Category: Justice

“Welcome the Interest of the American People,” My Ass

No Comments

If Barack Obama “Welcomed” a discussion on NSA surveillance, he would not be fighting the tech company’s request for transparency on the spying orders:

The U.S. Justice Department has told a secret surveillance court that it opposes a request from technology companies to reveal more about the demands they receive for user information, according to court papers released on Wednesday.

Negotiations between the federal government and companies such as Google Inc have gone on for months, and while U.S. spy agencies said they plan to be more transparent, they have opposed company requests to disclose more detailed data.

The court papers were filed under seal on Monday in the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, a body originally created to curb intelligence abuses.

Microsoft Corp, Yahoo! Inc, LinkedIn Corp and Facebook Inc are among the companies seeking permission to publish statistics about the extent of the demands placed on them.

Don’t listen to what he says, watch what he does.

Greece ……… Is ……… F%$#ed

No Comments

The leaders of the Greek Fascist Golden Dawn Partywere formally charged with assault and murder:

Nikolaos Michaloliakos, the extremists’ enigmatic leader, was said to be in his pyjamas when police surrounded his home and knocked at the door. Like his second-in-command, Christos Pappas, who subsequently surrendered, and the four MPs who were hauled before a public prosecutor on Tuesday, he stands accused of murder, money-laundering, blackmail and illegal possession of arms.

But they were almost immediately kicked loose on bail:

Three senior lawmakers from Greece’s far-right Golden Dawn were freed on Wednesday pending trial on criminal charges, an unexpected setback to the government’s efforts to clamp down on a party it has labelled a neo-Nazi criminal gang.

The decision to free the men after an 18-hour court session raises questions about the solidity of the state’s case against Golden Dawn after one of its sympathisers stabbed to death an anti-fascism rapper.

Party spokesman Ilias Kasidiaris and fellow lawmakers Ilias Panagiotaros and Nikos Michos stormed out of the court to cheers of “bravo” from supporters. They kicked and shoved journalists out of the way before hailing a taxi.

“We will not back down!” Michos shouted. “You can only stop us with bullets. Even from the grave, we will rise up – know this well!”

The parallels between a certain beer hall putsch of a failed painter are rather alarming.

The Euro looks to be doing the same job of stabilizing Europe during a depression as the mindless fixation on the gold standard of the German central bank did in the 1930s.

Even as Obama and Holder Refuse to Go After the Banksters, the Judges are Getting Cross

No Comments

Well, about 99% of the population have wondered why no banksters have been criminally prosecuted, and now, judges are beginning to wonder as well:

Last week, for the first time since the financial crisis, the government faced off in court against a major bank over lending practices during the mortgage mania. Lawyers for the Justice Department contend that Countrywide Financial, a unit of Bank of America, misrepresented the quality of mortgages it sold to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the taxpayer-owned mortgage finance giants, starting in 2007. Fannie and Freddie incurred gross losses of $850 million on the defective loans and net losses of $131 million, the government said.

Bank of America disagrees. Its lawyers say that Countrywide did not defraud Fannie or Freddie.

This case is undoubtedly big, but it is only one of many mortgage-related matters inching through the judicial system. And what is notable about some of the lower-profile matters is the tone and tack that federal judges are taking in their rulings. District court judges are not generally known as flamethrowers, but some seem to be losing patience with the banks.

For decades leading up to the foreclosure debacle, plaintiffs’ lawyers say, judges generally took the side of lenders when borrowers came to court complaining of problematic lending or predatory loan servicing. Many judges still do. But some are getting tough, perhaps having seen too many examples of dubious bank behavior.

“Maybe the judges are tired of the diet of baloney sandwiches the banks have been feeding them,” said April Charney, a foreclosure defense lawyer who for years represented troubled borrowers at Jacksonville Area Legal Aid in Florida. She is now in private practice.

Two recent rulings — one in New York involving Bank of America and one in Massachusetts involving Wells Fargo — serve as examples. In the Wells Fargo case, a ruling on Sept. 17 by Judge William G. Young of Federal District Court was especially stinging. In it, he required Wells Fargo to provide him with a corporate resolution signed by its president and a majority of its board stating that they stand behind the conduct of the bank’s lawyers in the case.

The case involved a borrower named Joseph Henning who fell behind on his mortgage, which he received from Wachovia, an entity later absorbed by Wells Fargo. In a suit filed against Wells Fargo in May 2009, Mr. Henning contended that the loan was predatory.

Judge Young agreed with the bank’s argument that federal laws pre-empted the state-law remedies Mr. Henning was seeking. But he did so reluctantly, calling it a win based “on a technicality.”

Then he chastised the bank. “The disconnect between Wells Fargo’s publicly advertised face and its actual litigation conduct here could not be more extreme,” the judge wrote. “A quick visit to Wells Fargo’s Web site confirms that it vigorously promotes itself as consumer-friendly,” he continued, “a far cry from the hard-nosed win-at-any-cost stance it has adopted here.”

If Wells Fargo does not supply the corporate resolution within 30 days of the ruling, the case will go to a jury trial, the judge said.

It is notable that there is no right to jury trial here, and Wells Fargo does not want to place their fate in the hands of ordinary people who are likely to understand how

Even if prosecutors are unwilling to hold the banksters to task, it appears that some judges are no longer willing do deal with the sh%$ that banksters are trying to peddle as Shinola.

Just When You Thought that the American Military Could Not Get Any Worse on Rape in the Military

No Comments

We have a the convening authority allowing cross examination that would not be out of place in a Taliban court:

Earlier this month, the U.S. Naval Academy held a hearing into allegations that three of its football players had sexually assaulted a female midshipman. The alleged victim was a 20-year-old sophomore in April 2012 when she attended an off-campus “toga and yoga” party, drank heavily, and had alleged sexual contact with the three men while being allegedly too intoxicated to give consent. That’s a lot of “allegedlys,” but if true, the midshipman’s tale is a worn, familiar one—especially in the military, where a recent Defense Department report found that an estimated 26,000 service members experienced some form of sexual assault last year, up from 19,000 two years before. Of those incidents, 3,000 were reported; only 302 went to trial. As details from this latest hearing leak out, it’s easy to see why so many victims might prefer to disappear rather than face the punishing interrogations and institutional pressures that come with speaking up.

The woman, now 21, spent more than 20 hours on the stand, requesting several times to be excused from testifying because of exhaustion. Though, according to newspaper accounts, she said repeatedly that her memory of the night was fuzzy (she came to believe she’d been raped after she heard rumors and saw posts about her on social media), the defense lawyers pounced on discrepancies in her story as evidence of instability and deceit. They grilled her on her mental health. They inquired whether she wore a bra or underwear at the party. They quizzed her relentlessly about her oral sex technique, including how wide she opened her mouth. (Why? Because, as the New York Times reports, “oral sex would indicate the ‘active participation’ of the woman and therefore consent,” according to one of the player’s lawyers.) They asked, the paper of record continues, “whether she had apologized to another midshipman with whom she’d had intercourse for ‘being a ho.’ ”

This is shameful. And it makes an excellent case for Sen. Kirsten E. Gillibrand’s bill to remove sexual assault trials from the military chain of command, prosecuting them in civilian courts instead. Supporters of the Gillibrand proposal cite the web of conflicting loyalties between the accused, the accuser, and the judges as one reason that the current system is failing to protect victims. They argue that authorities’ first allegiance may be to the military’s reputation—that the bias is to acquit. But here’s an even simpler reason to make the switch: Civilian courts don’t allow the kind of abusive questioning described above. Lawyers in civilian courts are prohibited (or at least strongly discouraged) from asking an alleged assault victim about her sexual history. Judges in civilian courts would probably break their gavels admonishing a counsel who wanted to know how wide a woman opened her mouth for oral sex.

This is truly obscene.

I’d go further than Gillibrand, and put this in Federal Court, removing it completely from the jurisdiction of the military, because it is clear that they cannot be trusted with this.

As the Germans once said of the British, “They fight like lions, but they are led by asses.”

It appears that the same could apply to our officer corps, at least with regard to their morality.

Today’s Must Read

No Comments

Public Knowledge’s Amicus Brief in WildTangent v. Ultramercial, or more accurately their summary of their brief, where they point out that obfuscating on a patent application does not make an idea non-abstract or original.

Or, to put this in a slightly earthier way, they argue that Utramercial, the holder of the “Patent” have engaged in a strategy of, “If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullsh%$.”

Today, Public Knowledge filed an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to review an important case on software patents, WildTangent v. Ultramercial. The basic question in this case is whether a patent to a simple, abstract idea can be valid simply by tacking on enough legal and technical language to that idea, even if that extraneous language has no real meaning.

The patent in question is U.S. Patent No. 7,346,545. That patent basically describes a simple idea familiar to anyone who has watched videos on the Internet: the idea of taking a video available for purchase, and showing it for free in exchange for viewing an advertisement first.

If you’re thinking that this idea is too simple to be patented, you’re right. The specific legal concept, as the Supreme Court has said, is the “abstract idea,” which includes things like methods of financial hedging and algorithms for converting decimal to binary numbers. Abstract ideas, like laws of nature and physical phenomena, cannot be patented, because they are the “basic tools of scientific and technological work,” and “monopolization of those tools through the grant of a patent might tend to impede innovation more than it would tend to promote it”—so said our highest court last year, in Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories.

Here is the kicker:

Sometimes the courts need a little help in understanding all of this technical stuff, and that’s where we came in. Our brief took the 349-word claim of the patent (for comparison, the 349th word of this blog post is this), and reduced it to 16 lines of computer code.

I have little doubt that most everyone would agree that 16 lines of computer code is not “intricate and complex computer programming.”

As an example, here are two steps of the process claimed in the patent.

a fifth step of offering to a consumer access to the media product without charge to the consumer on the precondition that the consumer views the sponsor message;

a sixth step of receiving from the consumer a request to view the sponsor message, wherein the consumer submits said request in response to being offered access to the media product;

a seventh step of, in response to receiving the request from the consumer, facilitating the display of a sponsor message to the consumer;


For all those words, here’s the computer code that implements them:

if (window.confirm(“View ad or buy?”)) {window.alert(selected_ad.text)

For those of you unfamiliar with JavaScript, this just asks the user whether to view an advertisement (the “window.confirm” part), and if the user says yes, then the advertisement is displayed (the “window.alert” part).

How many federal judges do JavaScript?

How many have done C, or FORTRAN, or even lowly Basic?

So Ultramercial figured that if they threw enough crap against the wall, and couched it in obscure technobabble, that a technically illiterate judge will see some “there” where there is no “there”.

This is Called Catch 22

No Comments

The FISA court has said that since none of the telcos have ever challenged the collections orders, and that they are the only ones with standing to challenge these orders.

I guess that it might have something to do with the fact that the only time that a phone company resisted their demands, the government retaliated against them and threw their CEO in jail.

So, no harm, no foul, I guess:

No telecommunications company has ever challenged the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance court’s orders for bulk phone records under the Patriot Act, the court revealed on Tuesday.

The secretive Fisa court’s disclosure came inside a declassification of its legal reasoning justifying the National Security Agency’s ongoing bulk collection of Americans’ phone records.

Citing the “unprecedented disclosures” and the “ongoing public interest in this program”, Judge Claire V Eagan on 29 August not only approved the Obama administration’s request for the bulk collection of data from an unidentified telecommunications firm, but ordered it declassified. Eagan wrote that despite the “lower threshold” for government bulk surveillance under Section 215 of the Patriot Act compared to other laws, the telephone companies who have received Fisa court orders for mass customer data have not challenged the law.

“To date, no holder of records who has received an Order to produce bulk telephony metadata has challenged the legality of such an Order,” Eagan wrote. “Indeed, no recipient of any Section 215 Order has challenged the legality of such an order, despite the mechanism for doing so.”

That complicity has not been total. Before the Bush administration moved the bulk phone records collection under the authority of the Fisa court, around 2006, Qwest Communications refused to participate in the effort.

If you know what happened to Qwest, and you might understand why the telcos have never challenged the order.

Qwest lost numerous government contracts after refusing to collaborate in the Bush administration’s illegal data collection, and missed its numbers, which caused the stock to tank, and then they went after the CEO, Joe Nacchio. who was then prosecuted for insider trading on the basis of his rosy projections for the company.

See Nacchio’s allegations here: (from 2007)

Nacchio was convicted for selling shares of Qwest stock in early 2001, just before financial problems caused the company’s share price to tumble. He has claimed in court papers that he had been optimistic that Qwest would overcome weak sales because of the expected top-secret contract with the government. Nacchio said he was forbidden to mention the specifics during the trial because of secrecy restrictions, but the judge ruled that the issue was irrelevant to the charges against him.

Nacchio’s account, which places the NSA proposal at a meeting on Feb. 27, 2001, suggests that the Bush administration was seeking to enlist telecommunications firms in programs without court oversight before the terrorist attacks on New York and the Pentagon. The Sept. 11 attacks have been cited by the government as the main impetus for its warrantless surveillance efforts.

They sent him to jail for 6 years. (He actually is coming out after a bit less than 5)

Is there any wonder that none of the telcos have challenged such an order?

Even if they don’t send you to jail, supplying secure connectivity to government agencies is a particularly lucrative part of the business, and if they took the NSA to court, it would all end, and they would lose their, “Phoney Baloney Jobs,” to quote Mel Brooks.

Harrumph, indeed.

I Missed this on Tuesday

No Comments

Incumbent Brooklyn District Attorney Charles Hynes was soundly defeated in the primary by Ken Thompson.

The reason that I have an interest in what would ordinarily be a very local race is because there is a huge Haredim (ultra-orthodox Jewish) community, particularly the Satmar, and many of the leading rabbis threw their support behind him.

When juxtaposed with the very soft touch applied by to the Hynes’ office toward the Orthodox community, the implication of an electoral quid pro quo is hard to avoid.

Thompson is saying that they will have a, “DA’s office, where there will be one standard of justice for all, no matter where you come from, no matter how much money you have,” which I think is a pretty obvious shot across the bow regarding the pattern of aggressive threats toward witnesses in the Haredi community.

As an aside, I think that Hynes had an inkling that he might lose, because we have some credible allegations that one of his assistants, the, “scandal-ridden A.D.A. Michael Vecchione,” has been removing files from the office for the past few days, allegedly to prevent Thompson from reviewing them and referring them to the Bar or a court of law.

If Thompson can break the Omerta of the Orthodox community, it would be a very good thing.

Fracking Assholes Literally Think That They are Above the Law

No Comments

And no, I am not invoking Battlestar Galactica.

I am referring to the hissy fit that drillers in Pennsylvania are having about being prosecuted for illegal dumping:

Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane’s decision to prosecute a major Marcellus Shale natural-gas driller for a 2010 wastewater spill has sent shock waves through the industry.

But environmentalists Wednesday hailed the prosecution of the Exxon Mobil Corp. subsidiary as a departure from the soft treatment they say the industry has received from Pennsylvania regulators.

………

Kane’s office announced charges Tuesday against XTO Energy Inc. for discharging more than 50,000 gallons of toxic wastewater from storage tanks at a gas-well site in Lycoming County.

XTO in July settled federal civil charges over the incident by agreeing to pay a $100,000 fine and deploy a plan to improve wastewater-management practices. The consent decree included no admissions of liability.

The Fort Worth, Texas, drilling company, which Exxon acquired in 2010, said it had worked cooperatively with federal and state authorities to clean up the spilled waste, known as “produced water.” XTO excavated and removed 3,000 tons of contaminated soil from the site.

“Criminal charges are unwarranted and legally baseless because neither XTO nor any of its employees intentionally, recklessly, or negligently discharged produced water on the site,” XTO said in a statement.

Kane’s office said it did not need to prove intent to prosecute the company for crimes. XTO is charged with five counts of unlawful conduct under the Clean Streams Law and three counts of unlawful conduct under the Solid Waste Management Act.

Industry leaders said the prosecution of a company for what they called an inadvertent spill creates a hostile business environment.

Because prosecuting criminals is constitutes a “hostile business environment.”

YOU see, laws are only for the little people.

The official story from XTO also stinks to high heaven:

The XTO spill received very little public attention when it occurred.

A DEP inspector discovered wastewater leaking from an open valve on a storage tank during an unannounced visit to the Marquardt well site on Nov. 16, 2010. The wastewater spilled into a tributary of the Susquehanna River and also contaminated a spring. Pollutants were present in the stream for 65 days after the spill.

The grand jury’s presentment does not say who opened the valves on the tank or why. XTO officials at the time suggested vandals might be responsible. But it noted that the drilling site had no secondary containment, little security, and no alarm system for leaks.

Yes, “vandals”.

It’s gotta be vandals, and not some corporate drone who decided that it made business sense to just dump the water, even if every now and again you get caught and have to pay a 100 Grand fine.

A tip of the hat, to Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane.

It’s Not Like it Was Important, It’s Just an Execution

No Comments

So Florida Attorney General had a fundraising meeting, so she delayed an execution:

There is no graver responsibility and act of state government than an execution.

In Florida this week, a campaign fundraiser takes precedence.

Attorney General Pam Bondi persuaded Gov. Rick Scott to postpone an execution scheduled for tonight because it conflicted with her re-election kick-off reception.

“What’s going on down there? It’s ridiculous,” said Phyllis Novick, the Ohio mother of one of Marshall Lee Gore’s victims, when told Monday about the reason for the delay.

Gore, 50, raped, strangled and stabbed 30-year-old Robyn Novick in 1988 before dumping her body into a Miami-Dade County trash heap. Gore was also sentenced to die for the slaying of 19-year-old Susan Roark, whose body was found a few months later in Columbia County.

Gore was initially scheduled for execution in June, but the date was twice delayed because of legal skirmishes over Gore’s sanity.

I have mixed emotions.

I oppose the death penalty, I see a delay to an execution as a good thing, but postponing an execution so that you can raise money?!?!

Damn, that is cold.

Pass the Popcorn………

No Comments

Pass the Popcorn

The NRA has joined with the ACLU’s lawsuit against NSA surveillance of Americans. They are maintaining that it violates the law against maintaining a national gun registry:

The National Rifle Association has joined a lawsuit against the federal government’s sweeping surveillance program, claiming the collection of phone records and other data violates First Amendment rights and amounts to an illegal gun registry.

In supporting the American Civil Liberties Union’s lawsuit, the NRA on Wednesday filed a supporting brief arguing the National Security Agency’s datamining “could allow identification of NRA members, supporters, potential members, and other persons with whom the NRA communicates, potentially chilling their willingness to communicate with the NRA.”

The NSA’s phone database would let the government track whether gun owners called the NRA, gun stores, shooting ranges or others.
The brief also says the database “could allow the government to circumvent legal protections for Americans’ privacy, such as laws that guard against the registration of guns or gun owners,” thereby creating an illegal “national gun registry.”

The ACLU welcomed the gun group’s support.

As strange as it sounds, I welcome the NRA’s support as well.

35 Years

No Comments

This was the sentence rendered by the judge against Bradley Manning.

This is actually a mild sentence, as he is eligable for parole in about 8-1/2 years. (The military has parole, unlike civilian Federal sentences)

While the defense asked for 25 years, this is still a relatively mild sentence, particularly considering the prosecution’s request of 60 years.

Still, the fact that the ringleader of the Abu Ghraib torturers only got 6 years indicates a problem with our priorities.  The damage done to both the military, and the country, was far greater.

IMNSHO, Obama will never pardon manning.

This is a Breath of Fresh Air………

1 Comment

The SEC just settled with a hedge fund that misused funds and manipulated markets, and in addition to a fine, and a 5 year ban for the principal, they got an explicit admission of wrongdoing:

Wall Street’s regulator sent a message on Monday that it was now taking a more aggressive stance on securities settlements as it extracted its first admission of wrongdoing under a new policy.

The regulator, the Securities and Exchange Commission, said that the hedge fund manager Philip A. Falcone had agreed to admit wrongdoing and to be banned from the securities industry for at least five years to settle market manipulation accusations. As part of the settlement, he and his fund, Harbinger Capital Partners, must also pay more than $18 million.

The deal comes a month after the commission had in a rare move overruled its own enforcement staff to reject a settlement struck with Mr. Falcone and Harbinger.

That original agreement had called for a two-year ban from raising new capital and no admission of wrongdoing. It also did not include an injunction against committing fraud in the future — language common to nearly every single securities settlement.

The original settlement terms had irritated the S.E.C.’s new chairwoman, Mary Jo White, people briefed on the matter said, and frustrated many others within the agency who saw that deal as too lax.

The new, tougher terms reflect a wider policy change that Ms. White outlined this year, aiming to shift the burden of admission of guilt onto the defendant, overturning a longstanding policy of allowing defendants to “neither admit nor deny” wrongdoing.

If this is a start of a trend, then this is a big deal.

I hope that this is not just political atmospherics.

The Classic Defintion of Chutzpah, Revisited

No Comments

A number of US detainees have sued the US contractor CACI International for directing torture at the notorious Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.

The suit was dismissed, because the alleged abuse occurred in Iraq, and thus was out of the purview of the Federal Courts.

So now, CACI has counter-sued for legal fees:

Weeks after winning dismissal of a case alleging that CACI International employees directed mistreatment of Abu Ghraib detainees, the company has asked its accusers to pay a $15,580 bill for legal expenses. Lawyers for the plaintiffs, all Iraqis who served time at the prison, opposed the request in a federal court filing on Monday.

In July, CACI secured a long-fought victory when a federal judge dismissed the lawsuit against one of the company’s units, deciding that because the alleged abuse happened overseas, the U.S. District Court in Alexandria did not have jurisdiction to hear the case.

This is truly disgusting.

Fabulous!

No Comments

Pastor Scott Lively, a homophobic bigot who was one of the Americans involved in drafting, and lobbying for Uganda’s “Kill the Gays” bill, has has been sued in court for crimes against humanity:

A federal judge on Wednesday denied a motion to dismiss a crimes against humanity case brought against evangelical pastor Scott Lively of Massachusetts.

Lively is accused of violating international law by inciting the persecution of LGBT individuals in Uganda. The lawsuit was filed by the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) on behalf of Sexual Minorities of Uganda (SMUG) in 2012.

“We are gratified that the court recognized the persecution and the gravity of the danger faced by our clients as a result of Scott Lively’s actions,” CCR Attorney Pam Spees said. “Lively’s single-minded campaign has worked to criminalize their very existence, strip away their fundamental rights and threaten their physical safety.”

The lawsuit alleged that Lively aided the persecution of LGBT people in Uganda over the past decade and inspired notorious anti-LGBT legislation known as the “Kill the Gays” bill.

Here’s hoping that they take him for all he’s worth.

H/t BS at the Stellar Parthenon BBS.

More Lying Liars

No Comments

This time it’s Attorney General Eric “Place” Holder, and he is lying about prosecutions for mortgage fraud.

Not only did he puff up the about the numbers and amount of mortgage prosecutions, but the DoJ retroactively edited the transcript of his speech on this subject:

Not sure that even the Bushies ever tried pulling the “modify the text of old archived speeches a year later” trick.

Yes, this is a level of mendacity that would impress Karl Rove.

Michael Bloomberg Gets a Well Deserved Smackdown on Stop and Frisk

No Comments

Ta-Nehisi Coates nails it when he calls the judge’s ruling, “Ending Michael Bloomberg’s Racist Profiling Campaign:

As I’ve noted before, Ray Kelly and Michael Bloomberg justify the number of stops by arguing that black and Latino men commit the majority of violent crime. This position intentionally ignores the data which shows, even after controlling for crime rates, the NYPD still discriminates. It’s very important that people interested in this case understand that. And as always, anyone who is interested in the case really needs to listen to This American Life‘s reporting on Officer Adrian Schoolcraft.

He’s actually easier on the bigot Bobsey twins Kelly and Bloomberg than I have been.

I have described this as Bull Connor bullsh%$ and described it as an attempt to terrorize minorities.

This Takes Guts

No Comments

Glenn Greenwald lives in Brazil, though he regularly returns to the United States.

In response to an offer of protection from Brazilian officials, Greenwald has stated that he will not be applying for protection from US prosecution:

A Brazilian official has taken the unusual step of publicly announcing that the Brazilian government will offer Guardian writer Glenn Greenwald protection from the U.S. government after determining he risks facing legal action if he returns to the U.S.

To receive protection from Brazil, Greenwald would have to officially request it. But though he takes the risk of prosecution seriously, Greenwald tells me he has no intention of taking the Brazilian government up on the offer — and that he plans to return to the U.S. sooner than later, come what may.

“I haven’t requested any protection from the Brazilian government or any other government because, rather obviously, I’ve committed no crime — unless investigative journalism is now a felony in the U.S.,” Greenwald said via email. “But the fact that Brazilian authorities believe there is a real possibility that the U.S. would unjustly prosecute journalists for the ‘crime’ of reporting what the U.S. government is doing is a powerful indictment of the U.S.’s current image in the world — just as was the requirement that the U.S. promise it will not torture or kill Snowden if he’s returned. It’s an equally potent reflection of the massive gap in opinion between the U.S. Government and the rest of the world when it comes to how the NSA disclosures, my reporting, and Snowden are perceived.”

………

“Given that the Obama DOJ has adopted theories that would criminalize journalism in both the WikiLeaks Grand Jury proceeding and the investigation of James Rosen, given that it has waged what most observers agree is an unprecedented war on whistle-blowers, and given that several prominent political figures and journalists have called for my prosecution, I obviously take the risk seriously,” Greenwald adds. “But I take more seriously the Constitution’s guarantee of a free press in the First Amendment. So I have every intention of entering the U.S. as soon as my schedule permits and there’s a reason to do so.”

If he sets foot in the United States while Obama is president, he will be harassed, and almost certainly detained, at least briefly. (The reality will likely be worse.)

Well, That’s Mighty White of Them

No Comments

The judge at the Bradley Manning trial has issued a ruling that reduces his maximum potential sentence from 136 years:

Bradley Manning’s maximum possible sentence for leaking state secrets to WikiLeaks was cut from 136 years to a possible 90 years on Tuesday, marking a rare victory for the defence in a trial that has so far swung almost exclusively in the US government’s direction.

The judge presiding over the court martial, Colonel Denise Lind, granted the most elements of a defence motion calling for some of the 20 counts for which Manning has been found guilty to be merged on grounds that they repeat each other. In the motion, defence lawyers argued that the government had taken single acts of criminality and split them into several separate violations – thus multiplying the possible sentence.

“By dividing this ongoing act into two separate specifications,” the motion says, referring to the soldier’s transmission of the US embassy cables to WikiLeaks, “the government takes what should be a 10-year offence and makes it a 20-year offence and unfairly increases Pfc Manning’s punitive exposure”.

FYI, this isn’t justice, this is, this is the illusion of justice, and it is telling that the judge read her ruling too fast for professional stenographers to record what she said.

Silvio is Going to Jail

No Comments

Italy’s highest court has affirmed his jail sentence:

Italy’s highest court has upheld a prison sentence given to former PM Silvio Berlusconi for tax evasion.

The court also ordered a further judicial review on whether he should be banned from holding public office.

In an emotional video statement, Berlusconi denounced the decision as “based on nothing, and which deprives me of my freedom and political rights”.

The sentence cannot be appealed against further but Berlusconi, 76, is unlikely to go to jail because of his age.

The ruling by Rome’s Court of Cassation came after a three-day hearing. Berlusconi was not in court.

The former prime minister was sentenced to four years in prison at the conclusion of the trial in October last year, though this was automatically reduced to a year under a 2006 pardon law.

Berlusconi is likely to serve house arrest or carry out community service.

Hopefully, this spells the end of his political career.

Now go and break up his television monopoly.

Yadda, Yadda, Yadda, Fabulous Fab Found Liable

No Comments

Goldman Sachs mid-level minion Fabrice Tourre was found Civilly liable for fraud related to mortgage backed securities:

A federal jury found former Goldman Sachs executive Fabrice Tourre liable Thursday for duping investors about a shoddy mortgage deal on the eve of the housing market’s crash, the first major court victory for the Securities and Exchange Commission in its quest to hold Wall Street accountable for the 2008 financial crisis.

 After two days of deliberation, the jury decided Tourre — best known by his “Fabulous Fab” nickname — was liable for six of the seven claims pursued by the SEC. The agency had accused the 34-year-old Frenchman of defrauding investors out of $1 billion by selling them a financial product that was secretly designed to fail.

 The trial was one of the few to emerge from the financial crisis, and it cast Tourre as a symbol of Wall Street greed. Only twice before has the SEC brought individuals to trial in cases related to the crisis, and each time ended with lackluster results. The victory this time around is a boon for the agency, which is often criticized as a risk-averse regulator that shies away from court battles in favor of slap-on-the-wrist settlements.

 Tourre was only a mid-level executive at Goldman — not a marquee Wall Street figure, some legal experts noted. Still, the morale boost is likely to build momentum inside the agency as it pursues one of its most prominent targets yet: hedge-fund billionaire Steven A. Cohen. Last month, the agency charged Cohen with failing to properly supervise two employees who engaged in insider trading, a case that could potentially end the industry tycoon’s storied career.

Note that there is no possibility of jail time, just a fine, that will be paid after what will likely be endless appeals.

So no real possibility of  getting to testify against higher up.

There are two bits in the article that are particularly important in understanding this:

“You would think the SEC convicted the Al Capone of Wall Street today when all it did was scapegoat a single mid-level Goldman Sachs’ trader who bragged in emails to his girlfriend,” Dennis Kelleher, chief executive of a nonprofit group called Better Markets, said in a statement.

 John C. Coffee Jr., a professor at Columbia Law School, said a question still remains: “Why didn’t they go after someone important and not this sacrificial lamb?”

 ………

 Jacob Frenkel, a former SEC enforcement lawyer and former federal prosecutor, said the SEC’s victory came just in time. The five-year statute of limitations is running out on cases from the time of the financial crisis.

So,this is not a beginning, this is an end, and as that it is almost less than nothing, because it allows the banksters and Their Evil Minions™ can point to this, and claim that not everyone skated, even though all they got was a 28 year French number cruncher.

Damn.