BREAKING: Documents Confirm Fast and Furious AK-47 Used in Phoenix Gang Assault

[sevlex]

And the hits keep on comin'. Maybe this has something to do with Holder's announced exit.


http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepa...sault-n1906153

BREAKING: Documents Confirm Fast and Furious AK-47 Used in Phoenix Gang Assault
Katie Pavlich | Oct 16, 2014


Documents obtained through a lawsuit recently issued against the City of Phoenix by government watchdog Judicial Watch reveal a weapon from the Department of Justice's Operation Fast and Furious was used to injure two people in a 2013 gang-style assault on an apartment complex. When the incident occurred and during investigation afterward, police worked with federal law enforcement agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, Department of Homeland Security, FBI and Drug Enforcement Agency in the case, raising suspicions the assault wasn't simply a typical, local gang shootout and prompted questions about the details of where the weapons that were used came from.

“Thanks to our lawsuit, Congress has been able to confirm what Judicial Watch already reported – that a Fast and Furious weapon was used in yet another violent crime that terrorized and injured residents of Phoenix,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement. “Our lawsuit against Phoenix exposed how the Obama cover-up of Fast and Furious is ongoing. Eric Holder’s Department of Justice is a mess. It has endangered the public and is engaged in an ongoing cover-up of its insanely reckless Fast and Furious gun-running operation. Judicial Watch appreciates the refreshing diligence of Senator Grassley and Congressman Issa in pursuing the truth about Fast and Furious.” .......


"Based on the serial number [1977DX1654] from the police report obtained by Judicial Watch and documents obtained during our Fast and Furious investigation, we can confirm that the assault rifle recovered in the vehicle on July 30, 2013, was purchased by Sean Christopher Stewart. Stewart pled guilty to firearms trafficking charges resulting from his involvement with Operation Fast and Furious. Stewart purchased this particular firearm on December 8, 2009, one of 40 that he purchased that day while under ATF surveillance,” the letter continues. "According to the Phoenix Police Department report, ATF traced the firearm on July 31, 2013, the day after Phoenix police officers recovered it. Yet, over a full year has passed, and the Department has failed to notify the Committees."......


Assistant Attorney General James Cole, who played a large role in the cover-up of Operation Fast and Furious, announced his resignation from DOJ today.

More at link.

[Schuetzenman]

Blood is on their hands. All parties involved should be found guilty of conspiracy to commit murder.

[alismith]

The Obama Administration has declared war on the US. Perhaps, they can all be tried for war crimes.

[Aggressive Perfector]

They'll never have their day in court. The feds won't allow it.

[imanaknut]

I remember when they called Reagan the Teflon president. Compared to this whole regime Reagan was glue sticky. They are invisible when it comes to accountability. Truman said "The buck stops here" but with this group the buck doesn't even get near them to pass the buck.

[Kadmos]

Blood is on their hands. All parties involved should be found guilty of conspiracy to commit murder.

So if you were to buy a gun, then sell it to someone else, and they committed a crime with it, then blood would be on your hands?

I will completely grant that the guns involved should have been tracked and recovered.

But we are still talking about a "legal" purchase, that turned into a *possibly* legal private sale.

Unless you saying you want all secondary sales to go through an FFL, then how is what you are saying not extremely hypocritical?

You might as well be blaming the dealer and the company who made the gun.

[Oswald Bastable]

So if you were to buy a gun, then sell it to someone else, and they committed a crime with it, then blood would be on your hands?

I will completely grant that the guns involved should have been tracked and recovered.

But we are still talking about a "legal" purchase, that turned into a *possibly* legal private sale.

Unless you saying you want all secondary sales to go through an FFL, then how is what you are saying not extremely hypocritical?

You might as well be blaming the dealer and the company who made the gun.

The twists, turns and gyrations of your excuses for the gov't., and your constant attempts to lay blame where it does not belong, have become extremely tedious.

The gun in question came from a group of 40 bought at the same time, by the same buyer, who has since been convicted.

[Kadmos]

The twists, turns and gyrations of your excuses for the gov't., and your constant attempts to lay blame where it does not belong, have become extremely tedious.

I'm looking for consistency on this issue, not trying to twist a thing.

The gun in question came from a group of 40 bought at the same time, by the same buyer, who has since been convicted.

Ok...so does this board have an issue with someone buying 40 guns in a day?

If someone buys those guns (lets say a couple crates of Mosins) and then sells one off, and the secondary buyer kills someone, then who is to blame?

1. The government who allowed someone to buy guns?

2. The original dealer who sold the crates to the original buyer?

3. The original buyer who sold the gun on the secondary market?

4. The government for allowing private party gun sales?

5. The secondary buyer who pulled the trigger?

6. The gun manufacturer?


In my opinion it's always been number 5. Adding a government sting into the situation doesn't change who pulled the trigger.

Please explain why I am wrong.

[Oswald Bastable]

Please explain why I am wrong.

1. The DOJ & ATF forced dealers to make such sales, even though they knew they might be violating current law, assuring them all such guns would be tracked and interdicted.

2. The DOJ & ATF lied, did not track them as they said they would (per the operation itself), and waited for the slaughter to begin so they could beat the banner of Amerikan guns going to the cartels illegally, as a pretext for new gun restrictions.

3. Some of those guns (at least the serial numbers were tracked, if not the guns themselves) have now been used in multiple crimes resulting in injury and death to citizens.

4. The gov't. initiated, sponsored, abetted, and at least to the extent of tracking the serial numbers, assured those guns went into illegal hands.

[Kadmos]

1. The DOJ & ATF forced dealers to make such sales, even though they knew they might be violating current law, assuring them all such guns would be tracked and interdicted.

Sales like that already happen. Dealers aren't interested in tracking them under normal circumstances.

2. The DOJ & ATF lied, did not track them as they said they would (per the operation itself), and waited for the slaughter to begin so they could beat the banner of Amerikan guns going to the cartels illegally, as a pretext for new gun restrictions.

The DOJ didn't create the demand, we already knew guns legally sold in the US were going to the hands of cartels illegally.

3. Some of those guns (at least the serial numbers were tracked, if not the guns themselves) have now been used in multiple crimes resulting in injury and death to citizens.

Not to sound cold, but so what? Other guns sold by similar means kill many citizens every year, the only difference is the government tracked these ones a bit more closely from the initial sale to the end result.

4. The gov't. initiated, sponsored, abetted, and at least to the extent of tracking the serial numbers, assured those guns went into illegal hands.

Um...no, at most they really said was when this buyer shows up, go ahead and sell him the guns, we think he might be selling them illegally on the secondary market.

Had the government not done that, they sale may still have happened. What they did was choose not to deny an American citizen the right to buy guns. Which is something they have done every time I've ever bought a gun from a dealer. They ok'd the purchase, just like they have for nearly every member of this board (sorry LAGC).

That has never made them liable for our actions before.

[Oswald Bastable]

Sales like that already happen. Dealers aren't interested in tracking them under normal circumstances.

Bullshit...no one buys 40 AKs for personal use, though they might buy them for resale, in which case any FFL who didn't want his license revoked would insist on only transferring so many to another FFL holder. Don't believe me? Go try to buy 40 AKs or ARs at once from any FFL in the land...start with your local gun shop...just go in and ask them what it would take to buy 40 AKs or ARs...out the door...


The DOJ didn't create the demand, we already knew guns legally sold in the US were going to the hands of cartels illegally.

Ahh...so because an illegal activity was already taking place, the US Gov't needed to get on the gravy train, rather than actually working to stop it? The problem was that there weren't enough traced to gangs because the actual number of guns making it illegally to the cartels was low. The DOJ needed to increase those numbers to support the current regime's plans for gun control.

Not to sound cold, but so what? Other guns sold by similar means kill many citizens every year, the only difference is the government tracked these ones a bit more closely from the initial sale to the end result.

Not sure you could sound any other way...except that here you're absolving the gov't at least 2nd degree manslaughter, if not worse. But then, you have been known to absolve gov'ts and many of far worse...haven't you.

Um...no, at most they really said was when this buyer shows up, go ahead and sell him the guns, we think he might be selling them illegally on the secondary market.

Many of them were coerced into it against their wills, and there was gov't retaliation against any who refused.

Had the government not done that, they sale may still have happened.

YOU DON'T KNOW THAT!!! There is no way you could know that! To infer you could even begin to know that is an out and out lie.

What they did was choose not to deny an American citizen the right to buy guns. Which is something they have done every time I've ever bought a gun from a dealer. They ok'd the purchase, just like they have for nearly every member of this board (sorry LAGC).

This is so twisted a version of what actually happened, I can't believe even you're stupid enough to believe it.

That has never made them liable for our actions before.

Since nothing you've said in this post bears any resemblance to reality, your final statement is rendered moot.

...

[Schuetzenman]

So if you were to buy a gun, then sell it to someone else, and they committed a crime with it, then blood would be on your hands?

I will completely grant that the guns involved should have been tracked and recovered.

But we are still talking about a "legal" purchase, that turned into a *possibly* legal private sale.

Unless you saying you want all secondary sales to go through an FFL, then how is what you are saying not extremely hypocritical?

You might as well be blaming the dealer and the company who made the gun.

I know I'm wasting my time answering you prickface but here it is. No as my purchase was legal vs to people that the BATFE knew were either; 1 illegals, 2 felons or 3 both. They forced the dealers to sell weapons to known criminals so that BATFE could follow them back to their source. However, as anyone that has been paying attention know, they soon lost track of the weapons. Their story doesn't wash with the reality because at the same time the Dems (Obama) were wanting to start another ban on weapons to out do the Clinton ban. This was all designed to prove that we need more restrictions by creating the problem that didn't originally exist.

[Goodman]

So if you were to buy a gun, then sell it to someone else, and they committed a crime with it, then blood would be on your hands?

Uh, in this case yes. At best the original purchase was misrepresented on the form 4473 which makes this an illegal sale as the guns in question were not for the personal and ownership and use of the buyer.

I will completely grant that the guns involved should have been tracked and recovered.

Damn right.

But we are still talking about a "legal" purchase, that turned into a *possibly* legal private sale.

Disproven. This was clearly not a legal sale.

Unless you saying you want all secondary sales to go through an FFL, then how is what you are saying not extremely hypocritical?

You might as well be blaming the dealer and the company who made the gun.

As BATFE coerced FFLs to act illegally what's left of your argument does not carry any weight.

Are you drunk? You usually make a much better argument. In this case your position is beyond being even remotely likely to apply, unless the current regime keeps pulling strings from behind the curtain. According to current enforcement of federal regulations this sale was illegal through and through.

[Goodman]

Dealers aren't interested in tracking them under normal circumstances.

Correct. Dealers are interested in not making such sales in the first place so tracking becomes unnecessary. As someone else posted- don't believe it? Go to your FFL and try to buy 40 SBRs.

[sevlex]

Jesus, Kad. That was the most uninformed devil's-advocate post you have ever made. Congratulations, you have finally made on to my ignore list - along with Joey.

[mrkalashnikov]

Blood is on their hands. All parties involved should be found guilty of conspiracy to commit murder.

This. The criminal & treasonous actions of O and his cadre of marxist flunkies will go down as further evidence of the most corrupt & inept administration in the history of this country.

[alismith]

Kad, are you in line to replace Frieden as CDC chief? Your arguments make as much sense as his do.

[Kadmos]

Bullshit...no one buys 40 AKs for personal use, though they might buy them for resale, in which case any FFL who didn't want his license revoked would insist on only transferring so many to another FFL holder. Don't believe me? Go try to buy 40 AKs or ARs at once from any FFL in the land...start with your local gun shop...just go in and ask them what it would take to buy 40 AKs or ARs...out the door...

There were people buying crates of them and sks when they first started showing up in mass at around $75-$100. In most states it's legal to buy as many guns as you want in a day. Are you against this?

Ahh...so because an illegal activity was already taking place, the US Gov't needed to get on the gravy train, rather than actually working to stop it? The problem was that there weren't enough traced to gangs because the actual number of guns making it illegally to the cartels was low. The DOJ needed to increase those numbers to support the current regime's plans for gun control.

The government didn't make the guy walk in and buy the guns, he did that himself. Later they busted him for it. How many more guns would he have bought and sold if they had just shrugged their shoulders and said "these were legal purchases he initially made".?

Is the government responsible for any deaths caused by guns he may have previously bought and sold before they caught onto him?

Not sure you could sound any other way...except that here you're absolving the gov't at least 2nd degree manslaughter, if not worse. But then, you have been known to absolve gov'ts and many of far worse...haven't you.

So by that logic anyone who sells a gun to someone who later uses it to kill is guilty of 2nd degree manslaughter?

Lets say the government if surveilling a drug dealer, they watch him make several sales before they send in an uncover agent to do a buy. Then they arrest the dealer. Now lets say someone overdoses from the drugs they bought earlier in the day...is that the government's fault?

Your making arguments that you would never make in private gun sales. You've gone from "guns don't kill people, people kill people" to "guns kill people when the government allows they to be sold in a way we can kinda put part of the blame on the government for"

Many of them were coerced into it against their wills, and there was gov't retaliation against any who refused.

Uh huh, sounds like "cover your ass" talk...."the government made me make that wildly profitable sale that happens to be totally legal, but *may* (or may not) have seemed a bit shady, they forced me to take that profit, I would never sell a gun to someone who could even possibly think of selling it to someone else, because I can look into everyone's eyes and see their soul and know they would never do such a thing"

Sorry but it's horseshit, you can pretty much walk into a gun dealer and say "I'm forming a militia, just in case shit goes down and I have to fight the government, I want 40 Ak's to put in the armory, all in my name".

Most gun dealer's I've met would go "Hell yeah, can I join up, and how are you set for ammo, mags, and accessories"

YOU DON'T KNOW THAT!!! There is no way you could know that! To infer you could even begin to know that is an out and out lie.

Note how I used the word "may". The dealers may have sold them or may not have sold them if the government wasn't involved.

Obviously this guy walked in, flush with money, with the expectation that he was going to buy guns.

This is so twisted a version of what actually happened, I can't believe even you're stupid enough to believe it.

At it's basic level it's exactly what happened, a man came in to buy a gun, the dealer called in, and was given the go ahead to sell.

The circumstances are a bit different, as the government was actually sort of (ineffectively) watching this time. But it's the same basic thing that goes on day in and day out.

[Goodman]

The circumstances are a bit different, as the government was actually sort of (ineffectively) watching this time. But it's the same basic thing that goes on day in and day out.

You miss the point. The government overrode the dealer's responsibility to deny any sale that in his opinion didn't pass the smell test. This puts full responsibility for the sale and its consequences in the hands of the ATF.

[Kadmos]

You miss the point. The government overrode the dealer's responsibility to deny any sale that in his opinion didn't pass the smell test. This puts full responsibility for the sale and its consequences in the hands of the ATF.

But again, we have no idea if the dealer would have done anything different.

Nor do I see how this puts "full responsibility" on the government. They didn't pull the trigger. Moreover, most on here are for the idea of the easy sale of firearms and would never consider blaming the government, the dealer, etc.