DoJ figure taking the 5th in Fast & Furious probe

Spread the love

Loading

It’s every citizen’s right to take the Fifth Amendment in court and Congressional hearings when testifying.  When the sitting chief of a criminal investigation division for a US Attorney’s office does it, though, it certainly calls into question what in blazes the Department of Justice has been doing, especially with Operation Fast and Furious:

The chief of the Criminal Division of the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Arizona is refusing to testify before Congress regarding Operation Fast and Furious, the federal gun-running scandal that sent U.S. weapons to Mexico.

Patrick J. Cunningham informed the House Oversight Committee late Thursday through his attorney that he will use the Fifth Amendment protection.

Cunningham was ordered Wednesday to appear before Chairman Darrell Issa and the House Oversight Committee regarding his role in the operation that sent more than 2,000 guns to the Sinaloa Cartel. Guns from the failed operation were found at the murder scene of Border Agent Brian Terry.

The letter from Cunningham’s Washington DC attorney stunned congressional staff. Last week, Cunningham, the second highest ranking U.S. Attorney in Arizona, was scheduled to appear before Issa‘s committee voluntarily. Then, he declined and Issa issued a subpoena.

Cunningham is represented by Tobin Romero of Williams and Connolly who is a specialist in white collar crime. In the letter, he suggests witnesses from the Department of Justice in Washington, who have spoken in support of Attorney General Eric Holder, are wrong or lying.

Rep. Darrell Issa, chair of the House Oversight and Government Reform committee, issued a statement few minutes ago calling this move “extremely rare” and “an indictment” in itself of the DoJ’s integrity.  Issa also points out that the scope of the strategy that Cunningham will employ will leave him answering no questions except his name and title:

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of

3 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

And speaking of government programs gone awry:

The F-35 Joint Strike Force program is slated to be the most expensive weapons system ever. Turns out that it won’t be able to take off from aircraft carriers, making it much less valuable as JSF plane (e.g. the UK was counting on it being able to be carrier-based.

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/16/why-aircraft-carriers-may-be-good-for-parking-cars-but-not-landing-new-jets/

It appears that someone screwed up. Reminds me a little of that failed Mars mission, where one group of engineers was using English units and the other metric units and the parts (built by different groups) didn’t work, because they were built to different specifications.

Other than not being able to be based on carriers, it seems like a terrific plane for the next 30 years.

As I predicted long ago, nothing will come of this. Even Holder has escaped.

The Republicans FAILED horrifically to make hay out of this issue.

Duh!

That letter is damning…..of the Obama Administration and the Holder DOJ!
http://www.foxnews.com/interactive/politics/2012/01/20/letter-from-patrick-cunninghams-attorney/

“…..First, Mr. Cunningham proposed draft language internally to his supervisor in the United States Attorney’s Office.
Second, Mr Cunningham vetted the accuracy of the draft language with others in the United States Attorney’s Office.
Third, IvIr. Cunningham’s supervisor reported that he* provided the draft language to the Department of Justice.
Fourth, the Department of Justice did not include in its*rpr”* to Congress the draft language Mr. Cunningham’s supervisor reportedly provided.
……
The evidence described above shows that my client is, in fact, innocent, but he has been ensnared by the unfortunate circumstances in which he now stands between two branches of government.
I will therefore be instructing him to assert his constitutional privilege.

*WHICH “he?” Cunningham or the supervisor?
I’m guessing it was the supervisor.