You're watching...
Sen. Chuck Grassley wants Dept. of Justice to come clean on who knew what and when in 'Fast and Furious' scandal
Also in this playlist...
Auto-advance: ON
Auto-advance
This transcript is automatically generated
Skating description of the Justice Department's handling of operation fast and furious senator Chuck Grassley says you've always got somebody covering up for somebody else the Justice Department finally admits it provided congress with inaccurate information about gun running the -- aggressive says -- DOJ is still stonewalling.
We spoke with the senator earlier tonight.
Senator Nancy is there burdensome -- OK explain this to me on February 27 as ranking member you sent a letter to the justice -- For information on the gun running operation -- as -- -- or the other name ever again and in that.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- There weren't any -- accusations and that letter either name kinda wanna make out that I was accusing them a lot of things all I want it was information in fact.
Most of this year all we've wandered from the Justice Department is just information.
They responded on February 4 you know.
And then during the course of the next several months -- follow -- lot of controversy going back forth back and forth about information that provide -- didn't.
Now you've received a letter dated December 2 in which they say they -- going to withdraw the February 4 letter what happened -- well.
In the meantime.
Even even within couple weeks after the February 4 response we got -- We -- Some information that indicated very clear.
That there letterhead misinformation and they -- practicing letter saying there wasn't remain -- -- -- -- -- We had a hearing that involved the assistant -- -- general.
He came and is -- -- bird count he came in and he said that.
That you out there was misinformation and Atlanta.
And so now I'm James -- -- deputy attorney general sense select confirmation saying that they had -- you misinformation February 4.
Why did that happen and what's the reaction now.
Well okay what happened was basically.
They did not want to admit that there was an operation like passengers going on.
And they would say at that time they didn't know that but we got plenty of evidence.
That they did know we had not only evidence that people on alcohol tobacco firearms and what.
But we knew we know that people within the Justice Department what I just.
The message that they now why you know it because.
Religion investigative reasons and -- -- released and there where they've been deceitful.
Well it looks like now there are being deceitful from the standpoint that we know that they knew about it they sent us a letter said that they.
That none of this was true they senators basically two letters that -- -- wasn't -- and finally it was nine months before the hearing.
That we hadn't had before -- Judiciary Committee that they admitted that that letter of February 4 contained false information.
Why did they send you this letter to.
This -- -- the semi in the December 2 letter saying the -- the February 4 letter had a bunch of inaccuracies and well.
They wanted to do finally -- cover themselves but basically what they're saying is something this idiocy.
That we're we're drawing this letter.
Well you know this letters on my website it is Friday on a hundred web sites around town.
You can't -- latter you know is it.
You would -- how would they think if if price and demand were wrong withdraw our support from nomination somebody that we approved a year ago.
You can't do that this is in the public domain and their reason for doing it I think is they just if we bring it up again.
They wanna be able -- say -- that that letters no longer in the public domain but it is in the public domain what you can't -- would letters that were written.
Well what distresses me in a letter of December 2.
Is that when they say that the February 4 letters inaccurately they're supposed to finding information response -- January 27 left and best their sloppy.
Because it -- fully investigate.
At worst they're deceitful.
And in the meantime lots of money and time is spent trying to sort this out.
Well without a doubt what your word he gets it's gets back to the one word that I've been using -- several months you interviewed me on this subject.
From February the fourth on until at least October and to some extent now.
Stonewall although I have to say they did give -- Friday 2000 more pages.
Documents and information but.
Why -- -- that's what we asked for American fare -- why would it taken so long to deliver what we said and maybe not even everything that we said we're entitled to.
Is that sloppy in overworking their busy and other matters are they trying to Stonewall for political and -- of the fact that we're there are worried they're stole their stonewalling because this is a -- -- -- difficult situation for them.
Just understand what fast and furious is it's saying to licensed gun dealers federally licensed gun dealers.
That we in the Justice Department up here in Washington one -- illegally sell guns.
-- straw purchasers.
So we can follow -- cross the border.
We're government based upon the -- will ball and we have our own Justice Department advising people to violate the law.
That's what it does it meet the common sense test.
Well who shouldn't have authority and making decisions how much congress should have it shouldn't have on this because in this December 2 letter it says.
There was significant concern about how much information improperly should be shared with congress should you be making the decision on how much information you get about this operation.
Portion -- -- the just.
Department I should question involves national security or privacy.
Because.
The public's business ought to be public.
And and when you've got a program like fast and furious.
That's a violation of law but is being promoted by the federal garment.
And Brian Terry.
Ends up being murdered and some of these guns are to scene in the murder.
That's the epitome of the public's business and -- Kerry finally ought to even be informed and they aren't being informed.
Part this started at least January point seven we're almost coming up on a -- sort of been trying to get information -- justify -- tremendous amount of money.
Wasted energy got a lot of other things for the United States senate to be involved -- is there anything that should be done -- card can be done the president during an attorney general is get the information let's get to the -- So that this trip cricket gets -- I suppose that's what if you asked them that question this very day they say -- that's what we did last Friday.
But until we go from here out that so much all -- out well then it's inexcusable that -- give us this information back in February I guess it's easy answer your question.
But they were embarrassed.
They were stonewalling.
Enders to some extent they still may be storm warning about our goals -- -- Hussein.
Number one we want to find out who approved festive spirit.
Get that person fired number do proprietary families entitled all the information the government knows about their son being murdered.
And number three we want to make sure that are stupid program like this is not repeat.
-- assess the attorney general under all.
Who authorized this -- the top -- -- top woman who authorized it just tell us now let's move -- well -- ask tough questions like this before our Judiciary Committee and you you've always got somebody covering up for somebody -- that's horrible yeah it is horrible now maybe this starters in December the eighth.
Holders coming before the Judiciary Committee in the house -- and these.
Maybe those questions will be asked again.
But basically.
-- descent -- a letter saying you're gonna be here Thursday December 8.
We're gonna ask you one specific question you've got forties to find out who was the top personal authorizes come -- that information.
A lot of dealer congressman answer that question and I'm not going to be able to do over the other -- And never get passionate fans but I will get a congressman answered questions I get and I -- thank you sir thank you very much.
