This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
The Justice Department Plays Fast and Loose with the Law
While the Justice Department has loudly tooted its horn about it's ability to prosecute bad guys, it hasn't really done much recently.
For example,the Department's "crackdown" on Wall Street is just a P.R. stunt targeting small-time crooks.
And former counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke said of all the publicity surrounding the handful of terrorism prosecutions since 9/11:
A lot of the cases after 9/11 were manufactured or enormously exaggerated and were announced with great trumpets by the attorney general and the FBI director so that we felt that they were doing something when, in fact, what they were doing was not helpful, not relevant, not needed.
The DOJ famously refused to prosecute high-level officials who ordered torture, or illegal spying, or other criminal acts, or those who destroyed evidence and obstructed justice, even though top conservative and liberal legal scholars said that crimes had clearly been committed. It appears that Justice is playing politics to protect Bush, Cheney and the gang. See this and this.
Instead of prosecuting the big fish and protecting the little guy, the Department of Justice is bending over backwards to protect giant corporations. For example, the Justice Department - along with the Department of Homeland Security - has been using its national security powers to help big businesses. For example:
As the ACLU notes, Fusion Centers - a hybrid of military, intelligence agency, police and private corporations set up in centers throughout the country, and run by the Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security - allow big businesses like Boeing to get access to classified information which gives them an unfair advantage over smaller competitors.
Moreover, the Justice Department has itself been playing fast and loose with justice.
For example, an ATF agent told CBS News yesterday that Justice Department ordered the ATF to let guns cross into Mexico. The guns went to the Mexican drug cartels, which have used them to terrorize the locals and kill American agents:
And see this.
And documents leaked a couple of weeks ago show that - instead of following leads showing criminal wrongdoing by the big banks - the Department of Justice is instead working to crush whistleblowers who have the goods on the white collar criminals.
For example - in an effort to protect Bank of America from the threatened Wikileaks expose of wrongdoing - the Department of Justice told Bank of America to a hire a specific hardball-playing law firm to assemble a team to take down WikiLeaks. As a leaked email states:
DOJ called the GC [general counsel] of BofA and told them to hire Hunton and Williams, specifically to hire Richard Wyatt who I'm beginning to think is the emperor. They want to present to the bank a team capable of doing a comprehensive investigation into the data leak. Currently they are recommending:
-Hire H&W as outside council on retainer
***
-Use Berico/HBGary to analyze wikileaks the organization (people, history, where they are located)....
HB Gary, of course, proposed smearing journalists with forged documents and otherwise pressuring journalists to avoid WikiLeaks. See this and this.
Of course, the Justice Department's fast and loose behavior is not new under the current administration.
As I wrote in August:
Jon Eisenberg is a very well-known California lawyer. Eisenberg literally wrote the book on California appellate practice.
In a new interview, Eisenberg ... reveals the games played by the Department of Justice:
[Interviewer] You have written "effectively ... President George W. Bush is a felon." Why, and do you ever think he'll be brought to justice?
[Eisenberg] President Bush has freely admitted that his administration committed warrantless electronic surveillance, violating the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978. That's a felony, according to title 50, section 1809 of the United States Code. So President Bush is a felon. It's that simple.
Will he ever be brought to justice? Evidently not by a criminal prosecution, in which the Obama administration seems to have little interest...
[Interviewer] During [a lawsuit against the Bush administration concerning illegal spying,] you wrote a response to a government brief that you were not allowed to see. How does one go about doing that?
[Eisenberg] It was quite a challenge. It wasn't just that we had to speculate as to what might be in the secret DOJ brief; the conditions under which we wrote our secret response were onerous, approaching the bizarre: We were required to write the brief under guard in the U.S. Attorney's office in San Francisco; we were forbidden from preparing any notes for the brief-writing session; the DOJ retained sole possession of the brief we produced; and the DOJ has refused to allow us to review the brief since we wrote it. Litigation doesn't get any weirder than that.
There is no justifiable reason why the Department of Justice would refuse to allow the opposing counsel to see DOJ's brief, force the attorney to write his response brief under armed guard and without being able to use any notes, and then bury that brief without even letting the attorney who wrote it have a copy.
Attorney General Ashcroft approved torture, as did high-level Justice Department officials such as Assistant deputy Attorney General John Yoo. Promotion of torture is not just an ethical breach: it also constitutes a war crime under U.S. and international law. See this, this, this, and this. Yoo xsxseealso wrote memos defending illegal spying.
Former Attorney General Michael Mukasey supported illegal wiretapping, torture and indefinite detention (and see this).
Congressional Quarterly, Glenn Greenwald, Raw Story, FireDogLake and others point out that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales virtually blackmailed Congresswoman Harman into support illegal warrantless spying on Americans by threatening to prosecute her for her AIPAC shenanigans if she didn't play ball.
And former constitutional law teacher Glenn Greenwald says that - in it's defense of state secrecy, illegal spying, preventative detention, and other positions - Obama's Department of Justice under Eric Holder is even worse than under Bush.
Given the above, it's worth asking: how much justice does the DOJ actually dispense?
- advertisements -
"In the end, only the law abiding have their rights infringed upon...not the criminal."
gotta just say it:you nailed it.
the goal of our American gov is to make us all criminal..thru plethora or laws and arbitrary regulations..fed, state, local. the largest growth industry in America is the making of a criminal class and the "exempt" class Elites if you will. No bankster or regulator or pol will ever see the insides of the prisons they build for the rest of us.
no justice no peace comes to mind.
steal a loaf of bread go to jail, steal billions of
from the nation: go to cabo.
I doubt very seriously one could walk two blocks in any major city and not break some ordinance or law...LOL.
"steal a loaf of bread go to jail, steal billions of
from the nation: go to cabo."
It was all quite legal & regulated wasn't it ;-)
This is why no one has gone to jail...they were doing exactly what they were told to do...no one seems to put two & two together on this point...forcing things onto the market and allowing insurance of flawed "assets" had to have a negative consequence at some point.
The same will happen at COMEX...ten years worth of product still below ground...ROTFL...they never learn.
http://consumerist.com/images/resources/2007/05/banana.jpg
Holder.......what a joke!
maps of war.... Middle East 5000 yrs of history in 90 seconds
http://nakedempire.wordpress.com/
Banana Nut Bread Republic
Also reported today, a federal judge who pleaded guilty to felony cocaine possession is requesting probation and community service. Prosecutors are recommending he serve at least 15 days in jail. 15 days in jail for a pleading GUILTY to a FELONY?
I suggest he get twice what he sentenced for the same crime while on the bench, because he should know better.
Consider a quote from a supreme court justice back when America still had principles-
“Decency, security, and liberty alike demand that government officials shall be subjected to the same rules of conduct that are commands to the citizen. In a government of laws, existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. To declare that in the administration of the criminal law the end justifies the means -- to declare that the government may commit crimes in order to secure the conviction of a private criminal -- would bring terrible retribution.” Justice Brandeis (Olmstead et al v. United States (1928))
http://seenoevilspeaknoevilhearnoevil.blogspot.com/2011/03/garth-turner-sayscanadians-should-buy.html
That's a great quote. This kind of shit makes me want to move out of this country or stand and fight. People need to go to public trial with all the secret shit put out in the sunshine for everyone to see and learn by. We need a bad case of dirty laundry viewing.
..."breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy"...
Shipping guns to Mexico is probably just to get more money to combat the ever escalating drug crime/security threat manufactured by big money big politics to fleece the sheeple. War on drugs. The ones that ordered this mess should be put on trial for murder. If I were Mexico I would close the border, sell the oil to someone else, legalize drugs and fire the stuff out of cannons into the US or drop it in the A&P Oceans and the Gulf to let it wash on shore. What a sick bunch of scumbags.
Dmitry Orlov has recently suggested that the Mexican drug cartels will be the next mercenary army. If the US government is secretly arming the cartels for the expressed purpose of quelling any domestic insurrection in the USA, then the charge of "treason" is not a strong enough crime with which to prosecute those responsible.
Dmitry Orlov:
http://cluborlov.blogspot.com/2011/02/video-interview-nation.html
..."breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy"...
Well those chickens are going to hatch in around 6-12 mos.
Did I miss it or was Holder (by name) not stated in this article? ;-)
And you forgot to mention voter intimidation in the 08 election not being prosecuted as J Christian Adams has pointed to as being politically motivated...apparently because they were "my people".
A curious phrase from one who is appointed to uphold the law for everyone.
+1
This faux GW is a O**ma voter.
You are going to get an award nmewn for the stupidest poster alive. Despite all facts to the contrary, you keep singing the same stupid song. Google Hegel. Try to figure that out. That's my gift, my advise to you.
But first, read the article before you comment on it. No, GW did not mention your buddy Eric. But he did say this. - And former constitutional law teacher Glenn Greenwald says that - in it's defense of state secrecy, illegal spying, preventative detention, and other positions - the Obama Department of Justice is even worse than under Bush.
You do read don't you nmewn?
----------------------------------------------
Edit - I see GW was quicker to kick your stupid ass. Congrats GW.
What you two missed out on is that GW mentions Ashcroft, Mukasey, and Yoo, but failed to mention holder. No big deal to me, but he is correct
sun tzu,
I saw you last night defend the truth.
Thank you.
Look sun tzu, what you are missing out on is that - You don't need to keep score to see who's winning. That's the distraction you are supposed to/intended to play. When you stop engaging in this false dichotomy, you can observe and evolve to the point where you recognize that Bush v. Obummer are two sides of the same coin.
Except around the margins, they both do the same things. They have the same backers.
Crack open your book Sun Tzu and then take on the backers, not the front men.
nmewn,
I wrote:
Maybe I should have said:
?
Yes you should have in my opinion.
If the intent of the article is to paint collusion, corruption and moral decay at the highest levels of governemnt and you go through great lengths to >>>name names<<< in previous administrations I don't see why the glaring oversight of naming Holder.
The man was corrupted long before his appointment via his involvement with the Marc Rich pardon by Clinton...which curiously also involved a hell of a lot of money.
This would also speak to Barrys lack of political acumen to see this and not appoint him or his own dishonesty of not caring...or something else completely, which we don't need to get into for this discussion.
So yes, if bipartisan, only for truth, justice and the American way (the publics interest) is the thrust of the piece...all warts should be showed AND NAMED!
And I see my little troll (BringingIt) has returned slobbering all over himself for attention...contemptible little ass wipe that he is...a thoroughly discredited sychophant of yours no doubt, who will get no response from me.
I revised it at my blog as follows:
I'll also revise here at ZH if I have the time...
What you need to do is remove this drivel from ZH, stop posting your drivel on ZH, stop wasting ZH resorces promoting your senseless blog and your adolescent views, and just go away.
STFU Cranky or we'll put another burning bag of dogshit on your porch.
"you wrote a response to a government brief that you were not allowed to see"
Hey, wasn't that from that one scene Kafka's "The Trial"? Yeah, I think I remember that.
GW, believe it or not, this conservative does not support secret illegal government activites(against citizens that is). If its that necessary, then why not put up a bill and hold a debate in the Congress. Then hold an open vote. How many yeas would they get if they had their names on record for approving torture, illegal searches, warrantless wiretaps, etc?
This is possibly your best article to date GW.
Kudos.
Jump! You Fuckers!
>Jump! You Fuckers!
+1
Well, as the old adage goes. There are (TWO) sides to a trade! Lets dance.
get ready to rhhhummm-ba!
pass the sugar! maple sugar? wow!