One of the guns used in the November 13, 2015 Paris terrorist attacks came from Phoenix, Arizona where the Obama administration allowed criminals to buy thousands of weapons illegally in a deadly and futile “gun-walking” operation known as “Fast and Furious.”

A Report of Investigation (ROI) filed by a case agent in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF) tracked the gun used in the Paris attacks to a Phoenix gun owner who sold it illegally, “off book,” Judicial Watch’s law enforcement sources confirm. Federal agents tracing the firearm also found the Phoenix gun owner to be in possession of an unregistered fully automatic weapon, according to law enforcement officials with firsthand knowledge of the investigation.

The investigative follow up of the Paris weapon consisted of tracking a paper trail using a 4473 form, which documents a gun’s ownership history by, among other things, using serial numbers. The Phoenix gun owner that the weapon was traced back to was found to have at least two federal firearms violations—for selling one weapon illegally and possessing an unregistered automatic—but no enforcement or prosecutorial action was taken against the individual. Instead, ATF leaders went out of their way to keep the information under the radar and ensure that the gun owner’s identity was “kept quiet,” according to law enforcement sources involved with the case. “Agents were told, in the process of taking the fully auto, not to anger the seller to prevent him from going public,” a veteran law enforcement official told Judicial Watch.

Found by Adam Curry via No Agenda

  1. NewFormatSux says:

    Another non story liberals in the media keep insisting.

  2. Hmeyers says:

    I was expecting a story with a crappy unreliable source.

    But isn’t.

    Not sure what conclusions to draw from this. They still would have had guns, just not that particular gun.

    At the same time, the government intentionally supplied criminal guns and it ended up being used in a terror attack.

    • Charlie Primero says:


      The U.S. Government in a criminal enterprise. Americans deserve a criminal government because they are too lazy to resist by even cheating on their taxes.

      You deserve to be farmed by criminals.

  3. Limey says:

    And they impeached Nixon for what?

    • Mr. No-IT-All says:

      They also impeached Clinton and pretty much for the same thing too — lying to Congress. Both Nixon and Clinton knew their asses were in a sling where both of them could have even gone to jail. Only difference is Clinton had allies to keep him out of the poky — Clinton had the press who would always look the other way.

      Funny how things never change.

      • jpfitz says:

        Things have changed. New Journalism puttered out too soon. Corporate takeover in the eighties of news media made a Huge change.

      • Bob Reed says:

        Nixon approved a break-in by Republican operatives into the Democratic National Commitee headquarters. Clinton lied about getting a blowjob.

        Really? That’s what you consider to be the same thign?

    • TheInvisableJCD says:

      Nixon was not impeached…

  4. Ah_Yea says:

    Why isn’t Obama and Holder in jail? What kind of banana republic do we live in?

  5. bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

    Strong implication that Tesla Auto Driver allows the driver to speed and to watch videos or tv and to do both at the same time.

    It makes sense that very rare reflections/conditions and what not would be misinterpreted by any driver whether computer or human. This time…the computer failed. I wonder if that will be a continuing glitch or a bug that gets fixed?

    The car crashed 1/4 mile later….making me think the Tesla didn’t stop driving even after crashing thru the truck? Again…a characteristic or a bug?

    • NewFormatSux says:

      If it was as invisible as they claim, then no fix is possible.
      If the issue was they were only looking forward and not up, then a fix could end up causing problems with planes in the sky and birds.

      NHTSA can mandate a latch in case you are in the trunk, but they won’t ban video in the front?

      • jpfitz says:

        So many distractions.

        If only the pilot paid attention to the job at hand…I do mean watching the road, self driving or not for now drivers/pilots eyes kept on the road.

        I’m gonna have to put front and rear facing camera recording while the ignition switch is on. This sounds a bit like Russia, no.

  6. Mr Diesel - Nothing pithy to put here says:

    This has been a pretty bad few weeks in the news.

    Obomba worthless piece of shit administration gun used in the French terrorist attack.

    Obomba worthless piece of shit administration won’t release the 911 tape (required by law) and ignores reporters during a press conference.

    Obomba worthless piece of shit administration attorney general meets with former impeached president Clinton about grandchildren/investigation of his lying bitch wife.

    Tesla car kills a man.

    • Says it all says:

      So now, Loretta Lynch says she’ll accept whatever recommendation prosecutors and the FBI make about whether to bring charges against Hillary Clinton for using a personal email server.

      Did Bill set this up intentionally? He’s clever, not stupid.

      Who’s in who’s pocket?

      • Mr Diesel - Nothing pithy to put here says:

        All that means is that she will accept it. All prosecutors accept the recommendations of law enforcement. That in no way means they will do anything and she won’t indict the lying bitch.

        • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

          Thats just silly. The AG’s role is to accept, modify, or reject recommendations… they regularly do.

          I assume she wanted off the political meat hooks and punted back to the FBI.

          This is a great PUBLIC exhibition. JUST HOW CORRUPT has the USA become???

          …….and still no interviews with the FBI?


          • Says it all says:

            FBI interview with Hillary done.

            Now what? The drama continues…

      • NewFormatSux says:

        Two theories:

        1) Gary Byrne, a Secret Service agent from the Clinton White House calls it quiet intimidation that he used to do all the time as President. After an agent testified in court, Bill came up to him and started talking to him about his family and more. The President had never spoken to him before.

        2) Bill doesn’t want Hillary to win, and is doing what he can to sabotage the campaign.

    • Hmeyers says:

      If Hillary were indicted and had to drop out, wouldn’t that be terrible news for Trump.

      Both Hillary and Trump have very high unfavorable polling rates. Remove Hillary, you might end up with Biden or Sanders.

      Neither Biden or Sanders have Hillary’s astronomically bad unfavorable polling.

      Trump would be off if the FBI investigation dragged on or if the FBI recommended indictment but the State Department refused to do so.

      I think Biden or Sanders would beat Trump very, very badly.

      Hillary is the only candidate that could lose to Trump.

      • Limey says:

        Shows you what a quality candidate she is.

      • NewFormatSux says:

        Biden is about the worst candidate the Democrats could put up, and I have no idea why anyone is clamoring for him, but I think he would beat Trump. Bernie- no way.

      • JoJo Dancer says:

        Curious, what makes you think Trump would lose very, very badly?

        Not that I’m for any one candidate, just speaking from the sidelines, but it would seem Trump already has the momentum. Does he not?

        An indictment on Hillary would just bolster Trump’s arguments and talking points let alone his supporting base would grow even further. Not to mention the damage it would do to the Democratic party’s reputation.

        Then you have Hillary supporters who have been spending the last several months defending and speaking up for her to only be completely proven wrong by her own husband/system. Imagine now those same hard core supporters trying to go out and speak on behalf of Sanders/Biden. What kind of credit would they have at that point? I can’t see their arguments making many ripples far from the pond.

        So just wondering how you come to such a conclusion. If you don’t mind answering or offering some insight.

        • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

          Trump only has his base voters: Old white men.

          You can take it from there?

          • JoJo Dancer says:

            Old white men…

            So you pointed to one specific type of his voter base. You could point to a similar thing for Hillary. Old white hags.

            Irrelevant statement.

          • pedro says:

            In this blog, bobbo is a synonym for irrelevant

          • Limey says:

            So you’re a racist AND and an ageist.

          • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

            JoJo Dancer says:
            7/1/2016 at 7:10 pm

            Old white men…

            So you pointed to one specific type of his voter base. /// No…I pointed to the only type in his voter base.

            You could point to a similar thing for Hillary. Old white hags. /// No…that would be minorities and oldsters.

            Irrelevant statement. /// You appear to be quite ignorant. Recent grad?

        • Hmeyers says:

          Why should you believe me?

          And, you shouldn’t. I am a sample of size of 1.

          Most of us here can talk on equal terms because we have some interest in politics and current events.

          • JoJo Dancer says:

            I understand.

            Just thought if you was kind enough to elaborate. Per your emphatic expression, you appeared to have given it much thought.

            No worries. Pushing for discussion is an old pastime of mine. We all share what we can. And can share enough until it’s no longer worth sharing. But another day I’m sure.

          • Hmeyers says:

            Well, the thing is that I haven’t given it any thought.

            I’m just regurgitating polling data that is pretty widely known.

            Thinking about things isn’t a viable method to survey the landscape.

            All thinking starts with bias and preconceptions. And it assumes that humans make decisions by thinking — and they don’t.

            1) Most people using feeling to make many decisions.
            2) Most people will reject information that they don’t like.
            3) Most people will eager believe any statement that appears to affirm what they want to believe is true.

        • NewFormatSux says:

          The logic is that there is a large pool of voters who will vote for a Democrat over Trump, but not if that Democrat is Crooked Hillary.

          This is like how Torricelli was replaced when he was doing badly in polls, and his replacement won easily.

          I think Trump could adjust and beat Bernie easily, but he would have no traction again Biden, a ridiculous candidate who would lose to all of the other 16 candidates who ran, including Lindsey Graham and George Pataki.

  7. OmegaProject says:

    I believe we need to see Mr. Holder in court again.

    18 U.S. Code § 2339B – Providing material support or resources to designated foreign terrorist organizations

  8. Both Nixon and Clinton knew their asses were in a sling where both of them could have even gone to jail. Only difference is Clinton had allies to keep him out of the poky — Clinton had the press who would always look the other way.

  9. Eddie G says:

    I’m not surprised. It WOULD surprise me if Br’er Holder had to account for his actions.


Bad Behavior has blocked 6527 access attempts in the last 7 days.