Mark Levin on Univision Report, Fast & Furious Scandal

3 Responses to Mark Levin on Univision Report, Fast & Furious Scandal

1. Tina says:

   Monday, October 1, 2012 at 9:56 pm

   More from across the web:

   http://blog.heritage.org/2012/10/01/fast-furious-univision-continuing-to-ask-the-tough-questions/

   As my colleague Lachlan Markay writes responding to the recently released report authored by the Department of Justices own inspector general:

   While the report does not claim that Holder misled Congress, it does say that those affidavits suggested gunwalking took place. Holder says he read those affidavits, and that they suggested no such thing. If the inspector general is correct, both claims cannot be trueeither Holder did not review the affidavits, or he was not truthful about their contents.

   The Univision report only furthers the need for this Administration to provide the American people and the Mexican government with more information about how the U.S. government could have possibly allowed this program to be carried out. It has resulted in the deaths of Mexican and American citizens including U.S. Border Patrol agent Brian Terry.

   And despite the minimum coverage by the mainstream media of the Fast and Furious fallout, the recent inspector general report has made clear that there is more being uncovered, including the possibility that there may be another ATF investigation that involves an individual suspected of transporting grenade components into Mexicoand supplying them to drug cartels.

   See also these articles:

   http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/01/univision-report-connects-operation-fast-and-furious-scandal-to-murders-of-mexican-teenagers/

   http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/01/univision-report-connects-operation-fast-and-furious-scandal-to-murders-of-mexican-teenagers/2/

   Univision says the Obama administrations actions inadvertently helped fuel violence and a war between the cartels.

   In Mexico, the timing of the operation coincided with an upsurge of violence in the war among the countrys strongest cartels, according to Univision.

   In 2009, the northern Mexican states served as a battlefield for the Sinaloa and Juarez drug trafficking organizations, and as expansion territory for the increasingly powerful Zetas. According to documents obtained by Univision News, from October of that year to the end of 2010, nearly 175 weapons from Operation Fast and Furious inadvertently armed the various warring factions across northern Mexico.

   An English-subtitled translation of one experts comments indicated that the weapons the Obama administration allowed to flow to the cartels through Fast and Furious were capable of not only penetrating an armored vehicle but also a whole house from wall to wall.

   According to the Univision report, it wasnt weak gun laws that made Fast and Furious possible, as some liberal commentators have suggested.

   If up to this point drug dealers could easily obtain and smuggle guns, the United States government made it easier, English subtitles on one part of the report read.

   When Fast and Furious began in 2009, the ATF and Arizona prosecutors told [gun] store owners to sell weapons without restrictions to suspicious buyers.

   Reply
2. Peggy says:

   Monday, October 1, 2012 at 10:09 pm

   Beck also covered the F&F Univision report and the MSM cover up.

   Warning, pictures are graphic.

   http://www.theblaze.com/stories/glenn-beck-blasts-us-media-over-fast-and-furious-media-has-utterly-failed/

   Reply
3. Peggy says:

   Tuesday, October 2, 2012 at 8:00 am

   On a unrelated issue here is another scandal.

   There goes this administration again trying to buy votes. Only this time its not just cell phones but delaying layoff notices required by law until after the election. These potential layoffs are caused by once again this administrations refusal to deal with a budget and refusing to comply with the timelines they asked for and agreed upon.

   Hopefully, those workers realize their notice will still be coming just delayed a week or two.

   I am also outraged that this administration would encourage an entity to break a law and to promise to cover legal costs with OUR MONEY! This has to be illegal.

   Shameful!!!

   Beyond the pale. Patently illegal.

   Thats how Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) is describing a move by the Obama administration that not surprisingly came late Friday afternoon. What move? The one where the White House has told defense contractors not to issue layoff notices in November (four days before the election) in preparation for possible budget cuts on Jan 2, which even ABC News calls a move with political overtones.

   According to the WARN (Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification) Act, contractors are required to give workers a 60 day notice if they are about to be laid off. The across-the-board budget cuts that could happen in January apparently fall under the requirement. But the White House disagrees, and is begging contractors not to do it. In fact, the administration is even promising to pay legal costs if the cuts happen and the companies are sued for not following the law.

   In short, Republicans feel the White House is buying off companies to avoid bad press in the 11th hour before the election.

   In the spirit of that interpretation and that promise, Lockheed Martin has followed suit. From ABC (emphasis added):

   Defense contractor Lockheed Martin heeded a request from the White House today one with political overtones and announced it will not issue layoff notices to thousands of employees just days before the November presidential election.

   Lockheed, one of the biggest employers in the key battleground state of Virginia, previously warned it would have to issue notices to employees, required by law, due to looming defense cuts set to begin to take effect after Jan. 2 because of the failure of the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction the so-called Super-committee, which was created to find a way to cut $1.5 trillion from the federal deficit over the next decade.

   Such massive layoffs could have threatened Obamas standing in the state he won in 2008 and is hoping to carry again this November.

   Full article here.
   http://www.theblaze.com/stories/what-move-by-the-obama-admin-has-sen-lindsey-graham-labeling-it-patently-illegal/

   Reply