DoJ caught in contradiction
That is, the FBI (a part of the Department of Justice) concluded decisively (in its own eyes, though not in the eyes of those involved in the case) that Bruce Ivins was the scapegoat person responsible for the anthrax attacks, and when a victim sued the government, the DoJ (in its role as defense attorney for the government) filed papers that convincingly showed the FBI’s case was a house made of tissue-paper cards.
Oops! The DoJ doesn’t trust the DoJ? Now the DoJ is going for a take-back, but unfortunately the testimony showing the weaknesses of the FBI case are now public. This report in McClatchy has the story:
Rushing into court to undo a major gaffe, Justice Department lawyers defending a civil suit Tuesday retracted statements that seemed to undercut the FBI’s finding that a former Army microbiologist mailed the anthrax-filled letters that killed five people in 2001.
Although the seven-page correction, filed in federal court in Florida, addresses conflicts between lawyers in the Civil and Criminal Divisions, it does not erase depositions filed by the government that challenged the FBI’s finding that the late Bruce Ivins was the perpetrator.
The department’s legal dance stems from its two seemingly conflicting roles: backing up the FBI’s finding that Ivins, who committed suicide in July 2008, was the killer and defending an Army bio-weapons lab at Fort Detrick, Md., against allegations of negligence.
The Civil Division is attempting to limit federal liability over the death of the first anthrax victim, a Boca Raton, Fla., man whose family is seeking $50 million in damages for alleged negligence by the lab at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID).
In trying to minimize USAMRIID’s liability, government lawyers have had to walk a fine line, because the FBI says Ivins produced the anthrax powder at the facility while the civil lawyers are arguing it could have been prepared elsewhere.
Tuesday’s retraction came a day after a collaborative report by McClatchy, the Public Broadcasting Service’s “Frontline” news magazine and ProPublica, an investigative newsroom, disclosing what appeared to be an explosive Justice Department revelation. . .
Continue reading. This is very like the DoJ assurance that it would not bother those whose use of medical marijuana was in line with state laws, followed a few months later by a memo saying that those who use medical marijuana in line with state laws are liable to prosecution by the DoJ, thus killing medical marijuana dispensaries in Washington state and at least holding them up in Arizona.
And, in other Obama Administration news, Obama’s chief terrorism adviser John Brennan made the claim that drone attacks have caused no civilian casualties—none, zero, zip, bupkis—and then careful research found scores of casualties of civilians (assuming that the women and children killed were noncombatants). So naturally there’s a FOIA request for the data, and the Obama Administration has—surprise!—blocked it. I think I know why, but (speaking of contradictions) here is Obama once more contradicting his political stance of transparency. Here’s some background information with links to the substantiating reports.
