FAST & FURIOUS: BRIAN TERRY DISCOVERED GUNWALKING WAS FOR ISIL (BENGHAZI RELATED)

FAST & FURIOUS: BRIAN TERRY DISCOVERED GUNWALKING WAS FOR ISIL:

IS BENGHAZI RELATED TO FAST & FURIOUS AND BRIAN TERRY'S MURDER?

Sources: Alex Jones, Infowars, National Review, Youtube

Who really murdered former US Marine and ATF Agent Brian Terry?

Was he murdered after accidentally learning that US Military firearms were being transported (walked) from the United States, through Mexico and then onto the Middle East to be given to ISIL members?

Was US Ambassador Christopher Stevens' murder at Benghazi linked to the Fast and Furious US GUNWALKING operation?

***** BREAKING: FAST AND FURIOUS WAS SECRET PROGRAM TO SHIP ARMS TO MIDDLE EAST TERRORISTS

Investigation reveals arms shipments ongoing.

An expert researcher investigating the ATF’s Operation Fast and Furious gun walking scandal has discovered the operation is ongoing and is likely serving as a conduit for a global gun ring.

Speaking to radio host Alex Jones Tuesday, Lt. Col. Matt Smith-Meck, working on behalf of slain Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry’s family, revealed the botched operation transferred more weapons than initially suspected into the hands of Mexican cartels and possibly abroad.

“Not only is it guns and rifles, but also grenades, grenade launchers, military grade night vision goggles, black special forces tactical uniforms,” Smith-Meck stated, adding that the number of military items relinquished is “more in the magnitude of 4,700.”

Smith-Meck asserts weapons transfers into Mexico are ongoing to this day, and his research suggests the weapons may be resold to broader international networks outside the country.

“What I would speculate is – dovetailing on what Tosh Plumlee has been on your program before and talked about – this is, I think, part of a much larger international gun running operation,” Smith-Meck said.

Explaining the nexus between Fast and Furious and the Middle East, Smith-Meck claimed Mexican traffickers were already on record meeting with foreign purchasers in 2010, and weapons linked to the operation later showed up in Morocco.

“We know from accounts from folks that are actually involved in running these weapons, in September of 2010, weapons – separate from what we would call Fast and Furious – were run down to Mexico, down to a town in Mexico, Caborca actually, met with a international middle eastern arms dealer and en route over to the Middle East,” the retired US Marine said Tuesday.

“And I think of great import, is a Moroccon DST commander – their DST is their internal security forces on 16 October 2010, reported to his supervisors that Fast and Furious weapons were in the kingdom of Morocco en route to arm the rebels in Algeria.”

Smith-Meck was also informed that military equipment and installations were utilized during the operation.

“I was approached by a Col. Taylor – told me he was from OSI, Office of Special Investigations and that the military was aware of possible military installation and equipment involvement with Fast and Furious,” Smith-Meck stated.

According to his sources, Smith-Meck predicts yet another arms transfer to Mexico will occur towards the middle of May.

“We’ve got a mid-May of this year time frame where another large shipment is scheduled to go across from basically Arizona into Mexico, and we’re trying to make sure that does not occur,” Smith-Meck said, adding he had forwarded the information on to Rep. Trey Gowdy.

Additionally, Lt. Smith-Meck, who suspects Agent Terry may have been murdered for digging too deep into Fast and Furious, says he himself has been targeted for harassment.

The investigator says he filed a police report after a March 22, 2015 incident in which someone approached him around 10pm while he was walking his dogs, knocked him down, kicked him in his lower back and told him, “You obviously aren’t getting the message. Keep your Fing mouth shut.”

Smith-Meck declares he will continue searching for the truth behind Brian Terry’s death and is asking for Congress’ help to find answers.

To recap:

• Agents with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives from 2006 through 2010 convince straw dealers to sell weapons to suspected arms traffickers who may in turn sell them over to Mexican cartels, ostensibly to track the cartels.

• On December 14, 2010 while conducting operations in Nogales, Arizona, Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was shot and died while attempting to arrest five individuals. Two of the guns found at the scene were linked to Fast and Furious.

• Smith-Meck claims weapons were sold in Mexico to middle eastern arms dealers in September 2010. A Moroccon DST commander – on 16 October 2010 also reported Fast and Furious weapons were in the kingdom of Morocco en route to arm the rebels in Algeria.

• Smith-Meck asserts guns, rifles, grenades, grenade launchers, military grade night vision goggles, black special forces tactical uniforms, as well as military equipment and installations were involved.

• Lt. Col Smith-Meck’s research into Terry’s death has led him to suspect a wider weapons transfer scheme may be amidst.

• Smith-Meck predicts a mid-May arms transfer.

• The retired Marine has been target of harassment and intimidation since looking into the case.

Read Mr. Smith-Meck’s open letter to Congress regarding his ongoing investigation into Brian Terry’s death below:

**Did Brian Terry Die in Vain?**
**A call to Congress to find answers.**

**By: Andrew McKenna and Matthew Smith-Meck**

Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was murdered on December 14, 2010, ten minutes before his shift ended, and the day before he was going to “blow the whistle” on the Fast and Furious gun-walking debacle. The bullets that ended his life were fired from a Fast and Furious weapon.

Two months earlier, he was visiting his mother in Michigan. Brian, a principled and disciplined former Marine, rarely discussed his work with family. But this trip was different. Speaking with his mother Josephine recently, she told me that Brian acted differently during this visit. He was anxious. It seemed he had the weight of the world on his shoulders. Almost spontaneously over coffee one afternoon, he told his mother, “I just don’t want to go back this time … something bad is going to happen.”

Operation Fast and Furious was initiated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) in 2009 ostensibly as a way to confront the problem of illegal weapons traveling from the United States to Mexican drug cartels. The ill-considered operational design involved allowing straw purchasers in the U.S. to buy weapons and deliver them into Mexico under the supervision of law enforcement. The weapons would be tracked by using serial numbers with the hope that future busts would lead U.S. officials to cartel members.

Brian’s brother, Kent Terry, told us recently that following the killing, law enforcement officials were sympathetic, and most importantly, responsive to the Terry family’s concerns. After a memorial for Brian on January 22, 2011 in Tucson, Arizona, the family was invited to a hotel room full of government suits, including prosecutors and FBI agents. The purported purpose of the meeting was to allow Kent and his brother-in-law, Ron, to “ask any questions you might have” about Brian’s death. Rumors of guns being “walked” across the border to Mexico were already swirling. Ron, not one to mince words, immediately asked about the gun-walking. He told us, and Kent corroborated, that the room fell silent. The officials failed to make eye contact (except with each other). That single question effectively ended the meeting. Both Kent and Ron got the gut feeling that they were summoned there not to have their questions answered but as a fishing expedition. How much did Kent and Ron know? Had Brian confided in them about what he knew? Is this why the government, without notifying the family, went into Brian’s private residence after his murder, rifled through his personal effects and removed all electronic/digital devices and returning them, completely wiped clean, to the family a full year later?

A couple hours later in the same hotel, the Terry family was approached my members of the union that represented Border Patrol personnel, including Brian. The union leadership expressed their condolences, but then very cryptically referred to 3 e-mails that they had received from Brian in the weeks preceding his murder. They wanted the Terrys to be aware of them, but said they weren’t allowed to discuss the content. However, it was obvious, based on the union representative’s tone and demeanor, they weren’t typical union communications, such as transfer requests or shift schedules, for example.

On that final visit with his mother, Brian also told her that he was aggressively confronted by a couple of “bad” agents, and that he told them, “No need to talk to me; I’ll just walk away.” Law-enforcement communities are notorious rumor mills, and we suspect that word had somehow gotten around that Brian was going to speak up about weapons going south with BATFE’s permission, and expose, unbeknownst to Brian, the clandestine nature of Operation of Fast and Furious. We suspect this confrontation was borne out of concern to protect the architects and the players. Brian wasn’t part of the Fast and Furious Operation, but he had stopped vehicles attempting to enter Mexico that contained numerous AK-47 assault rifles. When he radioed the discovery to supervisors, the response was “Let ‘em through.” This troubled him.

In January 2011, ATF agents John Dodson and Vince Cefalu “blew the whistle” on Fast and Furious after learning that the ballistic results showed that a Fast and Furious weapon was used to kill Brian.

The House of Representatives’ Committee on Oversight and Government Reform (HOGR) launched an investigation into Fast and Furious. The Justice Department’s reluctance to cooperate was evident from the very beginning. A February 4, 2010 letter from an Assistant Attorney General to Senator Grassley, Ranking Minority Committee Member for the Judiciary, denied that straw purchased weapons were being deliberately sent over the border into Mexico. The Department did a full 180 degree turn almost a year later, officially retracting their earlier assurances, and admitting that the gun-walking operation was real.

Congress decided to dig deeper, issuing subpoenas for any information including e-mails and other correspondence pertaining to Fast and Furious. After much wrangling and negotiation, the DOJ turned over information compiled prior to February 4th, the day when they claimed the operation didn’t allow for the transport of weapons. On May 3, 2012, Chairman Darrell Issa—presumably frustrated by the Department’s stone walling—issued the following points in a memorandum to fellow members of the committee he chaired:

Some important areas remain cloaked in secrecy:

1. How did the Justice Department finally come to the conclusion that Operation Fast and Furious was “fundamentally flawed?”

2. What senior officials at the Department of Justice were told about or approved the controversial gun-walking tactics that were at the core of the operation’s strategy?

3. How did inter-agency cooperation in a nationally designated Strike Force fail so miserably in Fast and Furious?

These questions—four years later—still have not been answered. The Terry family and the American people deserve better. When the investigation began, members of Congress (House Oversight and Government Reform and Senator Grassley’s offices, specifically) and their staffs were very forth coming to the Terry family about the status of the investigation, answering questions and offering support. The Terrys have reported to us this, sadly, is no longer the case. At first the Terry Family truly believed the truth would come out concerning Brian’s murder, including both what reckless decisions about gun-walking were made and by whom within the Justice Department leadership made them. Now, with the knowledge that actionable information regarding “evidence to lay hands on” was provided to law enforcement, HOGR, and Senator Grassley’s offices in 2012 and 2013 without any meaningful responses, the Terry family is rightly distrustful and discouraged.

On January 19, 2016, the Honorable Amy Berman, U.S. District Judge for the District of Columbia, issued an opinion ordering certain withheld documents regarding Fast and Furious be turned over to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Perhaps this new material will reignite the investigative fire for members of Congress and lead to answers for the Terry family, the American people, and the institution of justice. For Brian Terry, the work of Congress has just begun.

OBAMA LOSES FAST & FURIOUS EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE (BRIAN TERRY)

OBAMA LOSES FAST & FURIOUS EXEC PRIVILEGE (BRIAN TERRY):

FED JUDGE REJECTS OBAMA ADMIN CLAIM TO CONCEAL GUNRUNNING PROGRAM RECORDS.

~ Federal Judge Rules Against Obama On Executive Privilege For "Fast and Furious"

A Federal judge ruled Tuesday that President Obama cannot use executive privilege to prevent Congress from viewing records on Operation Fast and Furious, a gunrunning program that let thousands of firearms cross the border into Mexico.

U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson, who was nominated by President Obama to the bench, said the administration had to release the documents that it was withholding by citing executive privilege.

The judge wrote in her decision that the relevant information already made public by the Justice Department has mitigated the impact of any further disclosures because any damage resulting from deliberations “has already been self-inflicted.”

Jackson was not questioning Obama’s executive privilege claim in itself but that it is rendered invalid by what the Justice Department has previously released.

The administration also has to hand over to Congress “attorney-client privileged material, attorney work product, private information, law enforcement sensitive material, or foreign policy sensitive material.”

The lawsuit dates back to a June 2012 vote in the House of Representatives to hold then-Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress for not handing over the records.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives launched Operation Fast and Furious in 2009, and it lasted until 2011.

The ATF lost thousands of firearms as a result, two of which were linked to the 2010 murder of a Border Patrol agent in Arizona.

The Obama administration can appeal the ruling, but it is unclear if it will do so.

Sources: Politico, Washington Free Beacon, Fox News, Youtube

James Holmes' Booby-Trapped Apartment Deactivated: 3-Phase Operation (Videos)

Entrance to suspect's apartment a 3-phase operation

Investigators carried out Saturday a "controlled detonation" inside the booby-trapped apartment of movie theater shooting suspect James E. Holmes, the latest move in a three-step effort to enter the apartment.

The blast came after a policeman yelled, "Fire in the hole!" three times.

Fire officials were on standby, but there was no immediate indication of a fire.

Earlier, a trip wire and an incendiary device were both dealt with, Public Information Officer Sgt. Cassidee Carlson told reporters.

"This trip wire was set up to clearly detonate when somebody entered the apartment, and it was set up to kill that person," she said. "That could have been a police officer executing a search warrant. This is some serious stuff our team is dealing with."

Investigators were planning to use a robot to disarm trip wires linked to explosives, and then use that same robot to remotely remove improvised explosive devices, a law enforcement official with direct knowledge of the operation told CNN.

It was also possible one of the bomb experts on site would put on protective gear and go inside the apartment, the official added.

Carlson did not say whether that occurred.

It was not clear where all the explosives were located, though many have been seen in the living area with circuitry reaching into the kitchen, the official said.

One of the incendiary devices appears to be improvised napalm and others appear to be mixtures that, if combined with other materials, could cause an explosion, the official said.

Approximately 30 aerial shells are in the 850 square foot apartment, Carlson said. They will be placed on sand trucks and taken to a disposal site for controlled detonation, she said.

"During any of these phases, and as this day goes on, again, there may be controlled detonations," she said, adding that reverse 911 calls would alert the general public prior to any blasts.

Asked what timeline authorities were expecting to follow, she said, "There is no timeline. I can't give you an endtime. We're hoping to get in there within the next hour."

But, she added, "We have no idea how long any of this is going to take."
Officials had been hoping to avoid detonations to limit any loss of evidence, she said.

"Jars of black powder" and what appear to be "liquid accelerants" attached to the explosive devices are also inside Apartment 10, another law enforcement official said. "He placed other chemicals to enhance fire/thermal effect of IEDs," the official added about Holmes' apartment.

"He has a level of expertise, not crude," the official said.

About 100 officials were called in to oversee the entrance into Apartment 10 at 1690 Paris Street.

Federal personnel flown here from out of state include bomb technicians from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and Explosive Ordinance & Disposal specialists.

Police evacuated five buildings Friday, including the one where Holmes lived, after he told them he had rigged his apartment with explosives.

Shortly after police apprehended Holmes in the rear parking lot of the Century Aurora 16 movie complex, where dozens of people had been shot, he told them that he had rigged his apartment, Police Chief Daniel Oates said Friday.

After the shootings, police arrived at Holmes' apartment to find "techno-music" blaring from the bedroom, according to a law enforcement source, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

The music was on a timer and apparently started once he left for the movie theater, said the source, who was not authorized to release details of the investigation to the media.

Oates said Friday that it could take days to work through the apartment safely. While authorities did not say how many residents were evacuated from nearby buildings, the number is estimated to be in the hundreds.

Authorities began Friday night to allow families in four of the five evacuated buildings to return to their residences to retrieve personal items, such as medication, identification cards and clothing.

A shelter was set up at Aurora Central High School for those forced from their apartments.



Crew triggers detonation in Colo. shooter's apt.

Bomb technicians executed a controlled detonation of a triggering device in the apartment of the suspect in Friday's mass shooting at an Aurora, Colo., movie theater.

The bomb crews were faced with deactivating an explosives-laden booby trap that had been set up in the home of James Holmes. Examination of the explosives by bomb experts from the FBI Lab in Quantico, Va., revealed that a trip wire (possibly fishing line) was set up to trigger a liquid container to mix with another, setting off the main charge of the device, which may be additional flammable liquids.

Also in the apartment were about 30 aerial shells (or fireworks) the size of softballs, black in color and made of mostly rubber. They are believed to be filled with smokeless powder. Depending on how the powder was packed, the devices could either detonate or just burn.

Police said the apartment was rigged to detonate on a presumed police entry when the suspect set up loud music to be playing, while he was on his way to the movie theater. First responders would then be sent to the apartment, on the opposite side of town where the gunman planned to wage his assault.

Having evacuated the apartment complex, police this morning were seen towing vehicles away to clear the immediate area. Bomb technicians on a fire truck's crane were seen maneuvering a triggering device through the broken window of the apartment.

Shortly afterwards, a sire sounded, and a muffled boom was heard.

If the explosive devices can be safely removed, they will be put into dump trucks filled with sand and transported to a remote area where they will be countercharged or burned.

If the apartment is rendered safe, the Denver FBI's Evidence Response Team will then carry out a search of Holmes' home.

Rendering the apartment safe for entry is an enormously dangerous mission. About 100 personnel are on the scene, including firefighters, ATF and FBI bomb technicians, and chemists to assess the risks of potential accelerants seen inside.


View Larger Map


Sources: AP, ABC News, CBS News, CNN, NY Daily News, TMZ, Youtube, Google Maps

Darrell Issa's Unnecessary Contempt Vote Against Holder May Help Sink Romney's Ship In November!

Fist Bump For Eric Holder! Two Thumbs Down For Darrell Issa!

The same Darrell Issa who once Arrested for Felony Car Theft & who Plead Guilty to a Concealed Weapons Charge is now the SAME member of Congress who wants to hold A.G. Eric Holder in Contempt for some E-mails.

A Judge later Dismissed the Felony Car Theft Charges.

Now Fast forward to the 21st Century.

Congressman Issa where is Your Mercy for Eric Holder?

The same type of Mercy previously extended to you via a Judge when you were charged with Felony Car Theft?

Pres. Obama & Eric Holder are being blamed for a Gun Running Operation started under George Bush's Administration as "Wide Receiver" and later re-named "Fast & Furious" under Obama's Administration.

"Wide Receiver" placed thousands of Guns into the hands of Young, BLACK Men living in America, yet NO One in Congress said a Word!

"Wide Receiver" contributed to Thousands of Young, BLACK, Male Americans losing their lives via BLACK on BLACK Crime, yet NO One in Congress EVER opened their mouths to question George W. Bush on the program.

Pres. Obama used "Fast & Furious" to locate & help Destroy Mexican Drug Cartels, but yet the GOP Members of Congress want to FIRE U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder.

It was NOT Pres. Obama or Eric Holder who Murdered U.S. ATF Agent Brian Terry.

It was a Drug Cartel Leader.

Thus ATF Agent Brian Terry was Killed while in the line of Duty.

YES it was very Unfortunate, however he was Killed while in the line of Duty.

So how can Pres. Obama or Eric Holder be Personally blamed for Terry's Death?

What about the Thousands of BLACK Youth Murdered under George W. Bush's "Wide Receiver" Gun Running Program?

The Mothers of those Young, BLACK Males Murdered with Guns from the "Wide Receiver" Gun Running Operation Cried and Mourned just as ATF Brian Terry's Mother Cried and Mourned his Death at the hands of Mexican Drug Cartel Leaders who possessed Guns from Obama's "Fast & Furious" Gun Running Operation.

Its quite obvious this entire GOP-Sponsored Theater, led by Congressman Darrell Issa is Politically Motivated to Help Mitt Romney.

Instead its turning away Voters, even some GOP Voters.
i.e., its Backfiring!

Pres. Obama is sure to Benefit from this Contempt Vote against Eric Holder and Darrell Issa's Political Career will be Destroyed soon after.

All for the sake of Bitter Partisan Politics.

Thanks Congressman Issa!

Its so Sad!

You could have chosen to use your Congressional Oversight Authority to help Eliminate Medicaid, Medicare Abuse & Fraud, Increase Child Abuse Protection laws, help Eliminate Disability Payment Fraud, Affordable Housing Funding Fraud,

Investigate Widespread Employment Discrimination against Minorities and Women over the age of 40, Food Stamp Fraud, For-Profit School Student Loan Fraud carried out by School Administrators, etc.,

Instead Congressman Issa you chose to Harass America's First BLACK U.S. Attorney General over some E-mails.

E-mails which by the way were already Submitted to Congress Months ago.

This type of foolishness and waste of Taxpayer Money is why Congress currently has a 9% Approval Rating!

Keep Standing Eric Holder!

We have your Back!

GET OUT THE VOTE AND RE-ELECT PRES. OBAMA FOR U.S. PRESIDENT IN 2012!








Why contempt case against Holder may be doomed


For veteran Congress watchers, President Barack Obama's formal claim of executive privilege regarding certain Justice Department documents related to Operation Fast and Furious will generate a sense of déjà vu.

Disputes over legislative access to executive documents occur in almost every presidential administration. Their resolution inevitably entails a set of legal and political considerations that change from episode to episode.

Unfortunately for the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, its legal position is uncertain at best, and almost all political considerations would seem to favor the White House.

Whether or not the full House votes Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt, the likeliest resolution will be an informal settlement in which the Justice Department expands slightly on its current offer of disclosure, the committee narrows the range of documents it is demanding, or both compromise in a mutual, face-saving gesture.

At least, that would be likely in politically "normal" times.

The form of executive privilege at stake in the current dispute is "deliberative privilege."

Deliberative privilege aims to protect documents generated anywhere in the executive branch that embody only the executive's internal deliberations, not final policy decisions.

Deliberative privilege is not a legal absolute.

The executive branch concedes that when another branch of government demands privileged documents within the executive's control, they sometimes have to be turned over.

They have to be turned over when the demanding branch can articulate a compelling need for the information to fulfill one of its own constitutional functions -- a need that outweighs the executive branch's interest in confidentiality.

A key problem now for the House Oversight Committee is thus far it has yet to state in a very concrete way why it needs the particular documents it is demanding.

In contrast, the executive branch has articulated a strong and highly specific reason for withholding the documents at issue: Forced disclosure to Congress of internal deliberations concerning how best to interact with Congress would undermine the executive's capacity to function as a co-equal branch.

It would undermine the prospects for future candid deliberations about interactions with the other institutions of government.

Resolving such a dispute sounds like a matter for the courts, but the judiciary is unlikely to be of much practical help now to the House.

If the House brings a civil action to enforce its subpoena, the matter is unlikely to resolved by the courts before the election or, indeed, before the expiration of the current Congress.

The House could ask the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia to prosecute Holder for contempt, but the Justice Department long ago took the position -- in a very careful opinion written by then Assistant Attorney General Theodore Olson -- that the department is not required by law to prosecute executive officials for contempt when the ground for subpoena noncompliance is a claim of executive privilege.

So that would leave the House with the one remaining legal option of launching an impeachment investigation, which brings us to the political side of things.

The reality Congress faces in separation of powers disputes, no matter how genuine or how principled, is that the public will almost certainly not rally around Congress if it perceives the dispute as more political food fight than anything else.

With no Democrats supporting the committee vote -- and I am guessing few, if any Democrats supporting a contempt citation by the entire House -- that's just what this will look like.

Moreover, as with Whitewater, it will be hard for House Republicans to explain exactly what the problem is. Fast and Furious appears to have been a disaster, but the Justice Department has shared documents freely on Fast and Furious.

The Justice Department sent a letter to Congress in February 2011 that mistakenly denied reports about what the Bureau of Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives actually did in Fast and Furious.

But the department has been forthcoming in sharing information about the events leading up to that letter, which Holder subsequently withdrew.

The fight, then, is not about a botched ATF operation or about a botched letter to Congress.

It is about how the attorney general reached his eventual conclusion that Fast and Furious was "fundamentally flawed" and decided how to respond to congressional and other requests for information about a program he now concedes should not have happened.

Politically, this now begins to sound like Whitewater -- a story hardly anyone can follow, which really does not seem to implicate fundamental issues of public policy or official integrity.

(One caveat: The dynamics of this dispute could change if it turns out that Republican Committee Chairman Darrell Issa actually has information that the process of responding to Congress after the February 2011 letter entailed specific instances of corruption.

Were he to bring such specific information to the attention of the White House, it would be consistent with past White House practice to release all documents related to that misconduct.)

A prolonged fight over Fast and Furious led by Republicans will do two things their presumptive presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, surely does not want.

It will fill up air space that could otherwise have been spent discussing the economy, and it will intensify the appearance of congressional Republicans as the obstructionists blocking the changes Obama so famously promised.

It also must be said that Issa's past attacks on the administration amply feed a narrative that his subpoena is about politics, not principle.

Having months ago called Obama "one of the most corrupt presidents in modern times" -- in the face of such modern historical escapades as Watergate, Iran-Contra or the Terrorist Surveillance Program -- the chairman is not well-situated to play a Sam Ervin-like role, policing the presidency more in sadness than in angry partisanship.

In short, unless the House has specific information not yet disclosed suggesting the information it seeks is closely linked to the exposure of government malfeasance we have not yet heard about, this fight will end in a standoff or the parties will finally compromise.

To put the matter in yet fuller context, here are some questions and answers about the dispute and the history of executive privilege:

What is executive privilege?

Executive privilege is really an umbrella concept that encompasses a variety of privileges. History's most famous claim of executive privilege -- President Richard Nixon's unsuccessful attempt to withhold the "Watergate tapes" -- was an example of "presidential privacy" privilege.

That privilege covers executive communications when the president is involved.

The executive branch, however, historically claims a much broader privilege, the so-called "deliberative privilege."

Deliberative privilege aims to protect documents generated anywhere in the executive branch that embody only the executive's internal deliberations, not final policy decisions. The current dispute involves "deliberative privilege."

Where does executive privilege come from?

The Supreme Court has held that the authority of the executive branch to withhold certain documents from mandatory disclosure is rooted in the separation of powers.

The court stated, in United States v. Nixon (1974), that the importance of confidentiality to protect "communications between high government officials and those who advise and assist them in the performance of their manifold duties ... is too plain to require further discussion."

It concluded that "the privilege can be said to derive from the supremacy of each branch within its own assigned area of constitutional duties."

In that sense, executive privilege is a form of power that the Constitution never mentions, but which the Supreme Court has found implicit in our constitutional structure. In that respect, it is just like Congress' investigative power, which is also not mentioned in the Constitution.

Why is the president involved in claiming privilege over Justice Department documents?

Withholding documents from Congress is always a sensitive matter, legally and politically. For this reason, presidents have long reserved to themselves the final decision of when and whether to invoke any kind of executive privilege against Congress.

President Ronald Reagan formalized this process in a November 1982, memorandum.

It states: "Historically, good faith negotiations between Congress and the executive branch have minimized the need for invoking executive privilege, and this tradition of accommodation should continue as the primary means of resolving conflicts between the branches.

To ensure that every reasonable accommodation is made to the needs of Congress, executive privilege shall not be invoked without specific presidential authorization."

Why is the White House claiming executive privilege regarding Operation Fast and Furious?

Operation Fast and Furious appears to have been a gravely misbegotten attempt by the ATF to nab drug traffickers in Mexico by allowing lower-level gun traffickers to buy weapons in the United States for the Mexican cartels and then tracing the guns' movement, rather than stopping their export.

One of the guns may have been involved in the December 2010 killing of U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.

On February 4, 2011, Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich wrote a letter to Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, the ranking minority member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which mischaracterized the operation.

He incorrectly denied that ATF "knowingly allowed the sale of assault weapons to a straw purchaser who then transported them into Mexico."

As a result, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, chaired by Issa, has been investigating not only the original operation but also the circumstances that led to the erroneous February 4, 2011, letter.

For his part, Holder directed the Justice Department's inspector general to investigate Fast and Furious and publicly denounced the operation in October 2011 as "fundamentally flawed." The Justice Department has released to Congress more than 7,600 pages of documents revealing how Fast and Furious was initiated and carried out.

What the Issa committee is now demanding, and what the White House and Justice Department are withholding, are documents generated after February 4, 2011, relating to how the Justice Department handled its responses to Congress regarding Congress' oversight of Fast and Furious, following the erroneous Weich letter.

In his June 19 letter to the president seeking the invocation of executive privilege, Holder argued that to disclose these documents would " 'significantly impair' the Executive Branch's ability to respond independently and effectively to matters under congressional review."

More specifically, "Congressional oversight of the process by which the executive branch responds to congressional oversight inquiries would create a detrimental dynamic" that would, in turn, "chill the candor ... of executive branch discussions and 'introduce a significantly unfair imbalance to the oversight process.' "

Is the executive privilege claim valid?

United States v. Nixon held that, with the possible exception of documents pertaining to military and state secrets, executive privilege is not absolute but "qualified."
Under a "qualified privilege," documents that are potentially exempt from mandatory disclosure might still have to be released to another branch of government.

This would happen when the institutional needs of the demanding branch to acquire the information in support of its own constitutional functions are weightier than the harms that would follow should the executive branch be forced to disclose it.

Congress typically takes the position that this balancing process always favors Congress, a proposition with which the executive disagrees and for which there is no judicial precedent.

As matters stand, the executive branch has articulated a strong and highly specific reason for withholding the documents at issue: They would shed no light on any policy issue before Congress and would directly intrude on the executive branch's capacity to figure out how to respond to legislative inquiries, consistent with the executive's own independent constitutional role.

To Congress, the Justice Department is saying, in effect: You can ask us questions, you can judge our answers, but you cannot eavesdrop on the process by which we formulate our answers.

For its part, Issa's committee has not made clear in any concrete terms why it needs the documents it is demanding.

It has not, for example, made a prima facie case of criminal wrongdoing in the Justice Department's post-February 11, 2011, actions, on which the documents now demanded would shed some light.

As long as the dispute remains in this posture, the Justice Department's claim falls well within the executive branch's longstanding interpretation of its prerogatives under the separation of powers.




House Investigator Issa Has Faced Allegations As Well

The man driving the investigation into the General Services Administration, California Republican Rep. Darrell Issa, took the top seat on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee after the GOP won a majority in 2010.

Issa has led several splashy investigations since. But he's also been dogged by allegations of his own.

Issa has made news in recent months by threatening to subpoena Attorney General Eric Holder, and by calling a panel of only men to talk about women's contraception.

The Car Alarm Voice

Issa made his fortune building and selling Viper car alarms. He is the wealthiest member of Congress, worth as much as $450 million. In fact, it's Issa's voice on the popular alarm's signature warning to would-be thieves: "Protected by Viper. Stand back."

What's less well known is how Issa got into car alarms in the first place.

"For years I used to tell everyone that I went into it because my brother was a car thief. Then they found out when I ran for office my brother did spend time in prison as a car thief, and it ruined the whole joke I'd had for 20 years in business," Issa said during an interview with WhoRunsGov.

Issa himself was accused several times of auto theft. In the early 1970s, he and his brother were arrested after police suspected them of stealing a Maserati sports car from a dealership in Cleveland. Issa says the police mistook his identity, and the charges were later dismissed.

Another time, Issa was arrested and eventually pleaded guilty to carrying a concealed weapon. Police found a handgun and a tear-gas gun — plus ammunition for both — in Issa's glove compartment.

Questions In The Past

These stories first arose when Issa ran for the Senate in 1998. An investigative reporter named Lance Williams was looking into the then-candidate's biography.

"He had been a soldier, and he claimed that he was part of an elite bomb detecting unit that guarded President Nixon at the 1971 World Series," said Williams.

Williams called up the Nixon Presidential Library, and was told that Nixon hadn't gone to any World Series games that year. Then Williams looked into Issa's purportedly stellar career in the Army.

"The biography that he was providing the press in the context of his campaign was all wrong. He had a bad conduct rating. He was demoted, and a fellow soldier accused him of stealing his car," said Williams.

Issa eventually took over the company that built car alarms.

Ryan Lizza, a reporter for The New Yorker magazine, detailed Issa's early business moves in a 2011 story.

The Fire

Issa had a warehouse full of electronics that, one night in 1982, caught fire. Investigators later found "suspicious burn patterns," Lizza reported, and found that Issa had done some odd things.

A co-worker claimed that before the fire, Issa had put important electronic prototypes in a fireproof box, and that he'd removed the business's computer and financial files from the building. Investigators also found that less than three weeks before the blaze, Issa had increased the company's fire insurance from $100,000 to more than $400,000.

"So you add the more than quadrupling of the insurance along with the taking the computer and putting the other stuff in a fireproof box, and you can see why both the arson investigators and the insurance investigators pointed a finger, you know, at Issa after this fire," said Lizza.

Issa said he had nothing to do with the fire, but the insurance company refused to pay the claim. The two later settled out of court.

It was in part because of these allegations that Issa lost his Senate bid in 1998. He went on to win his House seat, he worked to recall the governor of California, and now he chairs the powerful House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

Issa would not talk to NPR about this, but he has told several news outlets over the years that he's surprised the allegations from his past continue to dog him.


Sources: CBS News, CNN, NPR, The Blaze, Youtube

Issa vs Holder: Its About Jobs Issa NOT Contempt Of Court Dude! Where Are The Jobs??

Congressman Darrell Issa's push to hold AG Eric Holder in Contempt will actually hurt the GOP. It will be viewed as Petty by Voters.
Right now Most Voters don't really care about Issa's beef with Holder. We are ONLY focused on JOBS! Where are the Jobs?
Picking a Fight with Holder will be seen by many Voters including GOP Voters, as Vindictive and a Blatant waste of Taxpayer Money!
So Here's a final word for Congressman Darrell Issa: Keep beating that "Fast & Furious" Drum and see where it gets the GOP in November.
Congressman Issa: Sir where are the Jobs?? Does "Fast & Furious" have anything to do with JOBS??? I didn't think so!



Issa Complains Holder Is ‘Not A Good Witness’

House Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) in a House hearing on Thursday pressed Attorney General Eric Holder about the Justice Department’s response to a subpoena requesting information on the botched ATF operation known as “Fast and Furious.”

Issa said Holder was “not a good witness” and he was unsatisfied with Holder’s answer about whether DOJ had internally pulled material responsive to the subpoena. Issa said there was “hostility” between Holder and himself but Holder said he disagreed.

“With all due respect to Chairman Issa, he says there’s hostility between us, I don’t feel that, you know, I understand he’s asking questions, I’m trying to answer them as best I can. I’m not feeling hostile at all. I’m pretty calm. I’m okay,” Holder said.

Issa has threatened to pursue a contempt resolution against Holder but aides to House Speaker John Boehner (R) have been in discussions with the Justice Department in an attempt to resolve the matter without having House Republicans pursue contempt in an election year.

Fast and Furious was an operation in which agents with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) instructed gun dealers to sell weapons to individuals they suspected were “straw purchasers” for Mexican drug cartels. Two of the weapons were found at the scene of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry’s death. Holder has said he wasn’t aware that guns walked during Fast and Furious until reports became public in early 2011. The Justice Department has said the pursuit of contempt is “unwarranted,” “unprecedented” and “ill-advised.”


Sources: Politico, TPM

Amy Bishop's Murder Of Her Brother A Police Cover Up? Bombing Suspect

Braintree Promises Search For Records In Amy Bishop/ Brother's Murder Case


The Mayor of Braintree said today that the town and its police department would work with the Norfolk County district attorney's office to locate all materials relating to the 1986 fatal shooting by Amy Bishop of her brother, Seth Bishop, a case that is drawing new interest because Amy Bishop was charged with shooting six people on Friday in Alabama.

The town and the police recognize "the importance of transparency ... The Braintree Police Department will conduct a thorough audit of all its records to identify if there were deficits in its past record keeping process," Mayor Joseph C. Sullivan said today in a statement.

The statement came after Braintree Police Chief Paul Frazier on Saturday raised troubling questions about the handling of the case in his town, saying that a police report on the Dec. 6, 1986 shooting was missing and that the officer who prepared it remembered the shooting as happening during an argument, even though the State Police later ruled it was an accident.

More than two decades later, Amy Bishop now stands accused of shooting six of her colleagues – three of them fatally – at the University of Alabama in Huntsville.

Sullivan promised that the results of the review would be shared with the public and with law enforcement agencies.




















Ala. Suspect Was Questioned In Bomb Case


A Biology professor accused of killing three colleagues and wounding three more in a shooting rampage at the University of Alabama in Huntsville on Friday was a suspect in the attempted mail bombing of a Harvard Medical School professor in 1993, a law enforcement official said yesterday.

Amy Bishop and her husband were questioned after a package containing two pipe bombs was sent to the Newton home of Dr. Paul Rosenberg, a Harvard Medical School professor and physician at Children’s Hospital Boston. At the time, Bishop was working as a postdoctoral fellow in the hospital’s human biochemistry lab.

It was the second stunning revelation in two days about Bishop’s past. On Saturday, authorities said Bishop fatally shot her brother in Braintree in 1986 and was not charged after state prosecutors concluded that it was accidental.

In an interview last night at their home in Huntsville, Ala., Bishop’s husband, James E. Anderson, acknowledged that he and his wife were questioned by authorities about the 1993 mail bomb case, but said neither of them was a suspect. Rather, they were “subjects’’ of the attempted bombing investigation, he said.

It was “just a matter of questioning, being bothered, harassed. You know, the usual techniques, that’s all,’’ Anderson said. He told The New York Times, “In my files I have a letter from the ATF [Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms] saying, ‘You are hereby cleared in this incident. You are no longer a subject of the investigation.’ ’’

Rosenberg had just returned home from a Caribbean vacation with his wife on Dec. 19, 1993, when he was opening a package addressed to “Mr. Paul Rosenberg M.D.’’ that had been brought inside with the rest of the mail by their cat-sitter. When he saw wires and a cylinder inside, he and his wife fled the house and called police.

A law enforcement official said yesterday that the investigation by the US Postal Service, the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, and Newton police had focused on Bishop.

“She was the suspect early on,’’ the official said.

The official, who had knowledge of the case, said Bishop was allegedly concerned that she was going to receive a negative evaluation from Rosenberg on her work. Investigators believed she had a motive to target Rosenberg and were concerned that she had a history of violence, given that she had killed her brother, the official said.

Investigators conducted a search of the home where Bishop and Anderson were living and questioned the couple, the official said. Anderson was questioned about whether he had purchased any of the components used to make the bombs, the official said.

But the US attorney’s office in Boston did not seek any charges against Bishop or Anderson, and no one was ever charged with mailing the bombs.

The law enforcement official said federal prosecutors concluded the evidence was circumstantial and not sufficient to warrant charges. A spokeswoman for the US attorney’s office declined to comment yesterday.

At his home yesterday afternoon, Rosenberg declined to comment and referred questions to Children’s Hospital administrators, who said information on the case was not immediately available.

Sylvia Fluckiger, a lab technician who worked with Bishop at the time, told the Globe yesterday in a telephone interview that Bishop had a dispute with Rosenberg shortly before the bombs were mailed.

After the attempted bombing, Fluckiger said that Bishop told her she had been questioned by police. Fluckiger said Bishop told her police asked her if she had taken stamps off an envelope that had been mailed to her and put them on something else.

“She said it with a smirk on her face,’’ said Fluckiger. “We knew she had a beef with Paul Rosenberg. And we really thought it was a really unbelievable coincidence that he would get those bombs.’’

Sergeant Mark Roberts, a spokesman for the Huntsville Police, said yesterday that after receiving inquiries from the Globe about Bishop being a suspect in the 1993 mail bombing case, they were looking into the case.

“Presently we are trying to confirm it through law enforcement resources,’’ he said.

Bishop, 44, a professor at the University of Alabama in Huntsville since 2003, was arrested after allegedly opening fire during a faculty meeting Friday, killing three colleagues and wounding three others, reportedly after learning at the meeting that she was being denied tenure.

Her husband said to the Globe last night, “Why’d she snap? That’s my question. I’ve got to get to the bottom of that, and when I get to the bottom of that, then I’ll just call a press conference and say, ‘OK, this is what happened. Let me clear the air.’ ’’

He added that, “Everybody loves her, and everybody, including myself - we were all shocked. We don’t know what happened. They don’t know what the university did to her.’’

The New York Times reported that Anderson said he did not know his wife allegedly had a gun when she went to the meeting Friday at the university. “I had no idea,’’ he told the paper. “We don’t own one.’’

He told the Times that Bishop was fighting the school’s decision to deny her tenure.

In an interview with The Chronicle of Higher Education, Anderson said wife “didn’t want to go the way of’’ another university scientist who lost tenure and was now driving a shuttle bus.

In that interview, he also said he spoke with Bishop yesterday morning by telephone and she said, “I know you guys are obviously in shock.’’ He said she wanted to know whether their four children were OK and whether they’d done their homework.

He said he was dating Bishop when she shot her brother to death in 1986, an incident he called “an absolute accident.’’

The Globe reported yesterday that Bishop, who was 21 at the time, shot and killed her 18-year-old brother Seth on Dec. 6, 1986, inside their Braintree home.

Braintree Police Chief Paul H. Frazier said Bishop killed her brother with a shotgun after an argument, fired two other rounds inside the house, then later pointed the gun at a passing car while fleeing.

Prosecutors declined to bring charges after Bishop’s mother, Judy Bishop, insisted the shooting was accidental.

Since the Alabama shootings, Frazier has raised questions about whether the Braintree investigation was mishandled. But John Polio, who was the town’s police chief at the time and is now retired, defended the original investigation. He said Saturday that at the time, he had asked the district attorney to review the case. Also on Saturday, the Norfolk district attorney’s office released a six-page investigational report on the shooting issued at the time, which concluded that it was an accident.

Braintree police said their own file on the case went missing shortly after the 1986 shooting. Yesterday, Braintree Mayor Joseph C. Sullivan said the town has begun an investigation to determine what happened to the report.

“The Braintree Police Department will conduct a thorough audit of all its records to identify if there were deficits in its past record-keeping process,’’ Sullivan said in a prepared statement. “The results of this review, when completed, will be shared with relevant law enforcement agencies and the public.’’

Also yesterday, a person briefed on the mail bomb case said the search of Bishop’s computer in that inquiry turned up a draft of a novel that Bishop was writing about a female scientist who had killed her brother, and who was hoping to make amends by becoming a great scientist. The person spoke to the Globe on the condition of anonymity.

A former colleague who worked with Bishop described her as sweet, neat, and very nice. “She was always smiling,’’ said Mercedes A. Paz, a retired Harvard biochemist who advised Bishop on her thesis. “Everybody loved her.’’

But some of her neighbors held a different view.

Before Bishop and Anderson moved to Alabama in 2003, they lived in a tight-knit community on Birch Lane in Ipswich with their three daughters and son.

Neighbors described Bishop as an angry person who often called police when teens were playing basketball or skateboarding in the neighborhood, and yelled and cursed at children for being too loud.

“She wouldn’t let the ice cream truck come down the street,’’ said one neighbor, who declined to give his name.

Ipswich police confirmed two calls for neighborhood disputes from Bishop, but did not release any details. Bishop also called police on March 8, 2002 to report receiving harassing phone calls, police said.

Onetime neighbors Denise and Nishan Mootafian said they stopped letting their children go over to play with Bishop and Anderson’s children, in part because Bishop “got very agitated by noise.’’

“I just feel like she was a ticking bomb who could have gone off on any of us,’’ Denise Mootafian said.

Once, neighbors organized a block party and didn’t tell Bishop because of conflicts she had with people, she said. “At that point things were so tense.’’

“We weren’t sad to see them go,’’ Nishan Mootafian said.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Alabama Professor Killed Brother In 1986


The University of Alabama-Huntsville biology professor accused of killing three colleagues fatally shot her brother in Massachusetts more than two decades ago, police said Saturday.

The revelation by Braintree, Mass., police that Amy Bishop shot her 18-year-old brother, Seth M. Bishop, in 1986 raised troubling questions over how that incident was handled.

The Boston Globe reported at the time that Amy Bishop had accidentally shot her brother. It quoted then-Braintree Police Chief John Polio as saying that Bishop had asked her mother, Judith, in the presence of her brother how to unload a round from the chamber of a 12-gauge shotgun when the weapon went off. Seth Bishop was struck in the abdomen and died at a hospital 46 minutes after the Dec. 6, 1986 shooting, according to the report.

"Every indication at this point in time leads us to believe it was an accidental shooting," Polio said at the time, according to the Globe.

But Braintree Police Chief Paul Frazier, at a news conference Saturday, offered a different account of the 1986 shooting, the Globe reported. Frazier said Amy Bishop fired three shots during an argument at the family home, then fled. She allegedly pointed the shotgun at a motorist before being arrested at gunpoint by officers.

Frazier said Bishop was being booked into jail when Polio, the police chief at the time, ordered her released her to her mother.

Frazier said he was basing his statements on the memories of one of his officers who had arrested Bishop. He said the records from the case have been missing since at least 1987.

"I don't want to use the word 'cover-up,' but this does not look good," he said.

In an interview at his home Saturday, Polio, 87, told the Globe: "There was no cover-up." He said he followed all department procedures and then-District Attorney William Delahunt's office conducted an inquiry and the decision was made not to file charges.

Delahunt, now a U.S. representative, could not immediately be reached for comment.

Tenure Dispute

Bishop, now 42, is accused of gunning down three of her colleagues Friday during a University of Alabama-Huntsville faculty meeting in an apparent tenure dispute. Three others were wounded — a rare instance of a woman being accused in a mass shooting.

Bishop, a Harvard-educated Neurobiologist who became an assistant professor at the school in 2003, was taken Friday night in handcuffs to the county jail, and said as she got into a police car: "It didn't happen. There's no way. ... They are still alive."

Bishop's husband was also detained for questioning but police did not call him a suspect.

On Friday, Bishop presided over her regular class before going to a biology faculty meeting where she sat quietly for about 30 or 40 minutes, one University of Alabama faculty member told the New York Times. Then, she pulled out a gun and began shooting, firing several rounds before her gun either jammed or ran out of bullets, said the faculty member, who had spoken to people that were in the room.

After she left the room, he said, the remaining people barred the door, fearing she would return. She was arrested outside the building without incident.

A really big Nerd

Students' assessments of Bishop varied. Some recalled an attentive, friendly teacher, while others said she was an odd woman who couldn't simplify difficult subjects for students.

Sammie Lee Davis, the husband of Maria Ragland Davis, a tenured researcher who was killed, said his wife had described Bishop as "not being able to deal with reality" and "not as good as she thought she was."

In a brief phone interview, Davis said he was told his wife was at a meeting to discuss the tenure status of another faculty member who got angry and started shooting.

Maria Ragland Davis was killed along with two other biology professors, Gopi K. Podila, chairman of the biological sciences department, and Adriel Johnson. Another two biology professors and a professor’s assistant were wounded and were at a Huntsville hospital in conditions ranging from fair to critical.

Bishop and her husband, Jim Anderson, had created a portable cell incubator, known as InQ, that was touted as a replacement for the old-fashioned petri dish and less expensive than its larger counterparts. The couple won $25,000 in 2007 to market the device.

Andrea Bennett, a sophomore majoring in nursing and an athlete at UAH, said a coach told her team that Bishop had been denied tenure, which the coach said may have led to the shooting.

Bennett described Bishop as being "very weird" and "a really big nerd."

"She's well-known on campus, but I wouldn't say she's a good teacher. I've heard a lot of complaints," Bennett said. "She's a genius, but she really just can't explain things."

Student Complaints

Amanda Tucker, a junior nursing major from Alabaster, Ala., had Bishop for anatomy class about a year ago. Tucker said a group of students complained to a dean about Bishop's classroom performance.

"When it came down to tests, and people asked her what was the best way to study, she'd just tell you, 'Read the book.' When the test came, there were just ridiculous questions. No one even knew what she was asking," Tucker said.

However, UAH student Andrew Cole was in Bishop's anatomy class Friday morning and said she seemed perfectly normal.

"She's understanding, and was concerned about students," he said. "I would have never thought it was her."

Nick Lawton, 25, described Bishop as funny and accommodating with students.

"She seemed like a nice enough professor," Lawton said.

The Huntsville campus has about 7,500 students in northern Alabama, not far from the Tennessee line. The university is known for its scientific and engineering programs and often works closely with NASA.

The space agency has a research center on the school's campus, where many scientists and engineers from NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center perform Earth and space science research and development.

The university will remain closed next week, and all athletic events were canceled.

Female shooters rare

It's the second shooting in a week on an area campus. On Feb. 5, a 14-year-old student was killed in a middle school hallway in nearby Madison, allegedly by a fellow student.

Mass shootings are rarely carried out by women, said Dr. Park Dietz, who is president of Threat Assessment Group Inc., a Newport Beach, Calif.-based violence prevention firm.

A notable exception was a 1985 rampage at a Springfield, Pa., mall in which three people were killed. In June 1986, Sylvia Seegrist was deemed guilty but mentally ill on three counts of murder and seven counts of attempted murder in the shooting spree.


View Larger Map

Sources: Boston Globe, MSNBC, Fox News, Google Maps