Last week, Attorney General Eric Holder left no question about the Administration’s support of the abusive treatment of Aaron Swartz by US Attorney Carmen Ortiz and Deputy US Attorney Stephen Heymann. Heymann was previously linked to a suicide in another prosecution. We have discussed the abusive prosecution earlier and Swartz’s suicide after months of unrelenting threats and coercion. Holder heralded the treatment of Swartz as an example of the “good use of prosecutorial discretion.” Swartz’s girlfriend has come forward to denounce Holder and the Obama Administration for its misrepresentations in the case.
Ortiz previously tried to dampen criticism with a statement that misrepresented facts in the case.
Holder repeated his solemn obligation to prosecute crimes but that fervent belief in the rule of law was missing when Obama promised CIA officials that no one would be prosecuted for torture. It was missing when Holder and his aides found no ability to prosecute anyone for the torture program. Of course, torture is not just a federal crime but a war crime, but it did not rise to the level of releasing academic papers for free from a collection that MIT later released to the public for free.
Holder and Ortiz sought 35 years for Swartz and amended the charges to add new counts before his suicide.
In his March 6 testimony, Holder responded to a question for Republican Senator John Cornyn about Swartz’s prosecution. Most Democrats have remained silent in support of the Obama Administration. Holder insisted that the 18 month nightmare for Swartz was just good prosecution work on display. Holder repeated Ortiz’s claim that the prosecutors were just beside themselves trying to avoid a harsh punishment in the face of an unreasonable Swartz:
As I’ve talked to the people who have looked into this matter, these news reports about what he was actually facing is not consistent with what the interaction was between the government and Mr. Swartz. A plea offer was made to him of 3 months, before the indictment. This case could have been resolved with a plea of 3 months. After the indictment, an offer was made and he could plead and serve 4 months. Even after that, a plea offer was made, of a range of zero to 6 months, that he would be able to argue for a probationary sentence. The government would be able to argue for up to a period of 6 months. There was never any intention for him to go to jail for a period longer than 3, 4, potentially 5 month range.
As noted earlier, this ignores the fact that the Administration added charges and could have reached a plea without jail time or dropped charges. Instead, they demanded jail time for Swartz. Moreover, while Holder seems confused why people are mentioning 35 years, it was his department that crowed about the potential sentence when announcing its high-profile prosecution:
AARON SWARTZ, 24, was charged in an indictment with wire fraud, computer fraud, unlawfully obtaining information from a protected computer, and recklessly damaging a protected computer. If convicted on these charges, SWARTZ faces up to 35 years in prison, to be followed by three years of supervised release, restitution, forfeiture and a fine of up to $1 million.
Swartz’s girlfriend issued a stinging rebuke:
“Eric Holder and the Department of Justice are clearly trying to mislead the Senate and the public. Holder claims that Aaron was only facing months in prison while Heymann and Ortiz were actively pursuing a penalty of 7 years if the case went to trial. If you believe you’re innocent, you should not be coerced into accepting a plea bargain that marks you as a felon for life, just because prosecutors want to boast about taking a scalp. The discrepancy between the plea deal and the amount of prison time prosecutors said they would pursue at trial violates the DOJ’s own guidelines in this regard. Holder is trying to engage in revisionist history at the same time he claims that the strict sentences pursued by prosecutors were a ‘good use of prosecutorial discretion.’
The missing prosecutorial discretion is when the Administration decided not to drop the charges when it became obvious that MIT decided the documents should be made free to the public. Yet, Holder believes radically overcharging a person who acted without desire for personal gain was “good prosecutorial discretion.” I mean, it is not like he did something minor like torture, right?
Source: Techdirt
“We have now entered The Twilight Zone. Cue the music. Look for Rod Serling to step around the corner any moment.”
——-
Just when we entered The Twilight Zone is a matter of perspective. 😉
If this was 1946 and we were at the Nuremburg War Tribunals, Herr Holder would be in the dock for his conduct regarding Aaron and the statements Herr Holder made as quoted in this article. Google: The Judges Trial at Nuremburg. The 1933 Parallels are proceeding according to plan. Midway Bush saw the history of the Reichstag Fire and what could be done if there was a phony threat or exaggerated threat (then it was Commies now its Saudis with box cutters) and so after the Twin Towers he went forward with the Patriot Act and its progeny. Kiss your Constitution goodbye AmeriKa.
Thanks Elaine…..
Raff,
Do you endorse the fact that Holder serves at the pleasure of the President and that if Obama is displeased with his service that he has the ability to replace him? And that any actions are imputed to the president…….
OS,
Thanks for the heads up lead….. Wow….. I don’t tweet either….
Obama’s War on Whistleblowers
The president has been accused of allowing the Stuxnet leaks to help in the election, but his overarching policy has been extraordinarily tough on whistleblowing.
—By Peter Van Buren
Jun. 12, 2012
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/06/obamas-whistleblowers-stuxnet-leaks-drones
This story first appeared on the TomDispatch website.
Excerpt:
White is black and down is up. Leaks that favor the president are shoveled out regardless of national security, while national security is twisted to pummel leaks that do not favor him. Watching their boss, bureaucrats act on their own, freelancing the punishment of whistleblowers, knowing their retaliatory actions will be condoned. The United States rains Hellfire missiles down on its enemies, with the president alone sitting in judgment of who will live and who will die by his hand.
The issue of whether the White House leaked information to support the president’s reelection while crushing whistleblower leaks it disfavors shouldn’t be seen as just another O’Reilly v. Maddow sporting event. What lies at the nexus of Obama’s targeted drone killings, his self-serving leaks, and his aggressive prosecution of whistleblowers is a president who believes himself above the law, and seems convinced that he alone has a preternatural ability to determine right from wrong…
On the Other Side of the Mirror
The Obama administration has been cruelly and unusually punishing in its use of the 1917 Espionage Act to stomp on governmental leakers, truth-tellers, and whistleblowers whose disclosures do not support the president’s political ambitions. As Thomas Drake, himself a victim of Obama’s crusade against whistleblowers, told me, “This makes a mockery of the entire classification system, where political gain is now incentive for leaking and whistleblowing is incentive for prosecution.”
The Obama administration has charged more people (six) under the Espionage Act for the alleged mishandling of classified information than all past presidencies combined. (Prior to Obama, there were only three such cases in American history, one being Daniel Ellsberg, of Nixon-era Pentagon Papers fame.) The most recent Espionage Act case is that of former CIA officer John Kiriakou, charged for allegedly disclosing classified information to journalists about the horrors of waterboarding. Meanwhile, his evil twin, former CIA officer Jose Rodriguez, has a best-selling book out bragging about the success of waterboarding and his own hand in the dirty work.
Obama’s zeal in silencing leaks that don’t make him look like a superhero extends beyond the deployment of the Espionage Act into a complex legal tangle of retaliatory practices, life-destroying threats, on-the-job harassment, and firings. Lots of firings.
We have now entered The Twilight Zone. Cue the music. Look for Rod Serling to step around the corner any moment.
The DoJ is now prosecuting, in the most aggressive way possible, those who uncover criminal conspiracies among government contractors and big companies. The Barret Brown prosecution is alleged by many observers to be the direct outgrowth of the HB Gary affair, when their internal emails were made public. In this post-Patriot Act world, to reveal wrongdoing is punishable by prison, or in some cases, to cause the death of the target.
It is clear that Anonymous and Wikileaks have stepped on some very sensitive toes. When was the last time anyone ever heard of multiple governments spending millions trying to nail one guy who had consensual sex, but did not use a condom? AFIK, Sweden is the only country in the world in which casual sex without a condom is rape. How convenient.
Agree with rafflaw. Never have liked Holder. Hoped he would leave but no such luck thus far.
What is so upsetting about this is abuses such as this are never addressed or condemned. The only way to get guys like this out is to discover some form of sexual harassment/depravity or embarassing scandal that they committed and they will be thrown out in a flash to save the credibility of their superiors.
Another case that warrants attention for similar reasons is the way the Holder/Obama DoJ is going after Barret Brown, the alleged public face of the online whistleblower and activist group “Anonymous.” His story is quite convoluted, but the bottom line is that this 31 year old is facing approximately 100 years in prison. Barrett Brown does not come across as the most likeable person one might meet, but I just read an article saying the prosecutors have added more charges because he sent a Tweet that somehow endangered national security. I am not into using Twitter, but it is hard to conceive how national security can be endangered in 140 characters.
http://whowhatwhy.com/2013/02/21/the-saga-of-barrett-brown/
Google his name, and dozens of news stories about him pop up. That the FBI and DoJ are trying to shut him (and Anonymous) down is clear as daylight. He was recently sent for a mental exam, and was found competent to stand trial. No kidding. Reporter and best selling author meets the Dusky criteria. How amazing.
Despicable.
Add Bankers to the class of criminals the Obama administration will not prosecute. What a wonderful administration we have, torture, no problem, rob Billions $, no problem. Take documents that are later given away for free and we want 35 years of your life.
DISGUSTING!
Funny who Holder believes should be prosecuted. Certainly not the mega-banks. They are too big to jail. But he’ll go after little guys like Swartz and whistle-blowers with a vengeance.
*****
Rafflaw,
I agree. It IS disgusting!
Abominable …..
I can’t wait for Obama supporters to come out and support Obama….. Or…. As usual they will say nothing unless its directed at detracting attention…. Or blaming some republican….
Utter depravity. When will this man be impeached and put on trial for treason?
This is just the typical double-speak of the political class of this country. It is only to deflect the immediate criticism and nothing more. They have learned people will just forget about it in three weeks because not enough people are concerned or motivated to speak out against their actions.
Keep in mind that too many politicians or their appointed subordinates care nothing about individuals unless those individuals can benefit them politically or financially.
How do you like the obummer administration now?
People who are blamed and punished are always scapegoats. We are all one (according to scientists ) An idiot could figure out the idiocity of war and who profits from it. (Us all). War is great for business- invest your children.
This is typical bureaucratic CYA actions. The loyalty is to “their” people and not justice. That is the reason for not prosecuting war criminals too. If they had done that to US citizens in a major way, they probably would have been forced to take action, but as long as it was non-US citizens, they feel they can get away with this.
More proof that there are aliens among us. What else but an insect from an alien world would think “Reince Priebus” after sex?
Maybe if he had tortured someone, Holder would have looked the other way and Mr. Swartz would still be alive! Disgusting.