“Did Fast & Furious violate the Arms Export Control Act?” attorney and author David T. Hardy asks on his Of Arms and the Law blog.
He’s referring to the Arms Export Control Act that “authorizes the President to define defense articles and regulate their export.”
There’s no exemption from the State Department permit requirement for “official use” since no one is admitting walked guns are part of approved U.S. foreign policy, so the bottom line seems to be:
Any person who willfully violates these provisions "shall upon conviction be fined for each violation not more than $1,000,000 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both."
Hardy also notes that U.S. Code also includes provisions for “principals” who “induce” or “willfully cause” offenses, so presumably those who did not physically walk guns but nonetheless induced lawbreaking could be in for a world of hurt if caught.
Gunwalker exposé Colleague Mike Vanderboegh has been asking the same questions and taking them to the next stage. A June 22 post on Sipsey Street Irregulars concludes “Media & Congress Still Missing the Big Legal Point of the Gunwalker Scandal: it was a conspiracy to illegally export weapons to a foreign country.”
This leads to a series of correspondences this correspondent received around a month ago and was not sure what to do with. Hardy’s analysis brings a perspective by which these can now be read and better understood.
The identity of the correspondent or his/her background qualifications are not subject to disclosure. In some instances, redactions to the original correspondence have been made to minimize the chance that anyone can make an educated guess as to who it is, and thus compromise him/her. And my responses and certain specific replies have not been included in this thread.
It is up to the reader to determine for themselves if they believe these observations to be knowledgeable and credible, and to decide if these are appropriate considerations for ongoing Congressional investigations and/or for a special prosecutor to investigate.
[BEGIN CORRESPONDENCE]
Regarding the ATF’s facilitating the distribution of guns in Mexico: There is no denying that the ATF’s project exhibited extremely poor judgment, that tragic outcome was the death of CBP Agent Terry, that the “mainstream press” has in large part ignored this story, and finally that there has no doubt been a clear and deliberate attempt by the DOJ and USGOV to cover up this project and frustrate any attempts to glean truthful information about it. Further, apologists for the current administration and those whose agenda is nothing more than “common sense gun control” will no doubt obfuscate the facts and divert attention by blaming the operation on lax gun laws and likely make the following point: “If only US gun laws were stronger this would not have been necessary….” That line of argument is not only sickeningly illogical but sadly it is one that the US media would surely accept and quickly incorporate into their point of view.
I would offer merely one observation: While the above issues are indeed important, they are a time-consuming sideshow. While Congressmen and any number of those angered by this project will no doubt repeatedly inquire about who “knew what and when” – ad infinitum – I believe that they will be chasing the wrong point and hence missing the mark.
The point is the following: While the ATF, and by extension the USGOV, did not formally sell (or provide) weapons to straw purchases and physically deliver these weapons across the border to into a foreign sovereign nation, the ATF and the USGOV was/were the intellectual author(s) of a comprehensive plan to facilitate the sale and illegal export of weapons to a foreign country. As such, the ATF and the USGOV are the intellectual authors of a conspiracy (I am not an attorney, but use the word “conspiracy” in a broad sense) to illegally export weapons to a foreign country.
Those exports were a clear violation of US weapons export laws, and the USGOV knowingly conspired and allowed those weapons to leave the United States without, (1) A valid US Department of State Export License, (2) a valid End Use statement signed by an appropriate Mexican GOV authority attesting as to the use and end destination of the weapons, and (3) a valid Import License issued by the GOV of Mexico documenting approval for the weapons to enter Mexican sovereign territory. It would not be a stretch to suggest that one could successfully argue that the ATF’s actions, and by extension the USGOV, by facilitating these exports are: (a) complicit in illegal arms trafficking in violation of US weapons export law as codified by ITAR (DOS export regulations), and (b) complicit in a violation of Mexican law by knowingly allowing the weapons to transit into Mexican sovereign territory. Whether the USGOV could be found complicit or guilty of arms trafficking under international law (apart from ITAR and Mexican law) is not something I could speak to. I would, however, offer the following: (1) If any individual or any private group of any national origin had coordinated such an operation, the full legal powers of the Mexican government, the USGOV, and Interpol (not legal powers strictly speaking) would have been brought to bear on that individual or group (witness international arms trafficking prosecutions over the last 20 years), each of those government/other entities would have competed to get the arrest and prosecution headline in their national newspapers, that individual or group would have been immediately detained and incarcerated pending charges, charges would most likely be not in the dozens but in the thousands (as each weapon trafficked can be made to count for several if not dozens of individual violations), and all assets (financial and other, whether or not gained from trafficking) would be seized, and (2) if this were conducted by any number of sovereign countries – in particular any Latin American or African country – perhaps Ecuador facilitating transit/delivery of weapons to the FARC in Colombia, or South Africa providing weapons to a sub-Saharan civil war (create any scenario you wish) – that country facilitating the weapons transit would likely suffer several consequences: (1) The low-level individuals involved, if found by international authorities would be incarcerated (but likely they would never be found), (2) an international court (and perhaps the USGOV under previous administrations) would call for all top level GOV officials (Minister of Defense, Minister of Justice, and perhaps the President – as they are all in the chain of corruption) to be held accountable and tried – and perhaps extradited and (3) the country in question would be labeled as an international pariah, perhaps sanctioned, and certainly black-listed from purchasing and selling weapons and “bellic materiel” from the “civilized nations”.
Thus – the “who knew what when” and the “who told you not to release material that my office requested” etc. is nice to know but gets away from the real issue. The real issue is that the USGOV, through the ATF, was the intellectual author of an illegal arms trafficking operation that violated both US law and Mexican law – and perhaps international law. That is institutional and governmental corruption of the worst kind, above and beyond a few AKs crossing a border.
Two last points, and one that I offer from having lived and worked [REDACTED] (1) The vast majority (if not essentially all) the weapons “fueling the drug trade” (whatever that means) come from: (a) The USGOV exported to MIL armories in Mexico and trafficked to cartels by MEX MIL mid-level and high-level officers who divert arms upon arrival at the port of entry or from MIL armories prior to or immediately after being logged in, (b) USGOV-approved arms exported to other Latin American countries and diverted by their militaries (Brazil, Argentina, Ecuador, etc.) to the black market in neighboring regional countries, (c) supplied directly from local regional manufacturers (Brazil, Argentina, etc.) and (d) directly via container to Mexican ports from Israel, Russia, China, South Africa, and a half dozen others, and (2) If Mexico were truly “outraged” about this operation they would have filed legal charges against the US in their courts, in US courts, and in the International Court. Normally you just have to “follow the money”; in this case it would be “follow the logic”. There was either a financial or political incentive that benefitted Mexican officials. It is hard to understand how such a ludicrous plan could have ever have been proposed in the first place, as logic just does not apply. This project is much more likely the misguided attempt of a US politician with a political agenda, in conjunction with a few politically ambitious mid-level budget-hungry bureau administrators attempting to grow the agency. That is, concoct a scheme to allow weapons to transit to Mexico, knowing that ultimately those weapons will be found in Mexico, that event in turn would justify the argument that US weapons “fuel the drug trade”, and hence justify not only more stringent US gun laws but more importantly justify a higher budget for the bureau to “keep America (and Mexico) safe….”. Merely an attempt to explain the completely illogical by looking at it logically. While one does not necessarily expect politicians or appointed bureaucrats to perform professionally or logically, they do take actions based upon their own internally generated norms, their own internally generated benchmarks, and their own anticipated reward criteria.
[REDACTED STORY ON SPECIFIC DRUG/WEAPON SWAP BETWEEN COUNTRIES THAT IS NOT KNOWN ABOUT OUTSIDE OF SELECT CIRCLES]
Thus - despite stringent arms controls - drug runners were able, with the collaboration of Generals on both sides of the border, to source weapons and pay for them in cash and cocaine. These clearly "fueled the drug trade" but it had nothing to do with gun laws in either country. Pick a country in Latin America or Africa and there are dozens of similar examples. Strict controls on a law-abiding population to do nothing to restrain illegal behavior - by either private citizens determined to break the law or by that same government acting above or outside the bounds of that law.
[CORRESPONDENT GIVES PERMISSION TO SHARE HIS EMAILS]
(1) I have no objection, and take no exception, to your posting that information or using it in any article you write.
(2) I would prefer that any information such as my having lived and worked in any particular location not be identified and be removed - as that can start to get a bit close to home. So yes, I would prefer that anything like that be removed. Thank you for asking. Again, you can use the information as you wish - as if you had developed it.
(3) Regarding the example of [REDACTED] That was not published in the press and is not general knowledge, hence would ask that that example be retained for your information only. There are, however, dozens of these sorts of things being done all over the world - this is not an isolated case.
(4) I don't see that any of the material would need to be shown as provided anonymously as it is not private/restricted information. It was merely my viewpoint and sense of how this entire thing could be put into some sort of conceptual framework. Thus, I am entirely comfortable with your incorporating without attribution any of that analysis or commentary into any article that you and Mike V would write.
(5) I look forward to reading your articles.
One observation: I [REDACTED] have seen a few press reports that indicate something to the effect that "ATF Director will depart as a result of scandal......" What a wonderful sleight of hand. Drop the axe on a guy who is an interim/temporary head only to replace him with (most likely) someone as bad or worse - while everyone who really had a hand in this at more senior levels escapes scrutiny. Nothing like axing the inconsequential sacrificial lamb to divert attention from the bureaucrats who were really running this thing. You combine that with the calls of legislators to "strengthen gun laws and the scope of the ATF" and the sleight of hand is complete. We spend a lot of time worrying about "rogue governments acting outside the law" but we do not seem to worry much about rogue agencies acting outside the law - in part because legislators seem to believe that our own agencies only have to comply with those laws convenient at the time. It's everything from this operation to the agency's wholesale photocopying of sales records/docs during FFL audits to create a registry/database. A serious legislator, I believe, would suggest something like the following: (1) Put the entire agency under administrative review for criminal behavior and violation of US and international law, (2) administrative review of DOJ for the same reasons, (3) disband ATF as an agency, (4) eliminate their tasks that are already covered by other agencies, (5) split the remaining tasks and assign them to (a) Treasury (US Sec Svc) and (b) FBI - as appropriate, and (6) anyone at ATF who wants to work in this area can apply for a job at USSS or FBI. That is - apply for a job, not an automatic transfer. Seems like the best way to get a handle on this sort of thing and clean it up from the bottom up. Anything else is just smoke and mirrors. We should have serious people in government with serious proposals to fix serious problems - not sleight of hand at taxpayer expense.
[END CORRESPONDENCE]
Questions: Does anyone seriously think Hillary Clinton has been left out of the loop? How about Barack Obama? And does anyone seriously think if the evidence amassed to date had been gathered against a private munitions concern, that their facilities would not have been raided, records impounded, executives arrested and charges filed by now?
Also see:
- A Journalist’s Guide to ‘Project Gunwalker' Part One, Part Two, Part Three and Part Four for a complete list with links of independent investigative reporting and commentary done to date by Sipsey Street Irregulars and Gun Rights Examiner.
Note to newcomers to this story: “Project Gunrunner” is the name ATF assigned to its Southwest Border Initiative to interdict gun smuggling to Mexico. “Project Gunwalker” is the name I assigned to the scandal after allegations by agents that monitored guns were allowed to fall into criminal hands on both sides of the border through a surveillance process termed “walking” surfaced.
------------
Help wanted--inquire within
Regular readers: If you agree that mainstream press coverage of the gun rights issue demands a counter-balance, please help me spread the word by sharing Gun Rights Examiner links with your friends via emails, and in online discussion boards, blogs, social media sites, etc. Then get more commentary at The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance.
And don't forget to check out my War on Guns Resistance Radio show, weekdays at 7:00 AM Pacific and 10:00 AM Eastern on NBC 1260 Scottsdale, or by listening live, through weekend encores, or downloading archived programs.
Comments