Category: Legal

Did Blago try to oust Fitzgerald? Get ready for “Blagogate”

The Chicago Tribune tells the good news:

In a bombshell disclosure before testimony began Wednesday morning in the Antoin “Tony” Rezko trial, a federal prosecutor said a former Rezko confidant was prepared to say that another friend of Rezko was trying to pull strings with White House political director Karl Rove to fire U.S. Atty. Patrick Fitzgerald and kill his investigation into Rezko.

Karl Rove and Robert Kjellander issued statements denying the following allegations:

Before the jury was brought into the courtroom Wednesday, [ Assistant U.S. Atty. Carrie Hamilton] Hamilton told U.S. District Judge Amy St. Eve that Republican National Committeeman Robert Kjellander was working with Rove “to have Fitzgerald removed.”

The potential witness at Rezko’s trial, Ali Ata, a former official in the administration of Gov. Rod Blagojevich, is ready testify about conversations he had with Rezko in 2004 when the Rezko investigation had just begun. According to Ata, Blago was present in the room when Ata and Rezko proposed swapping a $25,000 campaign contribution for a job in the Blagojevich administration.

All roads lead again and again to the Gov. Rod Blagojevich, the Governor-Who-Won’t. It’s almost like we’re dealing with an elected mob — a klutzy Sopranos with styled hair.

I recall the night Blago was re-elected. As the numbers came in and it was evident that Blago would win, a friend who serves local municipalities as a prosecuting attorney made an intriguing observation. He said, “What’s it going to be like seeing a sitting governor indicted?”

No one has attached the legendary “-GATE” to this whole ordeal, but it’s coming soon. Perhaps “Blagogate”?

Whatever we end up calling this mess, it will not be good for Illinois.


Supremes Allow Lethal Injection for Execution

The Supreme Court today upheld Kentucky’s use of lethal injection for executions. The 7-2 vote backed the procedures in place in Kentucky, three drugs which some asserted constitute cruel and unusual punishment because they can cause great pain.

From the NYTimes:

”We … agree that petitioners have not carried their burden of showing that the risk of pain from maladministration of a concededly humane lethal injection protocol, and the failure to adopt untried and untested alternatives, constitute cruel and unusual punishment,” Chief Justice John Roberts said in an opinion that garnered only three votes. Four other justices, however, agreed with the outcome.

Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David Souter dissented.

ABC News tells of instances where the condemned endured prolonged, agonizing deaths:

In Florida, convicted murderer Angel Diaz was executed in 2006. But a medical examiner’s postmortem examination revealed that due to the improper injection of the anesthetic in his case, he had chemical burns on both arms. Experts believe he would have felt extreme pain for 20 to 30 minutes.

In Ohio, Joseph Clark was sentenced to death for killing a gas station attendant. But his 2006 execution was botched. It took him 86 minutes to die while he screamed in pain.

Even his victim’s brother, Michael Manning, watched in horror. “He started to shake his head from side to side,” said Manning. It took a technician 19 tries to insert the deadly intravenous needle.

Manning said what he saw in that execution chamber should not have happened. “I believe in the death penalty, but I side on the constitutionality side of it. The Eighth Amendment says no cruel and unusual punishment, and that’s what I think it was.”

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia was dismissive of such facts, again from ABC:

Conservative Justice Antonin Scalia said, “Where does this come from that you must find the method of execution that causes the least pain? We have approved electrocution. We have approved death by firing squad. I expect both of those have more possibilities of painful death than the protocol here.”

The United States stands in strange company as one of few countries in the world that still permit capital punishment. From Ask Yahoo!:

All European Union countries have abolished the death penalty. Any country wishing to join the Union must follow suit. As this map shows, capital punishment is most often found in Asia and Africa, plus the United States.

Countries and territories still using capital punishment include Afghanistan, the Bahamas, China, Cuba, Egypt, India, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, North and South Korea, Libya, Malaysia, Pakistan, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Sudan, Syria, Thailand, Uganda, and Vietnam.

The U.S. government and its military allow the death penalty. Capital punishment is legal in 38 American states. Meanwhile, these states have abolished it: Alaska, Hawaii, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. The District of Columbia also doesn’t have the death penalty.

We stand with China, Iraq, Libya, Jordan, Rwanda and Sudan.

Good for us. Scalia must be proud.


Alderman Mell Cashes In. So It Goes.

Chicago Alderman Richard Mell stands to take a chunk of a $15 million trial judgment, according to the Chicago Sun-Times. Mell is not talking about the case, Cement-Lock v. Gas Tech. Institute, and the Sun-Times had little success turning up anything too specific. Mell’s attorneys, Wildman, Harrold, Allen & Dixon LLP, who also list the Sun-Times among their clients, issued a brief statement:

“We are very pleased with the decision and the jury’s strong finding in favor of our client. Because this is ongoing litigation, we cannot comment further at this time.”

Plaintiffs’ attorneys could not be reached.

The case was heard by Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer. The federal jury’s decision was rendered March 11. By way of background, Attorney R. David Donoghue’s Chicago IP Litigation Blog offered the following in December:

Plaintiffs alleged that defendants permitted defendant Gas Technology Institute (“GTI”) to secure funding for Technology-related activities, despite defendants’ knowledge that GTI had no license to use the Technology and kept knowledge of the funding from CLG. GTI also allegedly claimed to own and have developed the Technology. The Court held that there was no written license between CLG and GTI regarding the Technology. But there was a question of fact as to whether GTI’s efforts to secure finding for the Technology was improper. Additionally, there was a question of fact as to whether GTI misrepresented its ownership or control over the Technology.

“CLG” is the Cement-Lock Group.

“Mell owns a 10 percent share of Cement-Lock Group, a company formed in 1997 to cash in on the remediation technology,” according to the Sun-Times. The suit alleged “massive fraud”:

Defendants in the case included Gas Technology Institute; Institute of Gas Technology; Endesco Services; Endesco Clean Harbors LLC, Stanley Brys, James Dunne and Francis S. Lau.

“What began as a legitimate enterprise to obtain funding to commercialize and market a technology . . . has become a massive fraud with defendants stealing and diverting grant funds through a pattern of racketeering involving acts of mail fraud, wire fraud, money laundering and more,” the lawsuit states.

Over a seven-year period, the defendants were accused of “contracting for or receiving” $30 million in grant funding without Cement- Lock Group’s permission by “misrepresenting ownership of the technology” they once claimed had a $5 billion world-wide market.

The scheme to “milk the cash cow” by prolonging the research phase — in part, by setting up a New Jersey demonstration facility — ended up “diverting millions of dollars . . . ,” the suit stated.

Of interest in all of this is where Mell might end up next. The Sun-Times again:

Earlier this week, a witness in the federal corruption trial of former Blagojevich fund-raiser Tony Rezko accused Mell of trying to muscle a lucrative kickback out of a deal at a state pension fund, which he denied.

Always looking for more exposure, Chicagoland pols must be hoping against hope no one even whispers their names at the Rezko trial. Yes, this was only one mention of Mell by a witness, but I suspect Rezko’s trial will only lead to more indictments. Is Mell’s name on the short list? No one has alleged anything formally against Mell, and I’ll not do so here.

But all of this raises horribly serious questions.

I really don’t get these Chicago Democrats. I don’t see them as Democrats at all. We have pols like these in the south suburbs. For many of them, the pursuit of ideals and the needs of the people are subservient to their desire for control and power. Patronage government is very expensive, and the feds are hungry to stop it all. But the Chicago machine rages on.

Time to rage back.


We Can’t Handle Guns

Yes, the Constitution gives us the right to bear arms. Specifically:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

We could debate endlessly the meaning of “a well regulated Militia” and whether such a thing could exist in this day and age.  We could talk about keeping guns out of the hands of criminals.  That’s all we have to do, after all, right?  We have enough laws.  We just have to enforce the laws we have and all will be well.

We could compare ourselves to other countries.  Canadians have lots and lots of guns, for example. But they don’t shoot each other the way we do.

Why do we shoot each other?  We could debate endlessly.  For all our discussion, it happened again.

Today, Ruben Ivy, 18, a student at Crane High School in Chicago was shot and killed.  The Chicago Sun-Times shows a black jacket laying in a pool of blood on the school’s front steps.

A puddle of blood and yellow police tape remain on the steps in front of Crane High School on Friday evening after an 18-year-old junior was killed and another student was beaten nearby in what police are calling gang-related incidents.

Police are looking for a male juvenile they believe is a suspect.

It happened again.   Our children are killing children.

While we debate once again the merits of gun control, the fact is Ruben Ivy will not be the last young person shot.  When children shoot children, the issues are systemic, and much deeper than guns. Some have suggested adding a $10 tax to individual bullets.

But remove guns from the mix, and what do we have left?  Imagine for an instant that we have removed guns from our streets?  What would be left that is driving our children to kill other children?  What’s going on in the big picture?

I don’t have an answer tonight.  I’m just trying to feel the question more deeply.


Prosecuting The Damned

We’ve heard the stories before. Soldiers in Iraq have committed suicide, others have attempted. The Army is prosecuting, according to The Washington Post:

In a nondescript conference room at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, 1st Lt. Elizabeth Whiteside listened last week as an Army prosecutor outlined the criminal case against her in a preliminary hearing. The charges: attempting suicide and endangering the life of another soldier while serving in Iraq.

Her hands trembled as Maj. Stefan Wolfe, the prosecutor, argued that Whiteside, now a psychiatric outpatient at Walter Reed, should be court-martialed. After seven years of exemplary service, the 25-year-old Army reservist faces the possibility of life in prison if she is tried and convicted.

Military psychiatrists at Walter Reed who examined Whiteside after she recovered from her self-inflicted gunshot wound diagnosed her with a severe mental disorder, possibly triggered by the stresses of a war zone. But Whiteside’s superiors considered her mental illness “an excuse” for criminal conduct, according to documents obtained by The Washington Post.

At the hearing, Wolfe, who had already warned Whiteside’s lawyer of the risk of using a “psychobabble” defense, pressed a senior psychiatrist at Walter Reed to justify his diagnosis.

“I’m not here to play legal games,” Col. George Brandt responded angrily, according to a recording of the hearing. “I am here out of the genuine concern for a human being that’s breaking and that is broken. She has a severe and significant illness. Let’s treat her as a human being, for Christ’s sake!”

I can’t even begin to comprehend what is happening here. Our fighting men and women are placed in extreme danger, in Hell. Their time in Iraq is extended. Some are sent back for two or three tours of duty. And some simply cannot take it any more.

This is not at all an article advocating suicide, nor an admission that this is the only alternative for those fighting in Iraq. If any of our veterans or soldiers currently serving read this, I have the utmost respect for you and your service to this country. I cannot imagine what you have gone through, or what you are going through if you are serving now.

This country is far too punitive, in every respect. We can’t build prisons fast enough. We have a problem, and our only solution is, “Lock-em up!” But prisons do not build a healthier society.

We all get one shot at life. Some have chosen to serve the United States of America in the Armed Services, and our Coward-In-Chief has put them in harms way. The Coward-In-Chief has yet to attend a single funeral for one of the fallen. The Coward-In-Chief never served, and neither have his children.

The Coward-In-Chief has damned these young people to Hell-on-Earth.

Those who command should spend more time with those who know something about the so-called “psychobabble”, and realize what they are doing to our young people.

Prosecution for an attempted suicide? This is a solution only for those who have ceased thinking, or those who have given up looking for solutions. We need to ask the big questions, and cease the clichés. Soldiers attempting suicide is a real problem, and these petty, simplistic prosecutions are no solution for those trapped in Hell.


What Can Boy George Say Now?

So the President had no idea that the CIA had these torture-tapes? Really?

According to Dana Perino, the President “has no recollection” that he ever saw these tapes:

Q Thanks. On these CIA videotapes, did either the President or Vice President or Condoleezza Rice, when she was National Security Advisor, or Steve Hadley, see them before they were destroyed?

MS. PERINO: I spoke to the President, and so I will have to defer on the others. But I spoke to the President this morning about this. He has no recollection of being made aware of the tapes or their destruction before yesterday. He was briefed by General Hayden yesterday morning. And as to the others, I’ll have to — I’ll refer you to the Vice President’s office and I’ll see if I can get the others.

Q Was there any White House involvement in approving or commenting upon their destruction?

MS. PERINO: As I said, the President has no recollection knowing about the tapes or about their destruction, and so I can’t answer the follow up.

Perino darts the question as to whether the President would support an investigation. Then, we get Good Ol’ Boy George once again. Is this President embarrassed? Is this President angry at CIA Chief General Hayden? Not Boy George:

Q Dana, is this something that you would characterize the President’s feeling about — is this something that’s sort of seen as understandable, or is this something that you’re embarrassed about?

MS. PERINO: I would say that the President supports General Hayden. General Hayden made a statement yesterday to his employees in which he said that the decision was made by the agency, it was made in consultation with the agency’s lawyers. And he said — and I quote — that “the tapes posed a serious security risk and were they ever to leak, they would permit identification of your CIA colleagues who had served in the program, exposing them and their families to retaliation from al Qaeda and its sympathizers.”

He has complete confidence in General Hayden and he has asked White House Counsel’s Office, as I said, who is already in communication with the CIA General Counsel as the CIA Director continues to gather facts. As you know, General Hayden wasn’t there at this time, either.

The President has “complete confidence in General Hayden.” Of course! Wait for it.  You know it’s coming… “You’re doing a heckuva job, Haydie!”

Now let’s see if Congress has any at all. Senator Dick Durbin has called for the Justice Department to investigate. Full-steam ahead with that one.


Can Anybody Really Touch the C.I.A.?

I have to admit this one makes me worry. I’ve always had the idea — no doubt based on superstition and fear — that the C.I.A. was untouchable. I mean, who could possibly go after the C.I.A., really?

So the old chaps were destroying tapes. Takes me back to the 70s, it does.

According to the latest in the NYTimes.com:

White House and Justice Department officials, along with senior members of Congress, advised the Central Intelligence Agency in 2003 against a plan to destroy hundreds of hours of videotapes showing the interrogations of two operatives of Al Qaeda, government officials said Friday.

This one really has me worried. I don’t recall anyone ever really successfully going after the C.I.A. Have you? They really worry me. I’m convinced they operate outside of any laws we know of. Therefore, I want to see Congress really go after them … that is, if Congress is still working for us.

Today’s Washington Post says President Bush (All Praise His Holy Name) was unaware of these tapes, but was aware in some fashion:

The White House said that President Bush was unaware of the tapes or their destruction until this week, but administration sources acknowledged last night that longtime Bush aide Harriet E. Miers knew of the tapes’ existence and told CIA officials that she opposed their destruction.

So, somebody knew something, but we’re not quite sure who knew what, and we’re pretty certain the President knew nothing.

That sounds about right.

The real question is, “Does Congress have any balls to go after this?”

Really, that is what should be our concern.

Are we simply going to listen to Harry Reid ramble on about generalities? Or will someone attempt to really find out what happened here?

Listen: I really hope this is the “Land of the Free,” and “Home of the Brave.” I don’t want to go to sleep thinking that this is really the “Land Ruled By The C.I.A.” and “The Men In Black,” whoever the Hell they are.

“Give me liberty,” or something….


The End of America – Possible, Says Naomi Wolf

Don Hazen has an interview with Naomi Wolf on AlterNet regarding her new book, The End of America: Letter of Warning to a Young Patriot.  In it, she warns that history may indeed repeat itself.

When discussing the Bush Administration, it’s easy to glibly toss around names like “Hitler” and “Mussolini”, and throw in a word like “fascism”, but Wolf raises some alarming concerns about the future of our democracy.

What exactly was going on when Hitler and Mussolini were coming to power?  Are there any comparisons with what is happening in America today, and has been for the past several years?

Wolf does not see much hope for a transparency in the next Presidential election:

We would be naive given the historical patterns to have hope that there’s going to be a transparent, accountable election in 2008. There are various ways the blueprint indicates how events are much more likely to play out. Historically, the months leading up to the national election are likely to be unstable.

What classically happens is either there will be a period of provocation, and we have a history of this in the United States — agitators who are dressed as or act like activist voter registration workers, anti-war marchers … but who engage in actual violence, torch property, assault police officers. And that scares people. People are much less likely to vote for change when they’re scared, and it gives them the excuse to crack down.

In addition, I’m concerned about the 2007 Defense Authorization Act, which makes it much easier for the president to declare martial law.

What are the plans for 2008?  Lower gas prices, and heightened terrorist threat alerts?  Martial Law in the United States?


Is Facebook violating the law?

Interesting question arising in the state of New York.  A new add-on to Facebook allows users to send ads to other users with pictures attached.  The legal question is, are these so-called “Social Ads” illegal, or violations of privacy?

That seems like a funny question to ask on a Social Networking site, but it is worthy of consideration.  Facebook users do agree to certain terms and conditions.  However, does that translate to a loss of all privacy?  And what if the user is a minor?

The New York Times quotes William McGeveran, a professor at the University of Minnesota Law School, who quotes the law in a blog post:

One who appropriates to his own use or benefit the name or likeness of another is subject to liability to the other for an invasion of his privacy.

The NYTimes post says Chris Kelly, chief privacy officer for Facebook, called and said McGeveran’s interpretation is too broad.  But McGeveran writes:

I don’t see how broad general consent to share one’s information translates into the specific written consent necessary for advertisers to use one’s name (and often picture) under this law. And the introduction of Facebook’s sales pitch about the program to advertisers leaves little doubt that individual users’ identities will be appropriated for the benefit of Facebook and advertisers alike.

I have a suspicion that Facebook will win this bout in the short term, but there will be a backlash as people begin to realize how precious privacy is.  Some Facebook users put much personal information online.  How long until we realize we’ve given up too much?

And rest assured that Facebook users are taking notice.  One user already created a group to protest: “Facebook’s Social Ads Are Illegal.”

At this writing, the group had one member.

Everyone else was probably busy updating their status.