson,and a bevy of "Biker Babes" and interviews with liberal misogynist Bill Maher and Jason Alexander, Finkelstein's article was subtitled "The DEA is Busting Doctors For Prescribing Drugs -- and Patients are Dying in Pain."

Deadly Morals became a very popular article on anti-drug war websites and the drug companies didn't mind it at all either since they benefited from greater numbers of prescriptions and were looking for political arguments to help deflect greater regulation.

It is perhaps not that great of a stretch for a declared feminist to write for Playboy since, as reported by DiscovertheNetworks:

Established in 1965 by Hugh Hefner, the Playboy Foundation seeks "to foster social change by confining its grants ... to projects ... fostering open communication about, and research into, human sexuality, reproductive health and rights; protecting and fostering civil rights and civil liberties in the United States for all people, including women, people affected and impacted by HIV/AIDS, gays and lesbians, racial minorities, the poor and the disadvantaged; and eliminating censorship and protecting freedom of expression." The Foundation makes it explicitly clear that it "will not consider religious programs" as potential grantees, and its grants are generally in the $5,000 to $10,000 range. Since its inception, the Playboy Foundation has awarded $20,000,000 in grants.

Reasoning from the premise that women and homosexuals face severe discrimination in the workplace, the Playboy Foundation embraces agendas that seek to remedy this situation by means of expanded government intervention, new legislation, and an overhaul of traditional social norms. For example, the Foundation endorses the right to unrestricted, taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand for all women; calls for taxpayers to bear an ever-increasing share of the financial burden of the gay community's AIDS scourge; seeks to redefine the family by encouraging homosexual marriages, not just civil unions; and supports the rights of homosexuals to adopt children, serve openly in the U.S. military, and become Scout troop leaders.

No doubt Playboy and feminists like Merle Hoffman are united by their pro-abortion affinity, but one wonders what Hoffman thought when one of her feminist writers published in such a venue. Obviously Finkelstein's scruples didn't choke on feminist author Robin Morgan's dictum that "Pornography is the theory; rape is the practice" -- at least if it meant getting paid.

In 2005, the drug industry again considered Eban Finkelstein's book Dangerous Doses a net plus because it detailed problems the industry was having with stolen, tainted and counterfeit prescription drugs. This, too, was a subject that the drug companies were largely comfortable with. Cracking down on their criminal competitors was right up Big Pharma's alley. An excerpt appeared in Vanity Fair magazine and Finkelstein got to go on her first book tour.

Finkelstein also was invited to speak at drug industry conferences including this one at at TRAX 2005, the Institute for International Research's Pharmaceutical Supply Chain Summit.

Anti-drug activists such as Marianne Skolek, who writes at Salem-News.com and who lost a daughter to Oxycontin has had her own run-in with Eban and wrote of her suspicions last September in "'Don't blind side me': My comment to the investigative journalist writing for Fortune Magazine about Purdue Pharma -- and the deception I encountered. Is Purdue Pharma now manipulating journalists to further their criminal marketing of OxyContin?"

(MYRTLE BEACH, S.C.) - Yesterday I received a telephone call from Katherine Eban (also writes under Katherine Eban Finkelstein), an award-winning investigative reporter, who writes for Fortune Magazine -- Eban is also a Rhodes Scholar and author of a book "Dangerous Doses." She purportedly wanted to interview me about an expose on Purdue Pharma, maker of OxyContin which would be written focusing on the company after they pleaded guilty to criminally marketing OxyContin.

Just last week, I wrote an article for Salem-News.com about clinical trials of OxyContin on children from 6 to 16 years old and I referenced questions and statements I had received from someone in the medical profession. So it seemed an odd question from an investigative reporter to be asked "Did I know anyone from within Purdue Pharma who would talk with her -- perhaps a doctor? Or maybe a previous employee?" But than I'm not a Rhodes Scholar. I replied that I was writing a book and would be referring to doctors and employees connected to Purdue Pharma in my book and did not wish to share this information. Suggested she might want to talk with Nathaniel Katz, MD -- but Katz was of no interest to Ms. Eban -- since he is a paid consultant to Purdue Pharma.

Did I think that Purdue Pharma had changed their "ways" after the criminal conviction when their three CEO's Michael Friedman, Paul Goldenheim and Howard Udell performed the benevolent act of pleading guilty for the few sales representatives who lied about the dangers of OxyContin. I suggested to Ms. Eban that she ask Purdue Pharma to show her a copy of the internal investigation they conducted to determine who these sales representatives were who pushed OxyContin as less likely to be addictive or abused. After all wouldn't a multi-billion dollar, privately held pharmaceutical company want to keep a sterling reputation in the pharmaceutical industry and show government agencies their good intentions? An internal investigation was never conducted by Purdue Pharma. Ms. Eban said that she hadn't thought to ask Purdue Pharma if they had, in fact, conducted an internal investigation.

I was curious -- when is this Fortune Magazine article being published? "Next week" was the reply. Still puzzled me. Why ask me if I knew of any doctor or employee within Purdue Pharma who would be willing to speak with Ms. Eban -- when the timing was so short?

Puzzling.

I brought up Purdue Pharma's funded pain societies who lobby to push narcotics for the "undertreatment of pain" in America -- in particular the American Pain Foundation. Another strike -- Ms. Eban said she was unfamiliar with Purdue Pharma's pain societies. But then she did a writing as Katherine Eban Finkelstein defending physicians who were charged by the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) with over-prescribing narcotics and her article was posted on Purdue Pharma's pain society websites. So why tell me that she was not familiar with pain societies and their financial ties to Purdue Pharma? Sorry I don't have the answer -- I'm not a Rhodes scholar.

So imagine my surprise when I read the below New York Times article written by Ms. Eban and J. Aaron Graham, former head of security at Purdue Pharma just last year. Also, in Eban's book "Deadly Doses" J. Aaron Graham is referenced throughout her book. Guess she didn't think I would be interested in her connection to Graham and Purdue Pharma. The article is shown below.

After reading the "New York Times" article, I sent the following email to Ms. Eban -- "I have someone for you to talk with -- Aaron Graham, former head of security with PP (Purdue Pharma).

I received the following reply from Ms. Eban - "Yes, a good suggestion, thanks. What do you think his take is on the company?"

I did not reply to her email. But I know why I was called yesterday and interviewed by Ms. Eban.. My "take" on Ms. Eban is "Who do you work for Fortune Magazine -- or Purdue Pharma?" Sorry I'm not a Rhodes Scholar, but something is very unethical here.

The New York Times article is found at the link above. This tracks with Ms. Eban's "journalistic ethics" in the Fast and Furious story as experienced by myself and others. She wanted, always, to know who our sources were, how did we contact them, would we share them with her? It was evident from the beginning too that Eban had an objective. We did not know then that she had been given much cherry-picked information straight from ATF files in order to buttress her preconceived exculpatory narrative. If we had, it would merely have confirmed our instincts.

Calling Eban a "journalist" is an insult to honest journalists everywhere.

Race card psychodrama adventures in alternate reality: AME church rips vote on Eric Holder.

Darrell Issa as Ku Klux Klansman.

The African Methodist Episcopal Church, one of the most prominent black denominations in the country, is blasting the House vote to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress last week, comparing the move to the “evil strategies employed following the Reconstruction era.”

Democrat President Woodrow Wilson's quote on "Birth of a Nation," used in the movie and shown in the White House.

"Sen. Grassley turns over another ace... how many do he & Congressman Issa have left?"

Politico reports: Grassley presses Holder on ‘false letter’.

Sen. Chuck Grassley is demanding to know who at the Justice Department saw a memo written by a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosive agent about the botched Fast and Furious gun-walking operation that was allegedly sent to the Department of Justice just one day before the agency denied that guns had crossed the U.S.-Mexico border.

In a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder on Tuesday, the Iowa Republican said the memo was forwarded to DOJ on Feb. 3, 2011, the day before the department insisted that gun-walking had not taken place as a part of Fast and Furious, which allowed thousands of guns to land in the hands of Mexican cartels. (Emphasis supplied, MBV.)

A DC buddy of mine forwarded the letter to me, found here, with the comment, "Sen. Grassley turns over another ace... how many do he & Cong. Issa have left?"

David Hardy comments "Fast and Furious -- a smoking gun?"

Grassley gets hold of an an internal ATF memo. Last para, page five of pdf:ATF agent is ordered to trace Fast and Furious guns that have NOT been recovered at crime scenes ... i.e., ATF has a list of those being sold, even before they turn up at crime scenes, and wants those fed into the trace counts. The agent assigned disagrees, but does the traces. His supervisors asked his opinion, and he gives it ... nobody gives a hoot, and he goes back to working real cases.

Comments: That is the smoking gun that establishes that F&F was for the purpose of inflating trace statistics for a political goal - more gun control regulation.

M Catharine Evans has some nice things to say about David and yours truly.

Journalists Who Broke Fast and Furious Story File Ethics Complaint with DC Bar.

When The Attorney General of the United States decided to stall, stonewall and retract previous positions regarding his knowledge of Operation Fast and Furious he should have known Mike Vanderboegh of Sipsey Street Irregulars and David Codrea of examiner.com, the two men responsible for breaking the gun walking story, would never, never give up.

From Radio Free New Jersey, an excellent bit detective work. "Jason Weinstein Trip to a Furious Pat Cunningham."

"If executive privilege is Cunningham's only issue, this might be the first thread Congress pulls, to see whether it all unravels." I'll pass this on the Committee to see if they can tug on the thread.

An Independence Day fit for mourning -- and fighting. Have a Happy 4GW Fourth!

Signing of the Declaration of Independence.

Thomas Sowell has it right. What we experienced last week was "Judicial Betrayal."

There are many speculations as to why Chief Justice Roberts did what he did, some attributing noble and far-sighted reasons, and others attributing petty and short-sighted reasons, including personal vanity. But all of that is ultimately irrelevant.

What he did was betray his oath to be faithful to the Constitution of the United States.

Who he betrayed were the hundreds of millions of Americans -- past, present and future -- whole generations in the past who have fought and died for a freedom that he has put in jeopardy, in a moment of intellectual inspiration and moral forgetfulness, 300 million Americans today whose lives are to be regimented by Washington bureaucrats, and generations yet unborn who may never know the individual freedoms that their ancestors took for granted.

Sowell presents his column today, on 4 July, an Independence Day fit for mourning. But mourning is for those who have the time to do so, and not for the warriors in liberty's cause determined to avenge the loss.

I am working on an essay on how we may best conduct a 4th Generation Warfare fight to defend our lives, liberty and property now that politics and the judiciary have failed to do so.

For those unfamiliar with the term, here's one succinct definition from the best single book on the subject:

(Fourth Generation Warfare) uses all available networks -- political, economic, social, and military -- to convince the enemy's political decision makers that their strategic goals are either unachievable or too costly for the perceived benefit. It is an evolved form of insurgency. Still rooted in the fundamental precept that superior will political will, when properly employed, can defeat greater economic and military power, 4GW makes use of society's networks to carry on its fight. Unlike previous generations, it does not attempt to win by defeating the enemy's military forces. Instead, via the networks, it directly attacks the minds of enemy decision makers to destroy the enemy's political will. Fourth-generation are lengthy -- measured in decades rather than months or years. -- COL Thomas X. Hammes, USMC, The Sling and the Stone, p. 208

Hammes describes in the beginning of The Sling and the Stone his introduction to insurgency and insurgents. On this Independence Day it is even more relevant.

From 1987 to 1990, I got a small taste of the practical aspects of insurgency. I spent those years training insurgents in various locations of the world. This was the tail end of the Cold War and the United States still had vested interests in the outcome of a number of insurgencies. The most intriguing part of the tour was the opportunity to talk to these men. I was particularly impressed with two aspects of the men I met. First was their utter determination to continue the struggle despite the odds. They were not deterred by fear of death. In each case, they were engaged in a struggle with a government force that possessed many times their military power. In each case, they knew the odds and were not deterred. They believed in their cause and were sure that belief was powerful enough to defeat the government. The idea they fought for was central to their resistance. In fact, they were counting on political power generated by that idea to neutralize the overwhelming military power of the government. As I worked with these men, I realized this fact should be obvious to Americans. An idea kept our American revolution alive during seven long years of war. (Emphasis supplied, MBV. It should also be noted that for most of the key leaders of our Revolution, the struggle began a decade earlier with the Stamp Act crisis.)

The second outstanding trait was the remarkable ingenuity they displayed for overcoming problems. Whether the problems were tactical, logistical, doctrinal, or political, they often attacked them from a direction that simply would not occur to a Western-trained soldier. I found insurgents are not impressed with conventional power. They respect it but seek ways around it -- and have consistently succeeded in finding those ways. They often used tactics and techniques that were outside the training and experience of the government forces. Despite years of war, they consistently surprised government forces with their ingenuity and determination. Insurgents are living proof of why man is at the top of the food chain. We are the most creative, treacherous, loyal, aggressive, and determined life form to yet evolve. Any nation that assumes it is inherently superior to another is setting itself up for disaster.

I would add to that last sentence that the same goes for political elites, only more so.

The question we have to ask ourselves this Independence Day is do we, individually and collectively, have the perseverance of the Founders? Do we have the sheer, naked will to secure our liberty no matter the failures of politics and government gone to corruption?

I believe we do. In future essays I will explore how we can do it. Until then, I wish you all a Happy 4GW Fourth!

Dave Workman: Holiday fireworks as Grassley reveals crucial ATF memo.

Link here.

Late Tuesday afternoon, Senator Charles Grassley revealed a crucial memo from a field agent with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives that reinforces suspicions that the Justice Department knew information in a controversial letter to the senator was false.

In a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder, which may be read here, Grassley asks who saw this memo, allegedly forwarded to Justice Department headquarters one day before then-Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich sent the infamous letter insisting that the ATF had never allowed guns to be walked.

Here's a question: how many dead Mexicans does it take for anti-gun Mary Sanchez at the KC Star to consider the F&F investigation more than a "sideshow?"

"Issa’s sideshow is typical of our polarized politics." Or is it okay if Democrats kill hundreds -- if not thousands -- with their policies and get away with it in order to justify more gun control? And what is Mary's solution? Why more gun control of course.

Poor, poor victimized Eric Holder.

Matthew Boyle comments here on this Sari Horwitz interview with the Field Marshal: "Eric Holder says Republicans have made him a ‘proxy’ to attack President Obama."

“I’ve been doing all of these things all the time Darrell Issa and his band have been nipping at my heels,” a defiant Holder said. “They’ve been nipping, but I’ve been walking.”

Well, Eric, we'll see if we can find a dog big enough to bite you in the ass so you will feel it.

Sipsey Street Exclusive: Jay Dobyn's Lawyer Comments On the Issa Letter.

Folks,

This morning I posted the letter by Congressman Darrell Issa to Eric Holder regarding further ATF victimization of whistleblowers, including Jay Dobyns. (Here is David's take.) At the time, I didn't yet have a response from Jay's lawyer, James Reed. Here it is:

Hi Mike:

It is nice to meet you, through this email. In response to your voicemail to me today, requesting a comment for an article you are writing for Sypsey Street Irregulars, let me offer the following.

Presently, my law firm is in discussions with the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) regarding a recent claim by my client, ATF Special Agent Jay Dobyns, of retaliation against Agent Dobyns by ATF, i.e., the matter to which House Chairman Darrell Issa, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, refers in his letter dated June 1, 2012, a copy of which you informed me in your voicemail today that you had already received and read.

In that letter, we appreciate that Representative Issa recognizes Agent Dobyns as an important resource during the House committee investigation regarding ATF’s Fast and Furious operation. Further, we thank Representative Issa for his role in engendering ATF agent confidence to report and speak publicly about allegations of fraud, waste and abuse within ATF, without fear of retaliation from ATF supervisors and management.

As demonstrated by publicly-available information, Agent Dobyns is not the only agent within ATF to allege that he qualifies as a federal whistleblower or to have made a claim that retaliation against him by ATF has occurred, despite federally-protected whistleblower status. In particular, Representative Issa’s letter makes clear, we believe correctly, that (1) ATF agents have a right and, under certain circumstances, even a responsibility to furnish information to Congress, (2) any limitations by ATF on such rights of communication with the Congress are impermissible, and (3) in certain instances, where prohibitions of or interference with an ATF agent’s exercise of such rights of communication with the Congress have the effect of obstructing or impeding a Congressional inquiry, such interference can rise to the level of a crime.

At the present time, I prefer not to comment further on the matters under discussion with ATF regarding Agent Dobyns, matters which we consider to be serious in nature. Please know that we appreciate the attention that Sypsey Street Irregulars continues to generate regarding the House Committee’s right to properly and thoroughly investigate Operation Fast and Furious, as part of the general public’s call for transparent operation of federal agencies whenever possible and for full respect for federal whistleblower protections. The role of Sipsey Street Irregulars in pushing for full disclosure of ATF documents relevant to Operation Fast and Furious, where such disclosure does not, when viewed fairly and objectively, compromise national security or ongoing criminal investigations, demonstrates the value of a free press and of free speech.

Regards,

Jim Reed

Attorney for ATF Special Agent Jay Dobyns

Home Again.

Exhausted, but I have a ton of email to go through and comments to release. While I've been on the road there have been some other developments which I will post on before turning in. No rest for the weary.

Sipsey Street Exclusive: Mike Vanderboegh and David Codrea file ethics complaint on Eric Holder with the D.C. Bar!

PRESS RELEASE

3 July 2012

An ethics complaint against U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has been filed by David Codrea and Mike Vanderboegh with the Office of Bar Counsel, Board on Professional Responsibility of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals. Codrea and Vanderboegh are the two bloggers who first broke the news of the Fast and Furious scandal in December 2010.

Said Vanderboegh, Eric Holder believes that he will escape serious consequences of the congressional investigations of the Fast and Furious scandal simply by running out the clock on his tenure. We intend this ethics complaint to place him on notice that his lies and malfeasances will follow him until justice is done."

The particulars of the complaint are included in the letter reproduced below.

July 2, 2012

Office of Bar Counsel

Board on Professional Responsibility

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

515 5th Street NW

Building A, Suite 117

Washington, DC 20001

In re: Ethics complaint against member Eric H. Holder, Jr.

Dear board members,

This letter serves as notice that a complaint is being filed against one of your members for professional misconduct. A search of your website at http://www.dcbar.org/ shows Eric H. Holder, Jr., currently Attorney General of the United States, has been an active DC Bar member since he was admitted on January 23, 1980.

As per your professional standards published as Rule 8.4, “Misconduct,” at http://www.dcbar.org/for_lawyers/ethics/legal_ethics/rules_of_professional_conduct/amended_rules/rule_eight/rule08_04.cfm, “It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to:

   (

a) Violate or attempt to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct, knowingly assist or induce another to do so, or do so through the acts of another;

   

(b) Commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer in other respects;

   

(c) Engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation;

   

(d) Engage in conduct that seriously interferes with the administration of justice;

   

(e) State or imply an ability to influence improperly a government agency or official;

   

(f) Knowingly assist a judge or judicial officer in conduct that is a violation of applicable rules of judicial conduct or other law; or

   

(g) Seek or threaten to seek criminal charges or disciplinary charges solely to obtain an advantage in a civil matter.”

It would appear that several, if not all of these rules, have been violated as evidenced by Eric Holder having been found in contempt of Congress on June 28, 2012 “for refusal to comply with a subpoena duly issued by the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform” (Note House Calendar No. 140/Report 112-546 appearing at: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CRPT-112hrpt546/pdf/CRPT-112hrpt546.pdf).

As per Rule 8.5, “Rule 8.5—Disciplinary Authority; Choice of Law,” at http://www.dcbar.org/for_lawyers/ethics/legal_ethics/rules_of_professional_conduct/amended_rules/rule_eight/rule08_05.cfm, which states in part “A lawyer admitted to practice in this jurisdiction is subject to the disciplinary authority of this jurisdiction, regardless of where the lawyer’s conduct occurs,” and due to the seriousness of this misconduct, we, as citizens of the Republic, with an interest in ensuring full accountability for the legal conduct of government officials, feel compelled to issue a formal complaint in accordance with your established filing protocol at http://www.dcbar.org/for_the_public/working_with_lawyers/when_problems_arise/filing.cfm

Because of the serious political ramifications involved, and because some on the Board may be sympathetic to AG Holder’s positions and hostile to those of the House contempt charges, and in order to ensure that this complaint receives proper attention and is not ignored through deliberate indifference, we are making a copy of this letter publicly available via our respective websites, SipseyStreetIrregulars.blogspot.com and DavidCodrea.com.

Further, it appears your own rules may remove any discretion and require an investigation. As per Rule XI, “Disciplinary Proceedings,” Section 10, “Disciplinary Proceedings Based Upon Conviction of Crime,” at http://www.dcbar.org/inside_the_bar/structure/bar_rules/rule11.cfm:

“(a) Notification. If an attorney is found guilty of a crime or pleads guilty or nolo contendere to a criminal charge in a District of Columbia court, the clerk of that court shall, within ten days from the date of such finding or plea, transmit to this Court and to Bar Counsel a certified copy of the court record or docket entry of the finding or plea. Bar Counsel shall forward the certified copy to the Board. Upon learning that the certified copy has not been timely transmitted by the clerk of the court in which the finding or plea was made, or that an attorney has been found guilty of a crime or has pleaded guilty or nolo contendere to a criminal charge in a court outside the District of Columbia or in any federal court, Bar Counsel shall promptly obtain a certified copy of the court record or docket entry of the finding or plea and transmit it to this Court and to the Board. The attorney shall also file with this Court and the Board, within ten days from the date of such finding or plea, a certified copy of the court record or docket entry of the finding or plea.”

 

“(b) Serious crimes. The term ‘serious crime’ shall include (1) any felony, and (2) any other crime a necessary element of which, as determined by the statutory or common law definition of such crime, involves improper conduct as an attorney, interference with the administration of justice, false swearing, misrepresentation, fraud, willful failure to file income tax returns, deceit, bribery, extortion, misappropriation, theft, or an attempt or a conspiracy or solicitation of another to commit a ‘serious crime.’"

While District of Columbia courts have not (yet) been involved, there is no question that the Congress has found the Attorney General guilty of contempt under conditions that rise to your definition of “serious crime.” It would also appear that Attorney General Holder is required to report the contempt finding to you within the ten day requirement, and that the Bar “shall” investigate this matter.

Please give this matter your immediate attention and we look forward to receiving your formal written response.

Sincerely,

David Codrea

Mike

Mike Vanderboegh

Enclosure: Complaint form

Press inquiries should be routed via email to David Codrea at dcodrea@hotmail.com or Mike Vanderboegh at GeorgeMason1776@aol.com.

"Meet The Camo-Clad, Gonzo Bloggers Behind The Fast And Furious Story."

"The most high-profile scandal of the Obama presidency has its roots in reporting by two conservative gun rights bloggers."

Mike Vanderboegh and David Codrea are rarely mentioned in connection with what is perhaps the highest-profile law-enforcement failure of the Obama Administration. Their central role in unearthing the story, though, offers a glimpse at the new media cycle of news bubbling up from outlets few traditional reporters read, or would even feel comfortable crediting. Before their first report on the story on December 28, 2010, Vanderboegh of “Sipsey Street Irregulars” and Codrea of examiner.com were gun-rights activists who curated small bands of loyal followers with a live-free-or-die ethos. (A few days before publishing the post that set the investigation of Fast and Furious in motion, for example, Vanderboegh wrote about a TSA parody video called “Grandma Got Molested at the Airport”.)

"It has been," said Vanderboegh, "the fight of my life."

Sipsey Street Exclusive: More whistleblower retaliation. Just one more criminal act in a criminal administration.

Sipsey Street Irregulars, in conjunction with David Codrea's War on Guns, has been provided a copy of a recent letter by Congressman Darrell Issa to Attorney General Eric Holder regarding the continuing efforts of ATF and DOJ to retaliate against whistleblowers, including Agents Jay Dobyns and John Dodson. The letter, obtained from a source close to the investigation, indicates that the woefully misnamed Department of Justice of the Obama administration continues to commit criminal acts against its own employees that it perceives as threats to the cover-up of the Gunwalker scandal.

Here is the letter:

June 1, 2012

The Honorable Eric Holder

Attorney Genera

l

U.S. Department of Justice

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20530

Dear Mr. Attorney General:

On October 12, 2011, I wrote to you to to express serious concerns about retaliation by the Department against whistleblowers who provided information to the Fast and Furious investigation. (1) I now write regarding reports that another whistleblower, Special Agent Jay Dobyns, has also been retaliated against for speaking out about mismanagement and abuse at ATF. Agent Dobyns has been helpful to Congress throughout the Fast and Furious investigation in providing information related to your fatal gun trafficking program. He was also instrumental in encouraging several whistleblowers with firsthand knowledge of Fast and Furious to come forward and speak with Congress. I urge supreme caution when disciplining a Department employee for alerting the public about internal misconduct.

ATF has earned a reputation for vindictiveness when it comes to retaliating against its employees. Unfortunately, despite prior assurances from senior ATF officials, it appears that Acting Director B. Todd Jones has yet to change this reputation, as he recently upbraided Special Agent John Dodson in a private meeting at ATF headquarters. These apparent attempts to silence critics of the Bureau are potentially illegal and certainly counterproductive.(2) As I have previously stressed, direct communications with Congress are both vitally important and protected by law.(3)

It appears that ATF has not received instructions from Department leadership that retaliation is not to be tolerated in any Department component. Please ensure that ATF receives the necessary instructions reiterating this policy.

Sincerely,

Darrell Issa, Chairman

cc: The Honorable Elijah E. Cummings, Ranking Minority Member

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

(1) Letter from Senator Charles Grassley and Chairman Darrell Issa to Attorney General Eric Holder (Oct. 12, 2011.)

(2) See 5 U.S.C. S. 7211 ("The rights of employees, individually or collectively, to petition Congress or a Member of Congress, or to furnish information to either House or Congress, or to a committee or Member thereof, may not be interfered with or denied.")

(3) See Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2010, P.L. 111-117, 1213 Stat., S 714 (2010) (setting prohibitions on restricting communications of federal government employees with Congress); see generally, Government Accountability Office, "Department of Health and Human Services-Chief Actuary's Communications with Congress," B-302911 (Sep. 7, 2004) (discussing the history and background in support of the government-wide prohibition on attempts to prevent direct communications with Congress); SEE ALSO 18 u.s.c. s. 1505 (providing that obstructing or impeding a Congressional inquiry is also a criminal violation).

This column reached out to Agent Dobyns for reaction to this letter, but he had "no comment" pending the outcome of on-going disciplinary actions against him. Calls to Dobyns' attorney Jim Reed were not returned, perhaps because of the Independence Day holiday.

Okay, that's it. I'm finally going to get serious about getting out of Google.

Google Shopping Censors All Gun, Ammo & Accessories Results

Secret Service Shuts Down Fast and Furious Protest Outside White House

From Katie Pavlich.

A group of young people protested against Operation Fast and Furious on the North Lawn of the White House this morning and were quickly shut down by the Secret Service due to a "suspicious package" forcing evacuation of the area. The package was later claimed by a tourist. More of the protesters' take from Campus Reform:

The Secret Service on Monday shutdown a student-protest calling for the firing of Attorney General Eric Holder saying they were acting on concerns over a 'a suspicious package' apparently left by a tourist on White House grounds. Secret Service officials forced the approximately 50 student-activists, who organized the event over social media, to leave the area after the protest had attracted significant attention from members of the White House press corps. and major news outlets.

Maurice Lewis, a student at the University of California, Merced, who marched in the event told Campus Reform that the Secret Service had seemed on edge well before the "suspicious package" was discovered.

"Several agents seemed hostile to our march and seemed anxious for us to leave the area," said Lewis. "The discovery of the 'unidentified package' came just as the protest began to gain traction."

It should be noted that a woman did come to claim the "suspicious package," because she had left it there and it was in fact her property.

Be sure and go to TownHall and see the pictures. I saw the footage on FOX News this morning.

Am in Ohio cooking up more devilment for the Empire.

The trip was exhausting, but I'm feeling better today. Am hobnobbing with my fellow Second Amendment wizards and cooking up more devilment for the Empire. More posts later today. (Note to blackbaggers: the house is still occupied so don't get your heads blown off while I'm gone. Or, do. Makes no difference to me.)

Taking most of today off.

I'm just exhausted, simple as that. Maybe more later.