WE'VE MOVED!


As part of our big, new redesign of the Alliance for Justice website, the Justice Watch blog has moved. To be sure you're getting all the latest news about the fight for a fairer America, visit us at www.afj.org/blog

Tuesday, January 29, 2008

Mukasey at the Bat

Tomorrow, Attorney General Michael Mukasey will appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee for the first time since he was confirmed in November 2007. Members of the committee will have the opportunity – and the responsibility – to ask Mukasey important questions about the Bush Administration’s politicization of the Justice Department, President Bush’s assertions of broad executive powers, and the Attorney General’s opinions on a variety of controversial legal opinions issued under his predecessor, Alberto Gonzales.

We anticipate that the majority of the committee’s questions will be forward-looking. Though that is certainly important, it is equally important for Senators to ask the Attorney General tough questions about the damage that was done to the Department under Gonzales’ leadership, how he plans to address these problems, and how he plans to keep similar issues from arising in the future. With this in mind, Alliance for Justice urges Senate Judiciary Committee members to pose a series of probing questions, including:

• The Attorney General has called for the President to veto amendments to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act unless they include retroactive immunity for violations of law by giant telecommunications corporations. It is widely believed that these corporations provided private information to the Bush Administration about their customers in violation of both federal law and their contracts with their customers. Some customers have already sued the corporations for redress. What is the justification, legally and as a matter of policy, for protecting these mega-corporations from having to defend their actions in a court of law, and at the expense of ordinary Americans? Is it simply that no contract, no law can stand in the way of the Bush Administration any time it makes a broad-brush assertion of national security?

• Several months ago, Special Counsel Peter Fitzgerald concluded his inquiry into the public disclosure of Valerie Plame’s identity as a CIA operative. President Bush’s pardon of Lewis “Scooter” Libby helped end that investigation. Congress has asked that the Justice Department permit Fitzgerald to release transcripts of interviews his office conducted with President Bush and Vice President Cheney. What is the legal justification for continuing to withhold these documents from public scrutiny?

• Justice Department Inspector General Glenn Fine has been investigating the politicization of the Department and the firing of United States Attorneys since early 2007. Can the Attorney General give the Senate and the public his personal assurance that every current and former employee of the Department is cooperating fully with that investigation? If not, who is failing to cooperate?

• During his confirmation process, the Attorney General – claiming that he did not know enough about the torture technique called “waterboarding” – refused to declare that it is indeed torture. Now, months later, the question must be answered: Is waterboarding torture? If Attorney General Mukasey is still unwilling to say that it is, does his reluctance stem in any part from a need to protect past or current administration officials from criminal or other liability?

• The New York Times recently reported the following: “Asked if he had found signs of turmoil, Mr. Mukasey said, ‘Based on what I’ve seen, no.’ Asked if reports of turmoil were a fabrication by news organizations, he replied with a wry smile and a hint of sarcasm, ‘I wouldn’t dream of suggesting that’.” Does the Attorney General continue to deny, as did Gonzales, that there are internal morale problems in the Department?

1 comment:

Candice said...

Following is a brief account and links to further information on the most hideous of ethics, legal and judicial crimes ever committed. Some say that all roads to today’s political and legal system corruptions lead to www.iviewit.tv regarding the Iviewit Technologies, Inc. inventions and the attempt by former patent counsel to steal them.

Crimes then committed in mass to cover them up when the attorneys, including former RNC Chief Counsel Michael Grebe formerly CEO of accused Foley and Lardner and Proskauer Rose, were found stealing patents and complaints filed. To lost five year case files at the FBI and US Attorney, causing investigators to elevate the matters to DOJ OIG, Glenn Fine and FBI OPR, H. Marshall Jarrett both currently investigating the matters. To patents suspended by the Commissioner of Patents pending completion of several year investigations by federal authorities. To host of other state, federal and international crimes committed to enact the thefts and further crimes to cover up. The cover ups may go all the way to the top, including rumors that the Bush v. Gore election was a fraud to gain the criminals top down control of Justice. With the fox in the henhouse, all heck broke loose on this great nation, criminals running (ruining) the country. To the next election with Bush and Kerry both Skull and Bones members. To this election where all but two candidates are members of Council on Foreign Relations, an extreme right wing group with a subversive agenda, founded and stacked with Skull and Bones members, Bilderberg members and other cultish members of far right groups, all who worship a Hitler way of life. www.iviewit.tv/senatecultbill.htm This lifestyle includes Deciders, Torture, Concentration Camps (Gitmoschwitz), removal of Habeas etc. all to remove citizen rights to enact a new world order and killing many "terrorists" (whatever that is), other dissenters (anyone they do not like) and massive amounts of people who they find inferior, like I guess those in New Orleans who they let die as they floated to the ceilings and then created a ghetto for them to come back too.

All of this coming to fruition in The Honorable Shira A. Scheindlin courtroom at the United States District Court ~ Southern District of New York Docket No. 07Civ11196 (SAS), a case the judge related to an insider Whistleblower case of Christine C. Anderson v. the State of New York, et.al. where Anderson claims that as a 62 yr old female Supreme Court of New York attorney for the disciplinary committee, she was molested by superiors to keep whitewash cases against prominent and connected attorneys. Anderson’s initial filings mention Iviewit as one of the causes of her termination.

The Iviewit cases at the First Dept of New York are against senior attorneys, mainly from Proskauer Rose and a one Steven Krane, former President of the NYSBA who were caught in violations of public offices handling complaints illegally and ordered for investigation by the First Dept. Investigations that later were derailed by further conflicts and violations of public offices by leading NY disciplinary figures. The case rises to Chief Judge Judith Kaye in New York and the crimes they are all originally accused involve fraud on the United States Patent and Trademark Office to steal inventions worth a trillion dollars from Proskauer’s client Iviewit.

That is a primer, after reviewing the Iviewit homepage, if you would like to talk further of the entire tentacles to the ethics committees, the Justice Department and Supreme Courts of Florida and the Virginia and Florida Bar Associations, please feel free to call or write me.

Eliot I. Bernstein
Founder & Inventor
Iviewit Technologies, Inc.
Iviewit Holdings, Inc.
www.iviewit.tv
iviewit@iviewit.tv
530-529-4110