Sen. Leahy to hold hearing on FBI & anthrax, Sept. 17, 9:30am

Please check for original posting by USAPatriot with active links.

The Senate Committee on the Judiciary has scheduled a hearing on “Oversight of the Federal Bureau of Investigation” for Wednesday, September 17, 2008 at 9:30 a.m. in Room 216 of the Senate Hart Office Building.
The Honorable Robert S. Mueller, III
Federal Bureau of Investigation
United States Department of Justice
Washington, DC

Salon Magazine's Glenn Greenwald interviewed FBI critic Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) on August 20.

"GG: Speaking of that, on August 7th, just a couple weeks ago, you wrote a letter to Attorney General Mukasey, and FBI Director Mueller, in which you stated:
This has been a long investigation, full of missteps and mistakes. There's been too much secrecy up to this point, and it deserves a full and thorough vetting. There are clearly a lot of unanswered questions, and it's time to start a dialog so we get answers.
And you then listed 18 questions that you have about the investigation, the last one of which was, quote: "What additional documents will be released, if any, and when will they be released?" Now, first of all, have you received a response from either the Justice Department or the FBI to that letter?

"CG: No, and I assume one of the reasons I haven't is because in the meantime, the FBI has consented to a hearing that Senator Leahy's having, and a hearing is one instrument of doing it. At the time I wrote the letter, I didn't know whether there'd be a hearing or not, and I wanted to make sure, as one individual senator who's not chairman of the Judiciary Committee, that I would do my own oversight and get answers to questions. It could be that the forum for answering my letter would be the hearing, but I want to make sure my 18 questions are answered one way or the other, and I want to ensure that every document's out."

Please contact Sen. Leahy and others on the Judiciary Committee with your own questions and comments.

Anthrax could be the back door to break the 9/11 lie wide open.

Francis A Boyle - Alex Jones Show - 8/21/2008

August 21, 2008

Alex Jones talks with Francis A. Boyle, professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law and bioweapons advisor for the Bush Senior administration about his belief the anthrax attacks were orchestrated to frighten Senators into supporting the USA Patriot Act.

Grassley's 18 Questions....

Read more for the full text of the letter. ~

The Honorable Michael B. Mukasey
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.,
Washington, DC 20530

The Honorable Robert S. Mueller, Director
Federal Bureau of Investigation
935 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20535

Dear Attorney General Mukasey and Director Mueller:

Thank you for ensuring that Congressional staff received an advanced briefing yesterday of the information released to the public in the Amerithrax investigation. The three affidavits provided represent an important, but small first step toward providing Congress and the public a full accounting of the evidence gathered by the FBI.

At yesterday's briefing, Justice Department and FBI officials invited follow-up questions after there had been time to read the affidavits. Indeed, there are many important questions to be answered about the FBI's seven-year investigation, the basis for its conclusion that Dr. Bruce Ivins conducted the attacks alone, and the events leading to his suicide. To begin this inquiry, please provide complete and detailed answers to the following questions:

1. What is the date (month and year) that the FBI determined that the anthrax came from a specified flask in Ivins's lab ("RMR-1029")?

2. When (month and year) did the FBI determine that Dr. Hatfill never had access to the anthrax used in the killings?

3. How did the FBI determine that Dr. Hatfill did not have access to the anthrax used in the killings? Was that because the FBI determined that Dr. Hatfill no longer worked at USAMRIID when the powder was made?

4. Was Dr. Hatfill or his counsel informed that Dr. Hatfill had been cleared of any involvement in the anthrax killings before the Department of Justice offered a settlement to him? Was he informed before signing the settlement agreement with him? If not, please explain why not.

5. Was Judge Walton (the judge overseeing the Privacy Act litigation) ever informed that Dr. Hatfill had been eliminated as a suspect in the anthrax killings? If so, when. If not, please explain why not.

6. Was Dr. Ivins ever polygraphed in the course of the investigation? If so, please provide the dates and results of the exam(s). If not, please explain why not.

7. Of the more than 100 people who had access to RMR 1029, how many were provided custody of samples sent outside Ft. Detrick? Of those, how many samples were provided to foreign laboratories?

8. If those with access to samples of RMR 1029 in places other than Ft. Detrick had used the sample to produce additional quantities of anthrax, would that anthrax appear distinguishable from RMR 1029?

9. How can the FBI be sure that none of the samples sent to other labs were used to create additional quantities of anthrax that would appear distinguishable from RMR 1029?

10. Please describe the methodology and results of any oxygen isotope measurements taken to determine the source of water used to grow the spores used in the anthrax attacks.

11. Was there video equipment which would record the activities of Dr. Ivins at Ft. Detrick on the late nights he was there on the dates surrounding the mailings? If so, please describe what examination of the video revealed.

12. When did the FBI first learn of Dr. Ivins' late-night activity in the lab around the time of the attacks? If this is powerful circumstantial evidence of his guilt, then why did this information not lead the FBI to focus attention on him, rather than Dr. Hatfill, much sooner in the investigation?

13. When did the FBI first learn that Dr. Ivins was prescribed medications for various symptoms of mental illness? If this is circumstantial evidence of his guilt, then why did this information not lead the FBI to focus attention on him, rather than Dr. Hatfill, much sooner in the investigation? Of the 100 individuals who had access to RMR 1029, were any others found to suffer from mental illness, be under the care of a mental health professional, or prescribed anti-depressant/anti-psychotic medications? If so, how many?

14. What role did the FBI play in conducting and updating the background examination of Dr. Ivins in order for him to have clearance and work with deadly pathogens at Ft. Detrick?

15. After the FBI identified Dr. Ivins as the sole suspect, why was he not detained? Did the U.S. Attorney's Office object to seeking an arrest or material witness warrant? If not, did anyone at FBI order a slower approach to arresting Ivins?

16. Had an indictment of Dr. Ivins been drafted before his death? If so, what additional information did it contain beyond the affidavits already released to the public? If not, then when, if ever, had a decision been made to seek an indictment from the grand jury?

17. According to family members, FBI agents publicly confronted and accused Dr. Ivins of the attacks, showed pictures of the victims to his daughter, and offered the $2.5 million reward to his son in the months leading up to his suicide. These aggressive, overt surveillance techniques appear similar to those used on Dr. Hatfill with the apparent purpose of intimidation rather than legitimate investigation. Please describe whether and to what degree there is any truth to these claims.

18. What additional documents will be released, if any, and when will they be released?

Orangutan, thanks for posting this!

I'm hoping C-SPAN will carry it. Check their radio or TV schedule tomorrow morning.

Sen. Grassley, we're counting on you to expose this blatant cover-up by the FBI, regardless of the consequences. An innocent man is crying out from his grave.

Mueller: cat that ate the canary

I put a a couple posts on my blog about this in the past 24 hours. Upshot: Congress isn't going to help us and even Salon blogger Glenn Greenwald is waffling in his condemnation of the FBI.

That said, I think that possibly, just possibly, I was able to influence the hearings a bit. I sent an email to Sen. Leahy on 8/31 that reads:

Dear Senator Leahy,

I'm very pleased to hear that you are planning an investigation into the FBI's investigation of the anthrax attacks. I have pasted below my article from Dissident Voice about this issue, in which I make connections which I have seen no where else in the media.

Well worth your time to read.

Thank you for taking the lead on this issue.


Sheila Casey

In the hearings yesterday, Leahy started right out talking about Dugway and Battelle, and as far as I know this hasn't been widely reported. Then I noticed in the transcript posted on Emptywheel that he references the NTY Times article from Sept 4, 2001 when he says:

"I'm aware of the article from September 4 reporting a program of secret research on biological weapons, project has been embraced by Bush Administration. Weapons used against Americans were right after that. "

Most people probably had no idea what Leahy was talking about, he didn't give a year or even a publication. But I knew, and he may have gotten that from the article I sent him.

So I like to think I had some small effect on these hearings. OTOH he is a Senator with a big staff -- he could have well dug this stuff up without me!