|
US Prosecutor sues Ashcroft, citing malfeasance and corruption
By Jerry Seper
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
A federal prosecutor who obtained guilty verdicts in the nation's first
post-September 11 terrorism trial has accused Attorney General John Ashcroft and
other key Justice Department officials of "gross mismanagement" in the war on
terrorism.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard Convertino said in a lawsuit filed in U.S.
District Court for the District of Columbia that Justice Department executives
violated his First Amendment and Privacy Act rights in retaliation for exposing
what he called malfeasance and incompetence in the war against terrorists.
The suit, filed late Friday and made public yesterday, is the latest threat
to Mr. Convertino's successful prosecution of three terrorists in a Detroit case
Mr. Ashcroft has cited as proof the war on terrorism is working.
The lawsuit said department officials in Washington knowingly disclosed to
the media false and misleading information about Mr. Convertino in retaliation
for his criticism of the war on terrorism and his testimony to the Senate
committee investigating terrorism.
Mr. Convertino became the focus of a Justice Department inquiry after he
testified Sept. 9 under subpoena before the Senate Finance Committee and was
then removed from the Detroit case.
But the lawsuit said the veteran prosecutor had been "vocal and consistent
with his supervisors and officials within the Department of Justice" for more
than a year over his concerns about a lack of support, cooperation, effective
assistance and resources "that plagued and hindered" the government's ability to
identify and prosecute suspected terrorists.
Justice Department officials yesterday declined to comment on the suit.
In June, Moroccans Abdel-Ilah Elmardoudi, 37, and Karim Koubriti, 24, were
convicted of conspiracy to provide material support for terrorism. A
co-defendant, Ahmed Hannan, 34, also a Moroccan, was convicted of document
fraud. They were accused as members of a "sleeper cell" that schemed to commit
terrorist acts against U.S. targets.
Sentencing was delayed pending a defense motion for a new trial, after U.S.
District Judge Gerald Rosen admonished federal prosecutors in the case for
withholding documents he said "should have been turned over" to defense
attorneys.
He has ordered the U.S. Attorney's Office and the FBI in Detroit to
determine whether other documents should have been made available.
Defense attorneys said Mr. Convertino and his boss, Keith Corbett, head of
the office's Organized Crime Strike Force, withheld documents their clients were
entitled to see, thus denying them a fair trial. Mr. Convertino also was accused
of making unapproved plea agreements to encourage witnesses to cooperate.
Both prosecutors denied the accusations.
Earlier in the trial, Mr. Ashcroft was admonished by Judge Rosen for
violating a gag order while trial in the matter was pending.
Judge Rosen, who said Mr. Ashcroft "exhibited a distressing lack of care" by
making public statements about the then-ongoing trial despite the gag order, has
since described the case as "a fine kettle of fish."
After the convictions in Detroit, Mr. Ashcroft said the case showed the
Justice Department would "work diligently to detect, disrupt and dismantle"
terrorist cells. Seven months before the verdict, he described the government's
key witness, Youssef Hmimssa, as a "critical tool" in the war on terrorism, a
remark that brought the threat of a contempt charge by the judge.
Mr. Ashcroft later apologized and promised to "make every effort" to avoid
similar statements.
The suit also said Justice Department officials intentionally disclosed the
name of a confidential informant as part of their retaliatory effort, forcing
the informant to leave the country and eliminating the government's ability to
obtain from him additional information on pending terrorist plans.
It targets, among others, U.S. Attorney Jeffrey G. Collins in Detroit, who
removed Mr. Convertino from office. Mr. Collins has declined comment on the
case.
begin 666 clear.gif
M1TE&.#EA"@`*`( ``/___P```"'Y! $`````+ `````*``H```((A(
IR
T/
$8RL`.P``
`end
|
| |
| |
On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 09:50:16 -0700, "=> Vox Populi " <vox@popu.li>
wrote:
US Prosecutor sues Ashcroft, citing malfeasance and corruption
Great ! That is what the courts are for, to enfore laws.
How 'bout the CA law against homosexual marriage?
By Jerry Seper
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
A federal prosecutor who obtained guilty verdicts in the nation's first
post-September 11 terrorism trial has accused Attorney General John Ashcroft and
other key Justice Department officials of "gross mismanagement" in the war on
terrorism.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard Convertino said in a lawsuit filed in U.S.
District Court for the District of Columbia that Justice Department executives
violated his First Amendment and Privacy Act rights in retaliation for exposing
what he called malfeasance and incompetence in the war against terrorists.
The suit, filed late Friday and made public yesterday, is the latest threat
to Mr. Convertino's successful prosecution of three terrorists in a Detroit case
Mr. Ashcroft has cited as proof the war on terrorism is working.
The lawsuit said department officials in Washington knowingly disclosed to
the media false and misleading information about Mr. Convertino in retaliation
for his criticism of the war on terrorism and his testimony to the Senate
committee investigating terrorism.
Mr. Convertino became the focus of a Justice Department inquiry after he
testified Sept. 9 under subpoena before the Senate Finance Committee and was
then removed from the Detroit case.
But the lawsuit said the veteran prosecutor had been "vocal and consistent
with his supervisors and officials within the Department of Justice" for more
than a year over his concerns about a lack of support, cooperation, effective
assistance and resources "that plagued and hindered" the government's ability to
identify and prosecute suspected terrorists.
Justice Department officials yesterday declined to comment on the suit.
In June, Moroccans Abdel-Ilah Elmardoudi, 37, and Karim Koubriti, 24, were
convicted of conspiracy to provide material support for terrorism. A
co-defendant, Ahmed Hannan, 34, also a Moroccan, was convicted of document
fraud. They were accused as members of a "sleeper cell" that schemed to commit
terrorist acts against U.S. targets.
Sentencing was delayed pending a defense motion for a new trial, after U.S.
District Judge Gerald Rosen admonished federal prosecutors in the case for
withholding documents he said "should have been turned over" to defense
attorneys.
He has ordered the U.S. Attorney's Office and the FBI in Detroit to
determine whether other documents should have been made available.
Defense attorneys said Mr. Convertino and his boss, Keith Corbett, head of
the office's Organized Crime Strike Force, withheld documents their clients were
entitled to see, thus denying them a fair trial. Mr. Convertino also was accused
of making unapproved plea agreements to encourage witnesses to cooperate.
Both prosecutors denied the accusations.
Earlier in the trial, Mr. Ashcroft was admonished by Judge Rosen for
violating a gag order while trial in the matter was pending.
Judge Rosen, who said Mr. Ashcroft "exhibited a distressing lack of care" by
making public statements about the then-ongoing trial despite the gag order, has
since described the case as "a fine kettle of fish."
After the convictions in Detroit, Mr. Ashcroft said the case showed the
Justice Department would "work diligently to detect, disrupt and dismantle"
terrorist cells. Seven months before the verdict, he described the government's
key witness, Youssef Hmimssa, as a "critical tool" in the war on terrorism, a
remark that brought the threat of a contempt charge by the judge.
Mr. Ashcroft later apologized and promised to "make every effort" to avoid
similar statements.
The suit also said Justice Department officials intentionally disclosed the
name of a confidential informant as part of their retaliatory effort, forcing
the informant to leave the country and eliminating the government's ability to
obtain from him additional information on pending terrorist plans.
It targets, among others, U.S. Attorney Jeffrey G. Collins in Detroit, who
removed Mr. Convertino from office. Mr. Collins has declined comment on the
case.
Liberalism is Communism one drink at a time. - P.J. O'Rourke
|
| |
| |
The -.-Frog. wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 09:50:16 -0700, "=> Vox Populi " <vox@popu.li>
wrote:
Great ! That is what the courts are for, to enfore laws.
Naw .... go back to grade school civics and take remedial classes.
How 'bout the CA law against homosexual marriage?
Is enforcing an unconstitutional law ethical?
Liberalism is Communism one drink at a time. - P.J. O'Rourke
--
"Naturally, the common people don't want war;
neither in Russia nor in England nor in America,
nor for that matter in Germany.
That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders
of the country who determine the policy and
it is always a simple matter to drag the people
along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist
dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist
dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can
always be brought to the bidding of the leaders.
That is easy. All you have to do is tell them
they are being attacked and denounce the
pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing
the country to danger. It works the same way
in any country."
- Hermann Goering, Nazi Reichsmarshall
|
| |
| |
...The -Frog. wrote:
On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 11:57:48 -0700, " Vox Dei " <vox@dei.rex>
wrote:
Only a court can decide if it is unconstitutional or not.
Until then, it is to be obeyed.
Sieg Heil ...Comrade!
--
Texas Constitution
ARTICLE VIII.
Slaves.
SEC. 1. The legislature shall have no power to pass laws for the emancipation of
slaves
without the consent of their owners, nor without paying their owners, previous
to such
emancipation, a full equivalent in money for the slaves so emancipated. They
shall have
no power to prevent emigrants to this State from bringing with them such persons
as are
deemed slaves by the laws of any of the United States, so long as any person of
the same
age or description shall be continued in slavery by the laws of this State:
Provided, That
such slave be the bona fide property of such emigrants: Provided, also, That
laws shall be
passed to inhibit the introduction into this State of slaves who have committed
high crimes
in other States or Territories. They shall have the right to pass laws to permit
the owners of
slaves to emancipate them, saving the rights of creditors, and preventing them
from becoming
a public charge. They shall have full power to pass laws which will oblige the
owners of slaves
to treat them with humanity; to provide for their necessary food and clothing;
to abstain from all
injuries to them, extending to life or limb; and, in case of their neglect or
refusal to comply with
the directions of such laws, to have such slave or slaves taken from such owner
and sold for the
benefit of such owner or owners. They may pass laws to prevent slaves from being
brought into
this State as merchandise only.
|
| |
| |
The, -Frog. wrote:
On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 15:19:25 GMT, "LawsonE" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
So it's OK to start burning abortion clinics now?
The negative effects of promoting lawlessness far outweigh any
positive ones.
You simpering little #@($eater, no surprise your pathetic little mind
cannot discern the difference between non-violent civil disobedience
and the extreme criminal acts you propose.
Is it ok for the Homosexuals to destroy the courthouses?
Are they burning or destroying anyone else or their property
by getting married ...?
Fuck you you sick little neo-con scumbag, and @$#* what your
stand for ... and @$#* your mother for bringing a piece of #@($
like you into this world.
Any questions?
Should I destroy abortion clinics because I feel morally compelled
to do so? It that now OK?
Liberalism is Communism one drink at a time. - P.J. O'Rourke
--
"Naturally, the common people don't want war;
neither in Russia nor in England nor in America,
nor for that matter in Germany.
That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders
of the country who determine the policy and
it is always a simple matter to drag the people
along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist
dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist
dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can
always be brought to the bidding of the leaders.
That is easy. All you have to do is tell them
they are being attacked and denounce the
pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing
the country to danger. It works the same way
in any country."
- Hermann Goering, Nazi Reichsmarshall
|
| |
| |
On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 10:09:20 -0700, "=> Vox Populi " <vox@popu.li>
wrote:
The, -Frog. wrote:
You simpering little #@($eater, no surprise your pathetic little mind
cannot discern the difference between non-violent civil disobedience
and the extreme criminal acts you propose.
Is it ok for the Homosexuals to destroy the courthouses?
Are they burning or destroying anyone else or their property
by getting married ...?
Fuck you you sick little neo-con scumbag, and @$#* what your
stand for ... and @$#* your mother for bringing a piece of #@($
like you into this world.
Any questions?
Yes, do you have two daddies?
Should I destroy abortion clinics because I feel morally compelled
to do so? It that now OK?
Can you think of a constitutional challenge to laws banning
destruction of someone else's property?
Liberalism is Communism one drink at a time. - P.J. O'Rourke
Liberalism is Communism one drink at a time. - P.J. O'Rourke
|
| |
| |
|
