Ammo For Sale

« « Poll Cat | Home | Gun Porn » »

Gunrunning: Not just for ATF any more

State Dept. Allegedly Sold Guns to Zetas

13 Responses to “Gunrunning: Not just for ATF any more”

  1. Mr Evilwrench Says:

    You mean hitlery’s DoS? But, but… she supports the UN arms treaty! Tell me this is all a lie! It’s so confusing!

  2. John Says:

    So, besides me, who wasn’t getting guns from assorted government agencies?

  3. JMaverick Says:

    Just think of it as CMP for international drug gangs and general criminal organizations.

  4. DirtCrashr Says:

    That must be why Obama blocked the return of Korean Garands and M1 Carbines, they said they could “be smuggled to terrorists, gangs or other people with bad intentions”. “Worried” is not the word they meant, they wanted and intended to send them to South American gangs and terrorists. THEY are the people with bad intent.

  5. MSJ Says:

  6. Old NFO Says:

    I ‘said’ we hadn’t seen the bottom of the barrel yet… sigh…

  7. Chas Says:

    I guess Hillary wasn’t about to be outdone by a mere man like Holder.
    When both Holder and Clinton are smuggling guns to criminals, the only person who could be behind both of them is their boss Obama. If DoJ and DoS were both running guns, then it was de facto Obama administration policy to do so, and the President has to take responsibility for it, which means resignation or impeachment.

  8. Kristopher Says:

    When does the Department of Education start selling? kids need school funding!

  9. hellferbreakfast Says:

    Billary has been in this up to her bloodshot eyeballs since it started. Who cried the loudest about guns from the U.S. going to Mexico? She belleyached this lie from the beginning. Obongo & others in congress are the enablers of this treasonous criminal conspiracy. Billary, the head? cheerleader.

  10. Bubblehead Les Says:

    As some Democrat said during Watergate about Nixon, I say the same about the current Secretary Of State: “WHAT did MRS. CLINTON know, and WHEN did She know it?”

  11. avidus Says:

    As explosive as this new portion of the story is, has anyone else noticed that it received no major media coverage.

    Until it’s picked up by print or television I do wonder if there will be any ramifications for something that would surely bring down a republican administration, if the situation is reversed.

    And if a republican administration did such a thing I would support their coming down as well. No American government should sell weapons, military or civilian to crooks and terrorists.

    Other than to Saudi Arabia of course.

  12. Chas Says:

    “When does the Department of Education start selling?”

    What ever did happen to all those short-barrelled shotguns that the Department of Education purchased not too long ago? Where are they now? Guarding some Mexican drug lord?

  13. Ron W Says:


    I believe that famous question, “what did he know and when did he know it”, came from Sen. Howard Baker, R-TN. But it’s a good one.

    This is a far greater crime than what occurred in Watergate. This is “giving aid and comfort to the enemies” which is defined as “treason” in Article III, Section 3 of the Constitution. And we know that from Sec of St. Clinton’s previous statements and those of Atty Gen Holder, that the probable pretext is to prove their assertion that the 2nd Amendment rights of American citizens is to blame for Mexican drug cartel violence, now spilling over our southern border which remains largely undefended; a refusal of our government to “protect the States against invasion” according to its duty in Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution.

    It seems to me we have a lawless government which is at war with its people.