Posted on 08/20/2009 7:08:37 PM PDT by PghBaldy
Justice Dept. Looking Into Whether Attorneys Broke Law at Guantanamo - The Justice Department recently questioned military defense attorneys at Guantanamo Bay about whether photographs of CIA personnel, including covert officers, were unlawfully provided to detainees charged with organizing the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, according to sources familiar with the investigation... The photos were taken by researchers hired by the John Adams Project, a joint effort of the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, to support military counsel at Guantanamo Bay, according to the sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the inquiry. It was unclear whether the Justice Department is also examining those organizations.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
BUMP THAT !!
“With Holder at Justice, I would be suprised if this gets any manpower applied to coming up with answers.”
Especially since Holder’s old law firm has been heavily involved in representing these terrorists and may have been involved in this scandalous leak!
Here is a list of the lawyers(at least those they are willing to admit) that are working with the ACLU and the NACDL to free these terrorists and who may have leaked this info.
Lawyers
Joshua L. Dratel
Thomas Anthony Durkin
Nina Ginsberg
Nancy Hollander
Amanda Lee
Denise LeBoeuf
Edward B. MacMahon, Jr.
Scott McKay
David Nevin
Jeff Robinson
Gary D. Sowards
We should look for links with Holder and his old law firm and/or Obama and his other radical minions.
HOLDER’S CONFLICT OF INTEREST
(snip)
“Holder’s previous job, after all, was as a senior partner with Covington and Burling - a white-shoe DC law firm that devotes considerable pro bono time to defending the Gitmo detainees. The job paid $2 million a year, and he expects to collect a like amount this year as part of his separation package.
As a senior partner, he undoubtedly had significant input on what kind of charity cases his firm picked up. He surely knew that dozens of lawyers from from his firm were among the 500-plus civilian lawyers representing the 244 or so remaining detainees (on top of military-court-appointed defenders).”
OMG .. despicable .. he could’ve been working
on this before he was appointed.
I’ve meaning to post Holder’s statement about
the release of the Lockerbie terrorist. We
shall see going forward how committed he is
to ‘innocent life’ in all situations.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“”The interests of justice have not been served by this decision,” Attorney General Eric Holder said in a statement, saying he was “extremely disappointed” by the release. “There is simply no justification for releasing this convicted terrorist whose actions took the lives of 270 individuals, including 189 Americans.”
He said Megrahi showed no compassion for innocent life
and that he should have had to serve out his sentence.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/20/white-house-deeply-regrets-release-lockerbie-bomber/
“Thomas Anthony Durkin”
(snip)
“Among the accused terrorists are Ramzi Binalshibh, a Yemenese national charged as a top Al Qaeda planners of the 9/11 attacks.
Binalshibh was captured in Pakistan after a fierce gun battle; turned over to American authorities and locked up at Guantanamo where he is asking to be executed.
His lawyer? Tom Durkin.”
(snip)
“On Tuesday in Washington, Durkin and the other 9/11 defense lawyers met with President Obama’s Guantanamo team to discuss whether Gitmo prisoners will be moved into the federal court system...”
(snip)
“Initially, Durkin volunteered to represent Guantanamo detainees.The ACLU’s John Adams’ Project pays lawyers a bit better than a public defender’s fee, which is far less than what they usually receive. And in an odd twist to “the dark side” story: one of the major funding organizations for the ACLU’s Guantanamo project was the Bernard Madoff foundation. Of course, Madoff is himself is in federal court, charged in a massive fraud scheme. His contribution is no more.”
See post #27
This Chicago lawyer(Thomas Anthony Durkin) is also representing a person tied to Rezko.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0606270136jun27,0,3331925.story
Closing jabs in hiring trial - U.S.: `The fix was in’; Defense: Case `stupid’
Chicago Tribune (IL) - Tuesday, June 27, 2006
Author: Dan Mihalopoulos and Rudolph Bush, Tribune staff reporters.
A “corrupt clout machine” centered in Mayor Richard Daley’s office routinely gave high-paying blue-collar city jobs to political workers over more qualified applicants, prosecutors said Monday.
During the first day of closing arguments in the City Hall hiring trial, prosecutors portrayed Daley’s former patronage chief Robert Sorich as “quarterback” of a criminal scheme in which political payoffs trumped the public trust.
(snip)
Sorich’s attorney, Thomas Anthony Durkin , responded with an emotional argument that prosecutors had brought an “intellectually dishonest” case, charging a hard-working city official who gained nothing through his alleged misdeeds.
Durkin suggested to jurors that their verdict could have consequences far beyond the courtroom.
“Don’t try to run Daley out of office by convicting these guys,” he said.
(snip)
Defense says there’s no case
After a lunch break, Durkin began his argument by returning to his opening statement last month, when he labeled the government’s case “stupid.”
“I stand by [the comment] now more than I did when we started this case,” he said.
Durkin told jurors it should take them less than two minutes to “kick this case right out the door.”
Durkin assailed the credibility of prosecution witnesses, focusing his disgust on the Daley administration’s top lawyer, Mara Georges, and two former city officials who pleaded guilty to taking bribes from city trucking contractors.
Durkin accused Georges of not telling the truth when she testified that she was unaware of political hiring in the Daley administration until after the FBI raid of city offices last year.
He said Georges was aware of an alleged “clout list” as far back as 1997, when she provided the U.S. attorney’s office with many of the same documents that were used against Sorich in the trial.
“Was the stench worse from her testimony, or was the stench worse from [prosecutors] trying to get you to believe her testimony?” Durkin asked jurors.
He also lambasted former city officials Donald Tomczak and Daniel Katalinic, who were key prosecution witnesses. They told jurors that they led patronage armies that took campaign orders from Daley aides, including Sorich.
Tomczak and Katalinic testified in hopes of receiving lighter sentences for their crimes. In contrast, Durkin said, “Robert never took a dime.”
“To compare Robert Sorich in the same breath as Donald Tomczak sickens me,” Durkin said, referring to Tomczak as “that pig .”
(snip)
http://www.dailypress.com/chi-0605110271may11,1,1881473.story
Judge queries jury pool in public
Chicago Tribune (IL) - Thursday, May 11, 2006
Author: Rudolph Bush and Dan Mihalopoulos, Tribune staff reporters.
(snip)
U.S. District Judge David Coar questioned jurors in public Wednesday about a variety of matters, including whether they had been arrested, are employed by the city, involved in politics or harbor any views about unions or affirmative-action hiring.
(snip)
Before the jury pool entered the courtroom, Sorich’s attorney, Thomas Anthony Durkin complained to Coar that the “well is getting poisoned” by the Tribune’s coverage of the case.
Durkin also said prospective jurors might have been influenced by an anti-Daley protest in front of the courthouse Wednesday morning.
But earlier Wednesday, Durkin expressed confidence.
“We’re delighted to be here,” he said in the courthouse lobby. “We’re more than happy to take on this evidence.”
The defense has suggested they will argue that Sorich and the others were engaging in a widely known, longtime and legitimate practice of passing along job recommendations. McCarthy’s lawyer, Patrick Deady, suggested in a court filing this week that the system helped promote diversity on the city payroll.
With about 60 prospective jurors in his courtroom, Coar read aloud a long list of names that may come up in the trial.
The list read like a who’s who of local politics, including Daley, U.S. Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), Cook County Board President John Stroger, U.S. Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-Ill) and almost all of the Chicago City Council. The judge even mentioned long-dead former mayors Richard J. Daley and Harold Washington.
(snip)
The list also included more obscure City Hall insiders who have figured prominently in the federal investigation. Among them was retired Streets and Sanitation Department official Daniel Katalinic, who admitted running a pro-Daley patronage army last year and is expected to be a key prosecution witness.
Also on the list was the pro-Daley Hispanic Democratic Organization, whose members allegedly were rewarded for their political work with city jobs and promotions.
(snip)
Thanks. This lawyer sure is representing lots of shady clients involved in the Chicago Thug game of politics..isn’t he? He goes from representing terrorists, Rezko associates and Daley union thugs to visiting Obama in the WH to ‘discuss’ Gitmo.
There is alot of smoke here if you ask me.
(Snip) “2. Treason Defined by the Constitution and Federal Statute. It has been said that treason is the “highest of all crimes in the United States. It must be so in every civilized state; not only because the first duty of a state is self-preservation, but because this crime naturally leads to and involves others, destructive of the safety of individuals and of the peace of society. This crime is defined by the Constitution itself and its magnitude may be inferred from the fact that it is the only offense defined in that instrument.”
There are only three crimes referred to in the entire Constitution of the United States. Those crimes are treason, piracy and counterfeiting. Among those crimes, treason is the only crime for which the Founding Fathers defined and circumscribed specific conviction requirements. Treason is discussed in Article III Section 3 of the Constitution, which reads:
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.
The Constitution, ratified by two-thirds approval in 1788, does not prescribe the punishment for treason but confers that power on Congress. In response, Congress has passed a statute regarding treason at 18 U.S.C. 2381. This statute reads:
Whoever owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States,
In interpreting the Constitution and the treason statute, the Courts have determined the following general rules:
a. Treason may be committed by an American citizen in any geographical location in the world and it does not require the traitor to be a resident of the United States.
b. American citizens, whether born citizens or naturalized, owe an allegiance to the United States wherever they reside.
c. Every species of aid and comfort which, if given to a foreign enemy, constitutes treason.
d. Any intentional act furthering hostile designs of enemies of the United States gives “aid and comfort” and constitutes “adhering” to such enemies is treason.
e. Treason comprehends an “adherence” to the enemy by one residing in enemy territory or country.
e. War can only be levied by the employment of actual force.
f. If war is actually levied, then all citizens who perform any part, however minute or however remote from the scene of actual warfare, and who are in league in the general conspiracy are traitors.”
From
"It must be so in every civilized state; not only because the first duty of a state is self-preservation, but because this crime naturally leads to and involves others, destructive of the safety of individuals and of the peace of society."
This Durkin fellow was also a former Assistant US Attorney in Chicago. Looks like he went after John Kass during the same Daley investigation you linked to:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/services/chi-0605110187may11,0,2949985.column
Ping
(((Ping)))
Awwwww, "former" ACLU chief litigator and director Ruth Bader Ginsburg shoulda stuck around for this one...
Rahm Emmanuel has ties to Durkin too:
http://www.goldtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26591&page=6
(snip)
“Last week, investigators revealed the boys from the Water Department were heavily involved in Mr. Clean’s 2002 primary. That is important because Emanuel may be sitting in Congress today only because of the illegal contributions and help he received from the Daley machine back then.
Anyone who thinks that’s a stretch should ponder the situation young Emanuel was facing back then. He was one of eight Democrats fighting for his party’s nomination in a district the Democratic nominee was almost certain to win. It was a bitter primary that he finally won by only 11,058 votes. His major advantages were money and the support of the Daley machine. Still, he was forced to spend nearly $2 million and put hundreds of “volunteer” workers onto the streets of his district.
Emanuel denies any knowledge of all that. One assumes he must have just thought his message was really resonating with water department workers as they streamed in to help.
So the man the Democrats have chosen to fight the ethics war was himself elected only as a result of the machinations of a corrupt machine that he must have known was operating on his behalf, and he, like those he attacks, will be forced over and over again to argue that he just didn’t know what was going on around him.”
What a nest of vipers, traitors and thieves!
DEMOCRAT CULTURE OF CORRUPTION! AND THE MEDIA IS PART OF IT ALL!
(snip)”...Daley's former patronage chief, Robert Sorich, was among those convicted of mail fraud. He was sentenced to four years in federal prison for his part in the scheme outlined by federal prosecutors, but won a bond allowing him to remain free pending the appeal.
Tuesday's ruling means the 43-year-old Sorich has 72 hours to report to prison, according to his attorney, Thomas Anthony Durkin. Prosecutors said a federal judge would hear their motion to revoke the bond Thursday.
But Durkin noted he would continue the appeal process, all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
