SATURDAY, JUNE 30, 2012
Or will her report disappear: Last night, NBC Nightly News featured a brief interview with William Newell, “the veteran ATF agent who ran” the Fast and Furious program.
Newell furthered the story-line which first appeared in Katherine Eban’s recent confounding Fortune report. See THE DAILY HOWLER, 6/28/12.
“To my knowledge, not one firearm was walked to anybody intentionally,” Newell told NBC’s Michael Isikoff during last night’s report. “The notion that we somehow intentionally let guns walk is insane. It never happened.”
To watch last night’s report, click here.
Isikoff’s brief report seemed a bit confused—nothing unusual there. But this interview extends the contradiction which came to light in Eban’s report.
Newell said the ATF agents in Phoenix wanted to arrest the “straw” gun buyers at issue in the Fast and Furious flap. They couldn’t do so, Newell alleged, because nit-picking U. S. attorneys wouldn’t give them permission to make arrests.
Newell flatly denied the basic premise behind the long-standing Furious narrative. He also contradicted the testimony Eric Holder gave to the House last November. “Instances of so-called gun-walking are simply unacceptable,” Holder said in his testimony. “Regrettably, this tactic was used as part of Fast and Furious.”
Holder said gun-walking did occur. The notion is “insane,” Newell said. Eban’s detailed report in Fortune brought this contradiction to light. (To read her report, click here.)
Before we get to today’s Big Question, let’s imagine a reason for the contradiction between Holder and Newell. We have no idea if it’s true.
When she appeared on CNN Thursday night, Evan speculated that Holder might be scapegoating ATF agents in Phoenix to protect “the political appointees.” She wasn’t asked, and didn’t say, who those “appointees” are.
Question: Could Holder be trying to protect some U.S. attorneys he himself may have appointed? The ATF agents say the U.S. attorneys wouldn’t let them make arrests. If that’s true, were some of those folk Holder men?
We have no idea. But there is a glaring contradiction at the heart of the puzzling tale.
Eban’s report turned a long-standing story-line right smack dab on its head. Newell has furthered this new account with his NBC interview. If Newell’s statements are accurate, Holder’s statement to the House was not.
That brings us to today’s Big Question:
Will Eban’s detailed report disappear? Or will your favorite liberal heroes push to ferret the truth?
Over the past twenty years, your favorite fiery liberal heroes have often let the truth walk. Dearest Darlings, careers are at stake! In come cases, Obama’s line must be served!
Surely, it’s nice to pursue the truth. But it can’t always be done! In such ways, Fools for Scandal was disappeared. Ditto for our own incomparable work regarding the war against Gore. Darlings, the rubes can't be told!
In this case, we can’t tell you where the truth lies. But we can pose today’s Big Question:
Will Eban’s report be pursued in the press? Or will her report disappear?