MSM Sheep: Ignoring the Scandal of the Century

Monday's revelations by Mike Vanderboegh at Sipsey Street Irregulars and David Codrea at the Gun Rights Examiner, corroborated here at PJMedia and expounded upon at Fox News, comprise a "smoking gun" of the one of the most stunning political scandals in U.S. history.

As William Lajeunesse writes at Fox:

Not only did U.S. officials approve, allow and assist in the sale of more than 2,000 guns to the Sinaloa cartel -- the federal government used taxpayer money to buy semi-automatic weapons, sold them to criminals and then watched as the guns disappeared.

I don't wish to understate it: elements of the U.S. Departments of Justice, State, Homeland Security, and Treasury are responsible for supplying an arsenal to narco-terrorists waging a civil war against an American ally. Our federal government may bear responsibility for at least 200 murders committed with "walked" firearms, in what Mexican Attorney General Marisela Morales describes as a "betrayal" of her country by the Obama administration.

Are there legal ramifications? Perhaps. According to Title 18, 2331 of the U.S. Code, Operation Fast and Furious may amount to international terrorism, which carries with it stiff penalties for conspiracies that result in homicide. The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act -- which was originally used to prosecute the mafia -- and the Arms Export Control Act (AECA) may also fit, as may assorted state and federal charges. Charges may also result from two investigations launched by Mexican authorities, and Mexico could conceivably file charges with the International Criminal Court.

This is objectively the most important political and legal story in America right now.

But despite the revelations from of documents and testimony obtained by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and repeated calls for full disclosure from senators and congressmen, mainstream media organizations have done everything in their power to bury the scandal. This can only be viewed as a partisan media's attempt to protect a criminal executive branch.

Let's play "if Bush did it."

If thousands of firearms had been provided to the Sinaloa cocaine cartel by the Justice Department; and if those guns had been blamed for not one or two, but hundreds of murders by Mexico's lead prosecutor, would there not be wall-to-wall front page coverage every day on the pages of the New York Times ... if Bush were still president?

Under Bush, the MSM did provide blanket coverage for the warrantless wiretapping program -- which was deemed legal by the courts and caused no deaths.

If circumstantial evidence, political speeches, and talking points from Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, and President Bush all suggested that the solitary goal of a gunwalking conspiracy was to put American weapons in the hands of criminals in hopes they would commit violent crimes in order to undermine the Constitution and Bill of Rights ... the Washington Post columnists would call for impeachment and criminal prosecution each day.

Recall how they breathlessly reported the minute details and speculations of the Valerie Plame affair, which had much smaller stakes.