The (Fast & Furious) Crimes are Worse Than the Cover-up (Normally, nobody gets killed in a cover-up)

Rushlimbaugh.com ^ | June 20, 2012 | Rush Limbaugh

[NYer]

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Let's go to the phones before we resume on the sound bites.

Crown Point, Indiana, is where we're gonna start with Frank. Great to have you here, sir. Hello.

CALLER: Yes, hello. Thank you, sir. I'm calling about the Fast and Furious thing.

RUSH: Yeah?

CALLER: The president or his administration sent guns into Mexico and had to assume that they'd be used and kill Mexican citizens. But then the president's trying to get Latino votes, but he doesn't care if Mexican die?

RUSH: Well, he didn't figure on Mexicans figuring out Fast and Furious. I know what you're saying. "What's Obama trying to pull off? I mean, he authorizes the walking of assault weapons across the border, and Mexicans end up getting killed. Yet he's running around pandering for the Latino vote when he obviously doesn't care if Mexicans are killed in drug violence!" That's a great question, except Obama never expected us to get to this point. Remember, everybody was laughing at Fast and Furious.

Everybody was treating it as some sort of right-wing conspiracy birther-type thing. But your question is now very relevant. Now it's a good question. Now we can ask Hispanics: "You've got the president of the United States and his attorney general in charge of a program that ultimately resulted in Mexican citizens being killed. Including a US border agent, by the way, in addition to Mexican citizens. And yet, he's out pandering for the Latino vote, but he doesn't care if they die."

He put weapons in the hands of drug lords. He created crimes. He and Holder allowed weapons to end up in the hands of Mexican drug cartels, and those cartels take action against Mexican citizens. And Obama knew that that was gonna happen. He wanted it to happen. He wanted there to be crimes with these weapons, folks. He wanted an assault weapons ban. He couldn't get one politically. The American people didn't want it. This was...

It's sort of like if you're NBC and you want people to think Romney doesn't understand a supermarket scanner at Barbara Walters' store. So you cut short a video of Romney and make it look like he's never seen one of these scanners before. Or if you're NBC and you want people to think that George Zimmerman's a racist pig, you doctor the 911 call. This is what Obama was doing. This is what the American left does, by the way. They can't be straightforward.

They can't be honest about their plans, their intentions, their ideas, their policies. They'd never win an election. Nationally, anyway. So Obama has asserted an executive privilege. Eric Holder has testified before the Senate -- and since recanted -- that it all started under the Bush administration. Operation Wide Receiver, the predecessor to Fast and Furious, was walking guns to Mexico from America. Eric Holder told a Senate committee (paraphrased), "Well, yeah, Michael Mukasey, Bush's attorney general, he knew about that."

"Oh, yeah?" Issa said. "We need some proof."

"Uhhhhh, okay. I guess Mukasey didn't know about it. We retract it."

So in the midst-of-all this, President Kardashian asserts executive privilege. What is he trying to hide? Like I said, folks: If they want to lay it off on Bush, make these documents available! They're trying to blame Bush for the economy; they're trying to blame Bush for us being hated; they're blaming Bush for foreign policy problems. If they could lay it off on Bush, why don't they release the documents? But they're not. Executive privilege.

So what's Kardashian hiding?

What does he not want us to know?

When you boil it all down, that's the question.

Here's John in Topeka in Kansas. Great to have you on the program, sir. Hi.

CALLER: Googolplex dittos, Maha Rushie.

RUSH: Thank you, sir, very much.

CALLER: What's the difference between the Iran-Contra scandal where the Democrats and the media tried to hang President Reagan, my favorite president, when he didn't use -- I don't think he used -- executive privilege to try and cover anything up and now when Obama has basically implicated himself in this scandal?

RUSH: Well, I think you might find some dispute in the notion that Obama has implicated himself. You think he has because he's trying to hide something. But others might not look at it that way. You could easily say that Obama is sympathetic, and I expect this to be said, by the way. His media minions are gonna say it. "He's not trying to protect himself. He's trying to protect the presidency! You can't just have Congress running roughshod over the executive branch.

"He's asserting the privilege here to protect future presidents, to make sure the executive branch doesn't get run over by the legislative branch. Don't be surprised if you hear that. You are inferring that Obama is implicating himself. It is a legitimate question: What is he trying to hide? As to Reagan, he asserted executive privilege number of times. Reagan asserted it three times. I just don't know when. I don't remember whether it was Iran-Contra or not. John, thanks for the call. I appreciate it.

This is Eric in Boise, and you're next. Great to have you with us, sir. Hi.

CALLER: Great to talk to you, Rush. I've listened to you since the eighties and it's an honor to talk to you.

RUSH: Thank you very much, sir.

CALLER: My point is every American should be outraged by this Fast and Furious operation, because the bottom line is a border agent was killed. A life was lost. There was a cover-up. And now I believe the president, by asserting executive privilege, is complicit in the murder and cover-up of that Border Patrol agent.

RUSH: Brian Terry was his name.

CALLER: Yes.

RUSH: Well, this is the political problem that Kardashian has. This is what people are going to think. They're going to think, "What's he hiding? This was gonna be the most transport presidency ever!" This is Obama, again, in 2007 being asked about executive privilege.

OBAMA 2007: There's been a tendency on the part of this administration to try to hide behind executive privilege every time there's something a little shaky that's taking place. And I think, you know, the administration would be best served by coming clean on this. There doesn't seem to be any national security issues involved with the US attorney question. There doesn't seem to be any justification for not offering up some clear, plausible rationale for why these -- these US attorneys were targeted when by all assessments they were doing an outstanding job. I think the American people deserve to know what was going on there.

RUSH: Yeah. That's what a lot of people are gonna say now, Mr. President. People are gonna wonder what you're hiding. People are gonna wonder. This plan ended up getting a border agent killed, and you knew about it. You haven't done anything about it. You don't care about it? These are questions that are going to be asked and his media minions are gonna do their best to deflect this once they get over the shock of this.

Remember now: To the media, "Executive Privilege = Nixon."

Just like to the Republican establishment, a conservative nominee, to them, equals Barry Goldwater losing in a landslide. To the media, the greatest event in American media history was getting rid of Richard Nixon. Even the ones alive today who had nothing to do with it claim credit for it by being members of the fraternity, members of the industry: Journalism. They got rid of a corrupt president, in their mind. And that's so front and center to them.

And what did Nixon do? "Well, he was a raging criminal from start to finish, and he exerted executive privilege! But we were able to force him, along with the Supreme Court, to reveal what he was trying to hide." So that's how they view it. You know, executive privilege, it scares them. Their formative experience with executive privilege is an evil president trying to hide the truth. So they've been gob-smacked with this. They'll get themselves put back together. It's gonna take a while, though. Maybe by tonight.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: I'm sitting here thinking this might be the first time in history that the original crimes are worse than the cover-up. Normally, nobody gets killed in a cover-up. We've already had people get killed here in Fast and Furious. I don't know how many, but it's a lot of people killed and a lot of people wounded. A Border Patrol agent was killed.

END TRANSCRIPT

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks NYer.

[MestaMachine]

“A Border Patrol agent was killed.”

Yes, Rush. AND AN ICE AGENT AS WELL.

People need to start remembering Jaime Zapata was murdered in cold blood with walked guns and his name should be mentioned every single time they bring up Brian Terry...and I might add we don’t know how many other Americans have been killed by these weapons.

[Dr. Bogus Pachysandra]

“People need to start remembering Jaime Zapata was murdered in cold blood with walked guns and his name should be mentioned every single time they bring up Brian Terry.”

And you know damn well that he was set up! I just can’t understand why the Mexican govt ain’t goin’ crazy over this stuff! At least two Americans murdered, and 300+ Mexicans. The collusion and coverup is astonishing!

[Farmer Dean]

“Normally,nobody gets killed in a cover-up.”
Ron Brown just had a bad day then.

[The Antiyuppie]

“I just can’t understand why the Mexican govt ain’t goin’ crazy over this stuff! “

Maybe their goverment is acually non-functional. Wars have been fought over less. Let’s flip this situation around, and consider what would happen if, say, Iran, wanted to walk some guns, and maybe some other “goodies”, across the US border to see where they would go.

[thouworm]

People need to start remembering Jaime Zapata was murdered in cold blood with walked guns and his name should be mentioned every single time they bring up Brian Terry.

Been thinking that all day whenever Terry's name is mentioned. Why aren't they? It's got me talking to the talking heads.

[MestaMachine]

no one has really done any fact checking on this. they might now.

[TigersEye]

While the weapons found at the Zapata murder scene were not from among the Fast and Furious guns, this revelation is profoundly significant, because it directly contradicts sworn testimony by Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano.

“I have no information to that effect, no. I don’t know one way or the other,” she replied to a direct question on any Fast and Furious connection by Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas.

Word games. Here's the little trick Napolitano, Holder and ATF are playing. F&F was an ATF operation run out of the Tucson AZ office. But some guns were walked out of Texas gun shops which puts them in the jurisdiction of Texas ATF offices so those ops must have had other names. So far I have not seen any reporting on what those op names were.

Armored SUV could not protect U.S. agents in Mexico

U.S. investigators recovered one of the military-style semi-automatic weapons used in the attack that killed Zapata.

The gun came from Texas.

Ballistic testing of spent shell casings and the raising of an obliterated serial number revealed the weapon was a popular Romanian-made AK-47 knockoff purchased at J&J’s Pawn Shop in Beaumont, smuggled south to the Zetas by a methamphetamine trafficker named Manuel Gomez Barba, a U.S. citizen.

BP Agent Brian Terry was not the only Federal agent killed by guns allowed to walk by the ATF-DoJ.

Ice Agent Jaime Zapata Murdered While Investigating Fast and Furious Weapons

ICE Agent Jaime Zapata and his partner, Victor Avila, were ambushed at a fake roadblock in Mexico. Were they set up? If so by whom?

[MestaMachine]

The Zapata Family has now filed suit. Good on them.

[TigersEye]

That’s good! Put the pressure on. I have wondered how Victor Avila is, having been wounded in the shootout that killed Zapata, and whether he and his family aren’t just a little put out by this clown circus Holder and 0bama are running in DC.

[Erik Latranyi]

What most FReepers and conservatives are missing is this:

We only know about two murders (Terry & Zapata) due to firearms left at the scene.

We do not know how many murders of AMERICANS and US Law Enforcement officers were perpetrated and the firearms were not left at the scene for a trace.

There are over 2000 firearms in the hands of known murderers being used on nearly a daily basis to kill people.

The Mexican AG estimated over 200 Mexican citizens have been murdered by these firearms.

But we MUST keep making the point that more murders of American citizens exist but just have not been linked.

[NonValueAdded]

I just can’t understand why the Mexican govt ain’t goin’ crazy over this stuff!

I suspect the Mexican gubermint has been told in no uncertain terms that if they make the tiniest complaint, Obama will throw a bone to the right and suddently get tough on immigration, especially the flow of cash back across the border.

[marktwain]

“I just can’t understand why the Mexican govt ain’t goin’ crazy over this stuff! “

My suspicion is that, at the highest level, they knew, and like President Obama, were willing to “break some eggs” to get the omelet that they wanted.

[Yosemitest]

Let's remember where, when, and who started all of this.

Let us ALL remember,
Over a barrel? Meet White House gun policy adviser Steve Croley
By Jason Horowitz,


(excerpt) ... On March 30, the 30th anniversary of the assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan, Jim Brady, who sustained a debilitating head wound in the attack,
and his wife, Sarah, came to Capitol Hill to push for a ban on the controversial “large magazines.”
Brady, for whom the law requiring background checks on handgun purchasers is named, then met with White House press secretary Jay Carney.
During the meeting, President Obama dropped in and, according to Sarah Brady, brought up the issue of gun control, “to fill us in that it was very much on his agenda,” she said.

“I just want you to know that we are working on it,” Brady recalled the president telling them.
“We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar.”

In the meeting, she said, Obama discussed how records get into the system and what can be done about firearms retailers.
Her husband specifically brought up the proposed ban on large magazine clips,
and she noted that even former vice president Dick Cheney had suggested that some restrictions on the clips might make sense.

“He just laughed,” Sarah Brady said approvingly of the president.
Both she and her husband, she emphasized, had absolute confidence that the president was committed to regulation.

In simpler, pre-administration times, so was the president’s point man.
In Croley’s book, he argued that for all the healthy skepticism, in a complex world, regulation still amounted to “the least-worst solution to pressing social problems.”

b

[Carry_Okie]

He wanted an assault weapons ban.

That was just to start. What Zero really wants is the UN Small Arms Treaty. Disarm Americans, arm a US military-trained Mexican reconquista.

Kill whitey. That was the plan.

[UCANSEE2]

(Normally, nobody gets killed in a cover-up)

Sandy Hume,Danny Casolaro,Dr. Ronald Rogers,John A. Wilson,Gandy Baugh,Mary Mahoney,Suzanne Coleman,Judy Gibbs,Gary Johnson,Kathy Ferguson,Bill Shelton,James McDougal , Jon Walker, Johnny Franklin Laughton, Jr. , Ronald Miller, Ed Willey,Barbara Alice Wise, C. Victor Raiser II, Stanley Huggins, Paul Wilcher, Florence Martin,Keith Coney, Keith McKaskle, Gregory Collins, Jeff Rhodes,Richard Winters, Jordan Ketelson , Steve Willis , Robert Williams , Conway LeBleu , Todd McKeehan, Luther Parks, Maj. Gen. William Robertson, Col William Densberger, Col. Robert Kelly , Spec. Gary Rhodes , Staff Sgt. Brian Haney , Marine Sgt. Tim Sabel , Maj. William Barkley , and Capt. Scott Reynolds....

ALL DISAGREE with the TITLE'S CLAIM.