Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Flight 800: Major breakthrough! Jack Cashill advises U.S. has conceded wrongdoing against Sanders ^ | Thursday, March 13, 2003 | Jack Cashill

Posted on 03/12/2003 11:16:44 PM PST by JohnHuang2

One cannot underestimate the impact of what has just transpired in James and Elizabeth Sanders' ongoing civil suit against the federal government and seven named individuals. The case number is federal EDNY, #01-CV-5447 JS.

The United States government has declined to respond to the Sanders' summary judgment motion – "Rule 56.1 Statement." Incredibly, by so declining, U.S. Attorney Kevin Cleary has conceded that the Sanders' 32 damning charges against his clients cannot be rebutted.

In so conceding, the Justice Department tacitly acknowledges that, yes, the TWA Flight 800 investigation has been corrupted and, no, we are not prepared to contest this fact.

In sum, Cleary has thrown in the towel on a case that ranks among the most egregious violations of a reporter's constitutional rights in the history of American journalism.

From the beginning, the story of TWA Flight 800, the one that James Sanders chronicled, has been a story of humanity betrayed – none more so than the 230 good souls aboard that doomed plane.

Fifty-three of the dead were TWA employees. James' wife, Elizabeth Sanders, had trained many of the attendants on board and knew several of the pilots. Their deaths wounded the sweet, vulnerable Elizabeth deeply. In the weeks afterward, she and her TWA colleagues passed numbly from one memorial service to another, their grief matched only by their growing anger at the obvious misdirection of the investigation. One of those colleagues, 747 pilot and manager Terry Stacey, would become James Sanders' best source within that investigation.

From the beginning, too, James Sanders has recognized the humanity of those who have tried to block him from telling this story. In his civil suit, as in his reporting – including the book he and I have co-authored, "First Strike, TWA Flight 800 and the Attack on America" – Sanders has never shied from putting a human face on injustice.

What makes Sanders' legal case so powerful is that he targets not merely the anonymous monolith of "government," but seven named defendants within. These are real people with real fears who, for a variety of reasons, yielded to those fears and betrayed the trust of the American people. For several years now, Sanders is all that has stood between them and knowledge that they got away with it. No doubt, they are anxious about this turn of events. One hopes major media will seek them out and exploit that anxiety.

As Sanders argued in his summary judgment motion, the named defendants used their legal authority not to protect the federal Flight 800 investigation, but to thwart Sanders' reporting on their own lawlessness. In the process, the defendants knowingly violated the First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

The persecution of Sanders can be traced to March 10, 1997, when California's Riverside Press-Enterprise headlined its front page with an article titled, "New Data Show Missile May Have Nailed TWA 800." Written by Loren Fleckenstein, the story identified James Sanders as an "investigative reporter," provided information on his previous non-fiction books, and described his inquiry into the FBI and NTSB Flight 800 investigation over the preceding five months.

This story created a significant problem for the Justice Department. The article's text confirmed that Sanders was on the trail of potential criminal activity within the Flight 800 investigation. As to those charged with containing the investigation, their worst nightmare had been realized. Forensic evidence had left the hangar. Some unknown person within the investigation had removed a pinch of material from the plane as telling and potentially damaging as Monica's famed "blue dress." That person was Terry Stacey. He removed it of his own volition and sent it to Sanders.

This piece of seat back was laced with the DNA of the crash, a reddish-orange residue trail that streaked across a narrow section of the plane's interior. The FBI had lifted samples in early September 1996, then refused to share the test results with the NTSB. For the record, those tests today remain classified under the guise of national security.

Once the story had broken, the Clinton Justice Department used its considerable powers to thwart Sanders. The key to its strategy was the denial of Sanders' standing as a journalist by two Justice Department lawyers, Valerie Caproni and Benton Campbell. The current Justice Department now concedes that these two attorneys did the following:

conspired to print factually false information in a Justice Department letter to deprive [James Sanders] of his civil rights afforded by the PPA (Privacy Protection Act). By falsely alleging they did not know plaintiff was a journalist, defendants conspired to create an illegal scheme allowing them to subpoena and obtain work product and documents because, per the scheme, they did not know [Sanders] was a journalist until after receiving work product and documents.

The charges went beyond the two attorneys. The current Justice Department has chosen not to contest the following related charge from Sanders' civil suit.

Within seconds of learning that the overarching conspiracy [FBI agents Jim Kallstrom and Jim Kinsley, NTSB Chairman Jim Hall, NTSB head of investigation Bernie Loeb, and NTSB head of the Fire & Explosion Team Merritt Birky] were engaged in to alter the outcome of the TWA 800 federal 'investigation' was compromised by [James Sanders], CAPRONI and CAMPBELL knew beyond any doubt that [Sanders] was a journalist protected by PPA and Justice Department CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) 50.10. Defendants CAPRONI and CAMPBELL, in order to protect themselves and their co-conspirators, knowingly and willfully widened the overarching conspiracy to include violating [Sanders] PPA civil rights by using grand jury subpoena power to illegally seize work product.

The Sanders' suit details the way this conspiracy worked and names those responsible. Again, the Justice Department has let these incriminating charges stand unrebutted:

Defendants, no later than March 11, 1997, falsely said the reddish-orange residue was glue. Defendants HALL and LOEB made this false statement to Congress on March 11, 1997. Defendant BIRKY inserted this false information into the Fire & Explosion Team "Factual Report" … Defendants removed substantially all reddish-orange residue from rows 17-19. LOEB was then given the assignment to lie to Congress and state there was no residue trail on the seats inside Calverton Hangar.

At the FBI's Nov. 18, 1997 press conference, Kallstrom made the following claim about this residue trail:

The seat cushion residue, reported in the Riverside, Calif., press, of the residue that someone said was rocket fuel. The truth is the material is contact adhesive.

We know without a doubt – without any doubt whatsoever – that it's the adhesive that holds the back of the seats together. It's not rocket fuel. It's not residue of a rocket, never was, never will be.

The Justice Department, in essence, now concedes Kallstrom's "statement was false, [and] known to be false." Justice also concedes that "KALLSTROM and KINSLEY conspired to create a factually false illusion that [James Sanders] had misrepresented the [red residue tests]."

In fact, the residue was demonstrably not glue. The Justice Department also concedes that another FBI agent gave false testimony about the red residue by choosing not to contest the following charge:

FBI agent Ken Maxwell, testifying at the [Sanders'] criminal trial April 7, 1999, falsely stated the FBI first observed the reddish-orange [trail] in late October to early November [1996]. This factually false statement was made as a part of a conspiracy with [Justice Department attorney] PITOFSKY to place the peak FBI point of interest in the residue at the same period of time [James Sanders] and [Terry] Stacey were discussing removal for testing purposes.

If there were a consistent strategy among the seven defendants, it was to de-humanize the Sanders – to strip away their dignity and individuality. This strategy reached its tragi-comic peak on Dec. 5, 1997 when the FBI's New York office Internet site proudly headlined the story of the Sanders' arrest: "Conspiracy theorist and wife charged with theft of parts from airplane," and scrolled it across the top of its home page. The arrest warrant was shot through with false statements. In his suit, Sanders would credit FBI agents Jim Kallstrom and Jim Kinsley for this misrepresentation – and the Justice Department now concedes these constitutional violations.

Here is another critical point that the Justice Department has chosen not to contest: "On Dec. 5, 1997, the New York Justice Department-FBI website, coordinated with the KALLSTROM-KINSLEY conspiracy to vilify [James Sanders]." By labeling Sanders a "conspiracy theorist" on its website, the FBI employed a subjective characterization that violates the FBI's own guidelines.

Things got uglier four days later when FBI agent Jim Kinsley paraded James and Elizabeth through a throng of reporters, their hands cuffed behind their backs. Throughout it, Elizabeth worried deeply about what her aging mother, a Philippine immigrant, would think. Sanders would remember her hurt in his civil suit and charged Kinsley with inflicting it by orchestrating a gratuitous and illegal "perp walk."

Kinsley was also involved in one of the more clever bits of illegal mischief. As the Sanders charge, and the Justice Department concedes, federal prosecutor David Pitofsky recognized that Kinsley's seizure of Sanders' computer was illegal. So Pitofsky initiated a scheme in which relevant printouts of that information would be sent to publisher Alfred Regnery. He and Kinsley then jointly contacted Regnery and demanded that the publisher turn all over related documents in his possession, which he did.

At almost every turn in this sordid tale, cleverness trumped honor. The legal deck was stacked from the beginning and the jury pool poisoned. In April 1999, James and Elizabeth Sanders stood trial in Long Island before a jury shielded from the knowledge that James Sanders was acting as a journalist uncovering the criminal acts of federal agents, let alone that he was being prosecuted by the very agents he had hoped to expose.

As typical in a criminal trial, the prosecution got the last word. "A conspiratorial government going after these people?" David Pitofsky scoffed. "And, to what end? What is the government's motive? Ask yourself that. What is the government's motive to falsely implicate these people?"

One can hardly fault the jury for not knowing. They heard nothing about corruption within the investigation. They did not know about James Sanders' First Amendment right to expose that corruption or that his attempt to assert that right had been denied.

All they knew was that these two likely thieves may or may not have conspired to steal evidence from a crime scene. And why believe these "conspiracy theorists"? The establishment media obviously didn't. Besides, what reason did their government have to "falsely implicate these people?"

The jury returned after less than two hours of deliberation. Elizabeth clutched her husband's hand, almost too anxious to speak. She hoped for the best, but feared the worst. The worst is what they got.

"Guilty as charged" – both Sanders – not only for conspiracy, but also for aiding and abetting in the theft of the fabric. The audience gasped in disbelief. Even Judge Joanna Seybert looked stunned.

David Pitofsky beamed in delight. "The jury understood," he said, spinning nonsense even in victory, "that no responsible reporter would believe they could break into a place to get a story.'' At this sad moment of truth, as she wept softly, one thought flashed through Elizabeth's mind, "What will my mother think?"

The Justice Department now concedes that it "fabricated a defense where none existed" in earlier opposing the Sanders' civil action. It also concedes there is no defense for the 32 counts of federal lawlessness committed in pursuit of destroying a journalist and his wife.

Today, as the Sanders await Judge Seybert's summary judgment ruling, the major media have the opportunity finally to recognize the innocent, to rebuke the guilty and to avenge the dead. Whether they choose to tell it or not, this is a story that will not go away.

Read "Jailed author of Flight 800 book vindicated"

TOPICS: Editorial; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: twa800list; twaflight800
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-147 next last
Thursday, March 13, 2003

Quote of the Day by wayoverontheright

1 posted on 03/12/2003 11:16:44 PM PST by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
ruh roh... does this mean that the surface to air rocket was real, or that a shoe bomber did this and the clinton administration covered it up????

treasonous bastards...
2 posted on 03/12/2003 11:19:55 PM PST by Robert_Paulson2 (Pappy always said "If you don't understand something, kill it... it's safer that way..." or similar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Yes, short version please. Especially this late at nite.
3 posted on 03/12/2003 11:22:38 PM PST by Stopislamnow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pan_Yans Wife
for later read
4 posted on 03/12/2003 11:23:34 PM PST by Pan_Yans Wife (Lurking since 2000.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
5 posted on 03/12/2003 11:25:23 PM PST by Hunble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Did anyone else catch a BTW report on the shuttle Columbia that investigators found an orange substance on the debris, and had no idea what it was?

Everyone agrees the shuttle was up far too high when it started to come apart for a Stinger type missile to have hit it. But who else remembered that there was an orange substance on the Flight 800 debris?

Wonder if we'll get some answers now that the Bush administration seems to have opened the door.

6 posted on 03/12/2003 11:27:26 PM PST by patriciaruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stopislamnow
The short version:

Those of us that knew that something was wrong, put our evidence in a safe place.

When it becomes legal once again to expose the evidence, people like me will stand up.

7 posted on 03/12/2003 11:30:18 PM PST by Hunble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
This like the Billy Dale and The White House Travel office thing. I guess our government will give them the "Opps! Sorry we trashed you lives but stuff happens." apology with no one being held accountable for the screw up.

Question> Are the Clinton cronies still running the White House Travel Office?

8 posted on 03/12/2003 11:30:19 PM PST by Captain Beyond (The Hammer of the gods! (Just a cool line from a Led Zep song))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Bump! You still can fight City Hall or in this case the Feds and win!
9 posted on 03/12/2003 11:32:41 PM PST by goldstategop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Captain Beyond
Later read.....
10 posted on 03/12/2003 11:32:48 PM PST by mickie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
So when are these government employee traitors going to be shot dead, in public, for treason against the people of the United States? Why aren't they in Federal prison, awaiting trial and execution? Why aren't you asking your Congressman and Senators these very same questions?
11 posted on 03/12/2003 11:33:05 PM PST by sourcery (The Oracle on Mount Doom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
12 posted on 03/12/2003 11:35:41 PM PST by TLBSHOW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sourcery
We did ask, but at least one Congressman that helped is now currently in prison.
13 posted on 03/12/2003 11:36:07 PM PST by Hunble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Hunble
Before the foil hat brigade begins masturbating with glee, I don't think a breathless, overly-dramatic article from World Crap Daily qualifies as reliable legal reporting.

The author is claiming that since some motion in some lawsuit supposedly wasn't replied to, to it means the Government is conceeding a bunch of assorted foil-hatter claims.

But the author isn't quoting government statements conceeding things, the author is quoting statements from the lawsuit filed by the foil-hatters and trying to make it look like the government is conceeding those things.

I'm very dubious that what the author is claiming is actually legally true.

And of course the author endorses stealing evidence from a government investigation, as well.
14 posted on 03/12/2003 11:36:48 PM PST by John H K
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: John H K
You are most correct, and I will await the final legal verdict.
15 posted on 03/12/2003 11:38:13 PM PST by Hunble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2; dansangel
Great post John..(((ping dansangel)))
16 posted on 03/13/2003 12:07:18 AM PST by .45MAN (If you don't like it here try and find a better country, Please!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John H K
The case against the investigation is very compelling...then there are all those reliable witnesses told they didn't see what they saw.

Sanders' actions and motivations are understandable and laudible, given that he witnessed the corruption and cover-up. I'd have done the same. (much to my own consternation)

No doubt the government will continue to cover up; the FBI can't afford yet another hit on its it may be reasoned within the halls of service to the "greater good". Bigger lies have been glossed, covered, and scapegoated away.

This is not to say that the FBI didn't have a noble purpose in shielding the public from the truth...but the truth is always better...warts and all.

Godspeed, Hunble.

17 posted on 03/13/2003 12:11:12 AM PST by dasboot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Stopislamnow
I recently read First Strike: Twa Flight 800 and the Attack on America by Jack Cashill, James Sanders.

It presents a powerful case, with much detail, that TWA 800 was shot down by a couple of Navy missiles - in an failed effort to foil a terrorist attempt to bring that plane down. Clinton personally chose to cover it up, because apparently the truth, though well intentioned, would have been too risky just before the 96 election.

Part of story told involves a couple of reporters, named in this posting here, who got ahold of a sample of the residue of rocket fuel left on the seats, had it tested, and reported their findings. They were railroaded up one side and down the other.

They appear to be winning in their suit for damages resulting from the railroading. If this post is to be believed, and I for one would believe it, then the Federal government has chosen not to contest several key assertions in their case.

18 posted on 03/13/2003 12:13:26 AM PST by ThePythonicCow (Mooo !!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: John H K
Good try, but when the US Attorney didn't reply it is a de facto admission that there is no defense which will pass the red faced test.

The real question should be why our government tried to hide what many knew was a missle attack. If President Clinton did this to keep the public tranquil for an upcoming election, he vastly underestimated the public.

Remember Yamamoto's " -and filled him with a terrible rsolve."??

Or did President Clinton not want the public aroused against what he hoped would become his 'legacy' - a mid east deal?
19 posted on 03/13/2003 12:15:12 AM PST by GladesGuru (In a society predicated upon liberty, it is essential to examine principles - -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: John H K
And of course the author endorses stealing evidence from a government investigation, as well.

You have got to be kidding me. They staff you guys all three shifts?

The FBI had lifted samples in early September 1996, then refused to share the test results with the NTSB. For the record, those tests today remain classified under the guise of national security.

For a domestic plane crash...Hmmmm?

20 posted on 03/13/2003 12:27:24 AM PST by Woahhs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-147 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson