Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Fast and Furious Bombshell Explodes

Expand Messages
  • Supreme Law Firm
    ... 7:14:46 P.M. Central Daylight Time ... Explodes ... jobs.” ... From: usvfnews@charter.net To: usvfnews@charter.net Sent: 8/13/2012 7:14:46 P.M. Central
    Message 1 of 1 , Aug 13, 2012

    From: usvfnews@...
    To: usvfnews@...
    Sent: 8/13/2012 7:14:46 P.M. Central Daylight Time
    Subj: Fast and Furious Bombshell Explodes
     
     
     
    Mol onl abe Em ail New s List usvfnews@...
    In God, we have a great and invincible ally!
    His faithful will be raised on eagle's wings!
     
     

    Fast and Furious Bombshell Explodes

    [See the attached file]According to a high-ranking Mexican drug cartel operative, who is currently in U.S. custody, there are some things that the American people are not being told about Fast and Furious. We obviously knew something was not being told behind the scenes because of Barack Obama issuing executive privilege and Holder being in contempt of Congress for failing to comply. But this makes even the sleepiest of people perk up their ears and pay attention.
    Jesus Vicente Zambada-Niebla, known as the Sinaloa Cartel’s “logistics coordinator,” has brought allegations that the gunwalking operation had nothing to do with tracking guns and everything to do with supplying them. According to Zambada-Niebla it was part of an elaborate agreement between the U.S. andMexico ’s Sinaloa Cartel to take down rival cartels.
    Zambada-Niebla claims that under a “divide and conquer” strategy, the U.S. helped finance and arm the Sinaloa Cartel through Operation Fast and Furious in exchange for information that allowed the DEA, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and other federal agencies to take down rival drug cartels. The Sinaloa Cartel was allegedly permitted to traffic massive amounts of drugs across the U.S. border from 2004 to 2009 — during both Fast and Furious and Bush-era gunrunning operations — as long as the intel kept coming.
    This pending court case against Zambada-Niebla is being closely monitored by some members of Congress, who expect potential legal ramifications if any of his claims are substantiated. The trial was delayed but is now scheduled to begin on Oct. 9.
    Zambada-Niebla is reportedly a close associate of Sinaloa Cartel kingpin Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman and the son of Ismael “Mayo” Zambada-Garcia, both of which remain fugitives, likely because of the deal made with the DEA, federal court documents allege.
    Zambada-Niebla believes that he, like the leadership of the Sinaloa cartel, was “immune from arrest or prosecution” because he also actively provided information to US federal agents.
    Zamada-Niebla’s attorney filled a motion for discovery in U.S. District Court in July 2011 which alleged the above agreement stating:
    ”the Sinaloa Cartel under the leadership of defendant’s father, Ismael Zambada-Niebla and ‘Chapo’ Guzman, were given carte blanche to continue to smuggle tons of illicit drugs into Chicago and the rest of the United States and were also protected by the United States government from arrest and prosecution in return for providing information against rival cartels which helped Mexican and United States authorities capture or kill thousands of rival cartel members.”
    If these accusations could be proven in court, it could have severe ramifications to both the Bush and Obama administrations. Of course the feds are denying the allegations, just like they denied the allegations of the ATF whistleblowers like Vince Cefalu, John Dodson, Jay Dobyns, and Peter Focelli. What would we expect from a corrupt administration?
    Zambada-Niebla’s lawyer is seeking government “documents, files, recordings, notes, and additional forms of evidence” that would support claims that federal agents personally assured Zambada-Niebla that “he would not be arrested, that the agents knew of his prior cooperation … that they just wanted to continue receiving information … “[and] that the arrangements with him had been approved at the highest levels of the United States government.”
    Zambada-Niebla’s claims are confirmed by statements made last month by Guillermo Terrazas Villanueva, a spokesman for the Chihuahua state government in northernMexico , who said,
    U.S. agencies ”don’t fight drug traffickers,“ instead ”they try to manage the drug trade.”
    Villaneuva, also pointed the finger at theU.S. in providing an example of how it fights the ‘war on drugs” stating, “It’s like pest control companies, they only control. If you finish off the pests, you are out of a job. If they finish the drug business, they finish their jobs.”
    There is also corroboration of the story with Humberto Loya-Castro, who was a high-ranking member of the Sinaloa Cartel. He was arrested in 1995. In 2008 prosecutors dismissed his case after he became an informant for the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern district of California in 2005. According to a motion filed in federal court:
    “This strategy, which he calls ‘Divide & Conquer,’ using one drug organization to help against others, is exactly what the Justice Department and its various agencies have implemented in Mexico . In this case, they entered into an agreement with the leadership of the Sinaloa Cartel through, among others, Humberto Loya-Castro, to receive their help in the United States government’s efforts to destroy other cartels.”
    “Indeed, United States government agents aided the leaders of the Sinaloa Cartel.”
    Of course the federal government denies the accusations and claims the deal was only for Layo-Castro.
    Though Zambada-Niebla was arrests by Mexican soldiers in 2009, and the U.S. was not involved in his arrest, he was extrdited to Chicago to face federal drug charges in February of 2010. He claimed that he had immunity via an agreement, but the DEA says that there was no “official” immunity deal, but they admitted that he may have acted as an informant.
    While Zambada-Niebla’s legal council requested records pertaining to Fast and Furious, they were denied. Here is the claim they made in their motion for the documents:
    “It is estimated that approximately 3,000 people were killed in Mexico as a result of ‘Operation Fast and Furious,’ including law enforcement officers in the state of Sinaloa , Mexico , the headquarters of the Sinaloa cartel. The Department of Justice’s leadership apparently saw this as an ingenious way of combating drug cartel activities.”
    “It has recently been disclosed that in addition to the above-referenced problems with ‘Operation Fast & Furious,’ the DOJ, DEA, and the FBI knew that some of the people who were receiving the weapons that were being allowed to be transported to Mexico, were in fact informants working for those organizations and included some of the leaders of the cartels.”
    The federal government continues to deny discovery for the defense claiming that they are “classified materials” and argued that they “do not support the defendant’s claim that he was promised immunity or public authority for his actions.”
    Well that is just like the federal government, isn’t it? You can’t have the documentation because we think it should be classified and besides it doesn’t make your case. Oh really? Well maybe it doesn’t make the case, but I can tell you this: The federal government has a long history of trust issues and the administration that claimed it would be the most transparent has been anything but that.
     
     

    *COPYRIGHT NOTICE** In accordance with Title 17 U. S. C. Sect ion 107,
    an yc op yr ighte dw or k inth isme ssage is distr ib ute d un der fair use
    with outpr ofit orp aymentt oth osewh oh avee xpre sse d apr ior intere st
    inrece ivingthe incl ude d in form at ion forn onpr ofitre se arch an de duc at ion alp urp ose s onl y.[Re f.http ://www .l aw .c ornell .e du/usc ode /17/107.shtml ]


    Toth osewh oh avet akenthe Oath , Rememberthe Oath !
    Toth osewh oh aven ot an dbel ie ve inthe Con st it ut ion ,
    Take a sim il ar Oathn owt othe Con st it ut ion !
    Rememberth atth osewh om akel aw sc ontr ar yt othe Con st it ut ion ,
    Th osewh oen forcel aw sc ontr ar yt othe Con st it ut ion ,
    An dth osewh og ive or der sc ontr ar yt othe Con st it ut ion ,
    Havebec ome dome st icenem ie s ofthe Con st it ut ion !
    It doe sn'tt ake a Judge or al aw yert o kn owthe difference !

    "I DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR (OR AFFIRM) THAT I WILL SUPPORT AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES AGAINST ALL ENEMIES, FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC; THAT I WILL BEAR TRUE FAITH AND ALLEGIANCE TO THE SAME; AND THAT I WILL OBEY THE (CONSTITUTIONAL AND LAWFUL) ORDERS OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES AND THE (CONSTITUTIONAL AND LAWFUL) ORDERS OF THE OFFICERS APPOINTED OVER ME, ACCORDING TO REGULATIONS AND THE UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY JUSTICE. SO HELP ME GOD."
    Alll aw swh ich arerep ugn antt othe Con st it ut ion aren ull an d void." Marb ur y vs.Madison , 5 US (2 Cr anch ) 137, 164, 176. (1803)
     
    "Wherer ight s sec ure db ythe  Con st it ut ion are in vol ve d,therec anben or ulem aking orleg isl at ionwh ichw oul d abr og atethem ." Mir an da vs. Ar izon a , 384U.S. 436, 491. 
     
    "An unc on st it ut ion al act isn otl aw ; itc on fer sn or ight s; it imp ose sn o dut ie s; it affor dsn opr otect ion ; itcre ate sn o office ; it is inleg alc ontempl at ion , as in oper at ive asth ough ith adne verbeenp asse d." Nort on vs. Shelb y Count y , 118US 425, 442.
    Te ddy' s An swert o Diver sit y!

    There isn or oom inth isc ountr y forh yphen ate d Amer ic an ism . The one ab sol utel ycert ainw ay ofbr ing ingth isn at iont or uin , ofpre vent ing allp ossib il it y of it sc ont in uingt obe an at ion at all ,w oul dbet operm it itt obec ome at angle of squabbl ingn at ion al it ie s.
    — The odore Roose velt , speechbe forethe Kn ight s ofCol umb us, 1915 , New Yor k
    Teddy's Answer to Bush and Obama!
    To ann ounceth attherem ustben ocr it ic ism ofthepre sident , orth atwe aret o st an db ythepre sidentr ight orwr ong , isn ot onl y unp atr iot ic an d ser vile ,b ut ism or all ytre ason ablet othe Amer ic anp ubl ic .
    — The odore Roose velt
    Teddy's Answer to Obama & Congress
    "Wec ann ot affor dt o differ onthe que st ion ofh one st y ifwee xpect ourrep ubl icperm anentl yt oen dure .  Hone st y isn ot som uch acre dit as an ab sol uteprere quisitet oe ffic ient ser vicet othep ubl ic .  Unle ss am an ish one st ,weh aven or ightt o keeph im inp ubl icl ife ; itm atter sn oth owbr ill ianth isc ap ac it y."  — The odore Roose velt
    Want to be on our lists? 
     
     
    Wr itet o usvfnews@...  tobe offl ist s!
    Itw illt ake upt o 72 Hour st ot ake you off ofl ist s!
    Bill 'sVietn am Mem or ial Page
    http://www.wjpbr.com
     
     
     


Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.