The Last AG we had again IMO was far worse and the NRA I don't recall said anything.
this is great for a laugh as are many of his appearances in front of congress and the senate.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IBvZlRqOTw
The NRA and other pro-2A groups
did say something. Gonzales was a dirty tool and the calls for his head led to his resignation not a second too soon, but "I don't recall" (
) much of a reason for NRA or other pro-2A organizations to air ads or circulate petitions for his dismissal any more than they would for the myriad other anti-gun politicians. Despite not actively pursuing his termination as they are with Holder, the NRA certainly didn't roll over and sit quietly for AG Gonzales. With a few exceptions, most of what Gonzales did which caused people to not like him, was outside the realm of what pro-2A organizations would be concerned with.
The DOJ, under Gonzales' supervision, suggested adding persons
suspected to be or to have been engaged in conduct constituting, preparation for, in aid of, or related to terrorism, or providing material support or resources for terrorism - regardless of whether charges or convictions for such exist to the list of people prevented by law from purchasing firearms. The proposed legislation gave the AG discretionary authority to deny firearms transfers based on the above, as well as amending the process by which FFLs are issued and revoked. JPFO published an article describing this anti-2A legislation and circulated it to members. They also later re-published a letter from a pro-freedom group which criticized the reintroduction of similar legislation. The NRA, despite many false cries of "
the NRA wants terrorists to have guns" in the press, released a widely circulated letter to Gonzales blasting the proposed legislation and claiming that it was in contravention to the US Consitution's second amendment. The NRA stood behind it's claims, despite widespread criticism from the media, pro-gun control groups, politicians and others, saying "Right now law enforcement carefully monitors all firearms sales to those on the terror watch list. Injecting the attorney general into the process just politicizes it."
Before that, in 2006 and 2007, with the DOJ still under Gonzales' supervision, the BATFE conducted another operation similar to 'Fast and Furious' called 'Wide Reciever'. I believe the issue was sealed until recently (the end of 2010), so it's not much of a surprise that we didn't see outrage over the operation sooner. So far, indictments from that case have led to charges against at least 9 people with at least 2 of them pleading guilty.
In both cases, the main target of outrage ought to be the BATFE officials and agents in charge of conducting these operations and those involved in the politics of it (see the other thread here on the site where US Reps say that this is obviously a play at demonizing guns in order to enact stricter gun control laws). As Sen. Grassley said, "whether it's Operation Fast and Furious, Operation Wide Receiver, or both, it's clear that guns were walked, and people high in the Justice Department knew about it. There's no excuse for walking guns, and if there are more operations like this, Congress and the American people need to know."
From what I gather, the main cause for the ire directed toward Holder isn't just from the fact that he was at the helm of the DOJ when it happened but rather because it appears that he may have known (based on emails and other correspondence) about the operation a LONG time ago and allowed it to continue as well as possibly lying to Congress about what he knew and when he knew it. As far as I know (which isn't that far), there was never anything like that between Gonzales and Op Wide Receiver. Who knows what would have turned up in an investigation during the time. Unfortunately, it took something like Brian Terry to kick start this mess.