Kenneth Melson, acting director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, is expected to resign under pressure, perhaps in the next day or two, in the wake of the ongoing controversy over Operation Fast and Furious, two senior federal law enforcement sources said Monday.

In the operation, straw buyers were allowed to illegally purchase large numbers of weapons, some of which ended up in the hands of cartels in Mexico.

Attorney General Eric Holder will meet Tuesday with Andrew Traver, head of the ATF field office in Chicago, about potentially serving as acting director of the agency, according to the sources.

I haven’t been following all the twists and turns in the Gunwalker Scandal, but I think it’s safe to say Ken Melson is about to become the designated fall guy. Gunwalker, or Operation Fast and Furious as it was officially known was an ATF investigation that sought to track firearms purchased by straw purchasers in the United States and then smuggled to criminals in Mexico. The investigation fell apart after two of the weapons allowed to “walk” into the hands of criminals were used in a shoot-out that killed a US border patrol agent, Brian Terry.

The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform is currently investigating the actions of the Department of Justice and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives in Operation Fast and Furious… So far the testimony from whistle-blowers inside the ATF has been damning, but what I want to know is why is the Department of Justice refusing to cooperate with Congressional investigators?

Related

• A Drug-War Plan Goes Awry – Gail O’Grady, Wall Street Jounal
• Report: Four ATF Agents Working on Controversial Operation ‘Fast and Furious’ Tell their Story – House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
• The Definitive Scandal: ‘Gunwalker’ Much Worse Than ‘Iran-Contra’ – Bob Owens, Pajamas Media
• Operation Fast and Spurious – W. James Antle, III, The America Spectator
• Obama Eyeing Anti-Gun Backer to Run ATF – Newsmax

Seven former directors of the Central Intelligence Agency on Friday urged President Obama to reverse Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to hold a criminal investigation of CIA interrogators who used enhanced techniques on detainees.

The directors, whose tenures span back as far as 35 years, wrote a letter to the president saying the cases have already been investigated by the CIA and career prosecutors, and to reconsider those decisions makes it difficult for agents to believe they can safely follow legal guidance.

“Attorney General Holder’s decision to re-open the criminal investigation creates an atmosphere of continuous jeopardy for those whose cases the Department of Justice had previously declined to prosecute,” they wrote.

“Those men and women who undertake difficult intelligence assignments in the aftermath of an attack such as September 11 must believe there is permanence in the legal rules that govern their actions,” the seven added.

The letter was signed by former directors Michael Hayden, Porter Goss, George Tenet, John Deutch, R. James Woolsey, William Webster and James R. Schlesinger.

You can read the full text of the letter here.

President Obama would do well to heed the of advice messieurs  Hayden, Goss, Tenet, Deutch, Woolsey, Webster and Schlesinger… There is no good that can come from opening this can worms.

The President has already banned the use of the interrogation techniques in question and previously declared the CIA personnel who used them after September 11 would not be charged. By allowing Attorney General Holder to continue this ill-advised investigation the President will undermine the ability of CIA officers to to do their jobs effectively. More over there is no guarantee the investigation will remain narrowly focused. There is the very real risk that this investigation may ultimately undermine the ability of this president and his successors to obtain candid legal advice, as lawyers fear they may in turn by scapegoated by a future administration.

President Obama should stand by his commitment to the CIA and end this investigation before it poisons this country for years to come by criminalizing policy differences.

WASHINGTON – Rep. Jane Harman asked the Justice Department to release transcripts of her recorded conversations following published reports she was caught on tape agreeing to seek leniency for two pro-Israeli lobbyists under investigation for espionage.

In a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder sent Tuesday morning, Ms. Harman, the former top Democrat on the House intelligence committee, said the eavesdropping on her conversations were an “abuse of power.” The California lawmaker also denied contacting law-enforcement agencies to influence the Bush administration’s investigation.

“Let me be absolutely clear: I never contacted the Department of Justice, the White House or anyone else to seek favorable treatment regarding national security cases on which I was briefed, or any other cases,” she wrote in the letter.

According to the published accounts, first reported by Congressional Quarterly, Ms. Harman appears to agree to push for leniency for the two employees of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee in exchange for help gaining the chairmanship of the intelligence committee. The recordings were reportedly made by the National Security Agency. It isn’t clear precisely what the agency was monitoring.

I said yesterday that I thought there was something fishy about this leak and I still do… Most of the allegations in this story were reported by Time Magazine in 2006 and there doesn’t appear to be much of anything new here.

You can read Rep. Harman’s letter here.

Related

• Pelosi: No threat for Harman appointment – Washington Times
• Bush-era CIA officials push back – Laura Rozen, Foreign Policy
• Why the Harman leaks smell to high heaven – Ron Kampeas, JTA.org

Justice Department lawyers concluded in an unpublished opinion earlier this year that the historic D.C. voting rights bill pending in Congress is unconstitutional, according to sources briefed on the issue. But Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., who supports the measure, ordered up a second opinion from other lawyers in his department and determined that the legislation would pass muster.

A finding that the voting rights bill runs afoul of the Constitution could complicate an upcoming House vote and make the measure more vulnerable to a legal challenge that probably would reach the Supreme Court if it is enacted. The bill, which would give the District a vote in the House for the first time, appeared to be on the verge of passing last month before stalling when pro-gun legislators tried to attach an amendment weakening city gun laws. Supporters say it could reach the House floor in May.

In deciding that the measure is unconstitutional, lawyers in the department’s Office of Legal Counsel matched a conclusion reached by their Bush administration counterparts nearly two years ago, when a lawyer there testified that a similar bill would not withstand legal attack.

Holder rejected the advice and sought the opinion of the solicitor general’s office, where lawyers told him that they could defend the legislation if it were challenged after its enactment.

Ed Morrissey asks “What part of “support and defend the Constitution” does Holder not understand?“… I’m wondering the same thing, the Constitution is quite plain on the matter. The Office of Legal Counsel’s opinion is not in any way out of line or rogue it’s the same position that the OLC has held since at least 1963.

Ed Whelan was more here.

Related

• Attorney General Holder is Subverting the Constitution – Kim Priestap, Wizbang