New New York Times article well worth reading.
Turns out Ivins’ lawyer was correct about the FBI’s “Ivins gave us the wrong strain” story.
Either they are totally incompetent, or they made an early decision not to pin it on the Muslim terrorists who appeared to be linked to the case, so they had to find a fall guy.
They’d rather hound an innocent man to death than admit they were wrong.
And I still think that Sessions is one of the worst appointments Bush ever made. Instead of fixing an FBI that was corrupted under clinton, he appears to have made things worse.
I am so tired of the FBI and their lame attempt to put the blame on a dead man who cannot refute their so called evidence.
If they have evidence they should have used it earlier to put the guy behind bars. Now is not the time to try and make the case.
FBI - you blew it big time and lost. Give it up. A dead man cannot clear his name and you should now not sully it - no matter the evidence.
Once again, you screwed up. Get on with life.
God, I hate incompetence.
The FBI, ATF, IRS- all of them should be scrapped.
Sam
I recall they admitted to make the evidence fit the crime.
at first I thought the business with the envelopes was their strongest evidence.
Turned out that was exaggerated too.
hoo boy.
So after a couple of weeks of snow-job, they think they NOW have the scientific evidence? Gee, did they discover it on Monday? After more than 6 years?
So, FBI scenario number 1 was that Ivins used his position to mislead FBI and cover up his tracks by NOT providing FBI with the right samples that could incriminate him if he did so.
And FBI scenario number 2 is that FBI screwed up because Ivins did provide the right samples, but in improper "format" (obviously hoping that this would screw FBI up) and they didn't have the right testing methods or equipment anyway (and Ivins must have known and relied on that to get away with the crime).
Did I read that right and describe it accurately? Because if I did, I can't believe my eyes...
Oh, and just to be on the safe side, how did they finally "realize" that they had the "right sample" and how did they find it and where and how was the sample kept, because it was submitted in different "format" (this is anthrax sample after 3 years we are talking about).
Mind-boggling.
Today’s FBI is not your grandfather’s FBI....
It certainly comes across as simply another Federal clap trap full of incompetent boobs.
Shermy,
The allegation that a false sample had been submitted was the most powerful element of the weak case alleged in the probable cause warrant. Now it turns out that the sworn statement was untrue.
The bit about the letter was perhaps the third most significant element. Now it turns out that statement was untrue.
Let me give you another example of a sexy tidbit that in a week or two you can expect to be a fishy story. The government made a tantalizing suggestion that Dr. Bruce Ivins one day went walking out in the backyard and made a raking or digging motion. It was raining. Egads, you say. Given we know — or were led to believe he had submitted a false sample — what was he doing walking out the rain and raking a spot in the yard during the rain? He must have hid a vial of powderized anthrax! Or at least something suspicious. Give the FBI a search warrant quick! (It is reminscent of the hand-over of left-overs in the Pennsylvania backyard observed by a neighbor).
Well, Shermy, this seems like Hatfill all over again when, for example, the cabin in the woods evaporated as the fog lifted. The Greendale School turned out not to even exist. The talk of Cipro was part of some banter among friends.
Here, I’ll tell you what Dr. Ivins was doing out raking the yard in the rain. He was looking for earthworms. We had the shaggy dog story relating to the bloodhounds. Let’s call this “another fish story.”
Now only the family and Attorney Kemp would be able to confirm I’m right and I’ve not checked with them as Attorney Kemp no doubt will develop his argument as time permits.
So let me offer my tentative proof. Bruce used the screen name “kingbadger7@aol.com” in posting comments on the News-Post’s website. (My real name is not Zack or Pook in the interests of full disclosure; and I have the nagging suspicion Badabing is not her real name).
Kingbadger7 commented on a story published in May 2006 about a man who was detained at his Tuscarora house after he went to look for a trash can lid, which had blown off the back of his pickup truck.
As Slate Magazine explained:
“The man, Dave Twigg, held a flashlight out of his truck late April 30 to search for the lid. An officer with the Department of Natural Resources then tried to stop Twigg, but Twigg continued driving until he reached a lighted area — his driveway.
The officer threatened to charge Twigg for fleeing and eluding a police officer and illegally hunting deer by blinding them with bright lights, according to the article. kingbadger7@aol.com wrote:
- “I’ve known Dave Twigg for a long time, and he’s a great, honest, law-abiding guy. The DNR agent was more than a bit over-reactive and (testosteronal) in what he did to Dave ... Dave should sue the DNR and the officer involved for what happened.”
- “Great ... that’s all that night predators need to know: That they can stop anybody, anywhere, for practically any reason and say that they’re ‘DNR.’ Dave Twigg wasn’t running from anybody, so the ‘attempting to flee’ charge is completely bogus — What’s next? Arresting kids who have flashlights and are looking in their yard for nightcrawlers?”
- “ ... you can go online and purchase ‘police car’ lights for your vehicle. Scary, huh? Knowing that, how many of us would tell our loved ones to stop at night on deserted roads when unmarked, supposed police cars flashed their lights? As to comment in the previous post about ‘salivating lawyers,’ I think that the DNR officer’s actions would cause many reasonable people to consult an attorney.”
Well, I think we may be able to the writing on the walls here. Bruce Ivins perhaps was looking for nightcrawlers in his backyard. We know Dr. Ivins thought the FBI was overreaching in its actions. We can speculate, even without knowing legal stuff, that Dr. Ivins’ estate is preparing to sue US DOJ.
As you know, I’m a big fan of the US DOJ. The US DOJ should ahead of this and apologize for the false statement in the context of a press conference that Dr. Ivins submitted a false sample. He was a scientist and it is was a serious charge indeed in the context of a scientist helping with the investigation. The decontamination was also and is the subject of a 361 page US Army report, I believe, obtained by the Frederick paper in a FOIA. The fact of the clean-up — at a time Ft. Detrick was being hammered in the press — can be explained by a desire not to have co-workers or himself exposed to anthrax and a desire to avoid further trouble and bad press. But the decontamination had these legitimate alternative explanations. Submission of a false sample would not. US Attorney Jeffrey Taylor should publicly apologize to the family. The US DOJ should get ahead of this. Otherwise, this failure, without more, may forever doom the US Attorney Office’s credibility in this matter, thus dooming any possibility of a successful resolution. Then we can all move on and this false sample issue can be considered as already addressed by the time of any hearings. All this criticism of the US DOJ and FBI might best be understood in the context of this question: Could we do any better? Probably not. We should all be working together to get the right answer.
I hope Attorney Kemp can confirm this nightcrawler issue — for example, by confirming, if it is true, that he was planning on going fishing.
Shermy,
The FBI’s press conference on the science is at 9 a.m. Monday.