Sasamori, who now lives in Marina del Rey, Calif., said she is not angry with Americans for how World War II ended, but hates war itself and is saddened by the actions of those who made the bomb.
But she was upset about a $125-per-ticket event at the National Atomic Museum in Albuquerque on Friday.
Saturday, July 16, 2005
Is Rove The Fall Guy?
wow. judith miller evidently has done something for the free press that she never did before. by refusing to name sources and being sent to jail she has awakened a sleeping giant that doesn't seem to like being bashed by the administration. the new yawk times has been sporadic in its blunt reporting of activities undertaken by the white house and a bit blase when it came to "investigative" journalism. but now it appears that that is no longer the case. a very good, articulate (if late) editorial:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/17/opinion/17rich.html?hp
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/17/opinion/17rich.html?hp
Crap Crap Crap
it's becoming quite intriguing as this sad little story begins to spin its web farther and farther out:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/15/AR2005071502080.html
it seems that karl rove may not walk the plank after all, if multiple leaks really does pan out and bush can hand someone else's head to the axeman:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/7/16/2851/37971
and it is now looking like a bush administration attempt to knock attention away from the DNC convention before the 2004 election may have also knocked a British investigation off stride which might have resulted in stimying the recent London bomb attacks.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/15/AR2005071502080.html
it seems that karl rove may not walk the plank after all, if multiple leaks really does pan out and bush can hand someone else's head to the axeman:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/7/16/2851/37971
and it is now looking like a bush administration attempt to knock attention away from the DNC convention before the 2004 election may have also knocked a British investigation off stride which might have resulted in stimying the recent London bomb attacks.
Tower News
the latest gossip for the tower district is that the tower trust turned a bid by the people's church to buy either the tower theater or the whole property, because the trust thought it would not be conducive to the neighborhood.
also, word has it that the daily planet is being bought and turned into a 40's style nightclub complete with big band; formal attire required. supposedly this was announced on the local news last night.
i will keep listening for further updates. if any of you know more or know different, please post your comments.
also, word has it that the daily planet is being bought and turned into a 40's style nightclub complete with big band; formal attire required. supposedly this was announced on the local news last night.
i will keep listening for further updates. if any of you know more or know different, please post your comments.
Friday, July 15, 2005
Daily Rove Update
yup, i just won't let it go. karl rove is a person i have learned to love to hate. it's his idology that pushes bush's agenda. to be honest, though, i think rove's idology revolves solely around power; it has no interest in fundamentalism, democratic freedom around the world, faith-based anything, or even global hegemony. these are things that others are allowed to pursue because of his hunger for power and ability to attain it at any cost to anyone who might stand in the way of his dream. power...the power to bend people to his will, even (and especially) the president of the united states. evil exists, i think, and he is a prime example.
Karl Rove's Nondisclosure Agreement
A BUZZFLASH NEWS ALERT
Rep. Waxman released a fact sheet today that explains that the nondisclosure agreement signed by Karl Rove prohibited Mr. Rove from confirming the identity of covert CIA agent Valerie Wilson to reporters. Under the nondisclosure agreement and the applicable executive order, even "negligent" disclosures to reporters are grounds for revocation of a security clearance or dismissal.
* * *
Committee on Government ReformU.S. House of Representatives
July 15, 2005
Fact SheetToday, news reports revealed that Karl Rove, the White House Deputy Chief of Staff and the President's top political advisor, confirmed the identity of covert CIA official Valerie Plame Wilson with Robert Novak on July 8, 2003, six days before Mr. Novak published the information in a nationally syndicated column. These new disclosures have obvious relevance to the criminal investigation of Patrick Fitzgerald, the Special Counsel who is investigating whether Mr. Rove violated a criminal statute by revealing Ms. Wilson's identity as a covert CIA official.
Independent of the relevance these new disclosures have to Mr. Fitzgerald's investigation, they also have significant implications for: (1) whether Mr. Rove violated his obligations under his "Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement" and (2) whether the White House violated its obligations under Executive Order 12958. Under the nondisclosure agreement and the executive order, Mr. Rove would be subject to the loss of his security clearance or dismissal even for "negligently" disclosing Ms. Wilson's identity.
Karl Rove's Nondisclosure Agreement
Executive Order 12958 governs how federal employees are awarded security clearances in order to obtain access to classified information. It was last updated by President George W. Bush on March 25, 2003, although it has existed in some form since the Truman era. The executive order applies to any entity within the executive branch that comes into possession of classified information, including the White House. It requires employees to undergo a criminal background check, obtain training on how to protect classified information, and sign a "Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement," also known as a SF-312, promising not to reveal classified information.[1] The nondisclosure agreement signed by White House officials such as Mr. Rove states: "I will never divulge classified information to anyone" who is not authorized to receive it.[2]
The Prohibition Against "Confirming" Classified Information
Mr. Rove, through his attorney, has raised the implication that there is a distinction between releasing classified information to someone not authorized to receive it and confirming classified information from someone not authorized to have it. In fact, there is no such distinction under the nondisclosure agreement Mr. Rove signed.
One of the most basic rules of safeguarding classified information is that an official who has signed a nondisclosure agreement cannot confirm classified information obtained by a reporter. In fact, this obligation is highlighted in the "briefing booklet" that new security clearance recipients receive when they sign their nondisclosure agreements:
Before ... confirming the accuracy of what appears in the public source, the signer of the SF 312 must confirm through an authorized official that the information has, in fact, been declassified. If it has not, ... confirmation of its accuracy is also an unauthorized disclosure.[3]
The Independent Duty to Verify the Classified Status of Information
Mr. Rove's attorney has implied that if Mr. Rove learned Ms. Wilson's identity and occupation from a reporter, this somehow makes a difference in what he can say about the information. This is inaccurate. The executive order states: "Classified information shall not be declassified automatically as a result of any unauthorized disclosure of identical or similar information."[4]
Mr. Rove was not at liberty to repeat classified information he may have learned from a reporter. Instead, he had an affirmative obligation to determine whether the information had been declassified before repeating it. The briefing booklet is explicit on this point: "before disseminating the information elsewhere ... the signer of the SF 312 must confirm through an authorized official that the information has, in fact, been declassified."[5]
"Negligent" Disclosure of Classified Information
Mr. Rove's attorney has also implied that Mr. Rove's conduct should be at issue only if he intentionally or knowingly disclosed Ms. Wilson's covert status. In fact, the nondisclosure agreement and the executive order require sanctions against security clearance holders who "knowingly, willfully, or negligently" disclose classified information.[6] The sanctions for such a breach include "reprimand, suspension without pay, removal, termination of classification authority, loss or denial of access to classified information, or other sanctions."[7]
The White House Obligations Under Executive Order 12958
Under the executive order, the White House has an affirmative obligation to investigate and take remedial action separate and apart from any ongoing criminal investigation. The executive order specifically provides that when a breach occurs, each agency must "take appropriate and prompt corrective action."[8] This includes a determination of whether individual employees improperly disseminated or obtained access to classified information.
The executive order further provides that sanctions for violations are not optional. The executive order expressly provides: "Officers and employees of the United States Government ... shall be subject to appropriate sanctions if they knowingly, willfully, or negligently ... disclose to unauthorized persons information properly classified."[9]
There is no evidence that the White House complied with these requirements.
ENDNOTES
[1] Executive Order No. 12958, Classified National Security Information (as amended), sec. 4.1(a) (Mar. 28, 2003) (online here).
[2] Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement, Standard Form 312 (Prescribed by NARA/ISOO) (32 C.F.R. 2003, E.O. 12958) (PDF here).
[3] Information Security Oversight Office, National Archives and Records Administration, Briefing Booklet: Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement (Standard Form 312), at 73 (emphasis added) (PDF here).
[4] Executive Order No. 12958, sec. 1.1(b).
[5] Briefing Booklet, supra note 3, at 73.
[6] Executive Order No. 12958, sec. 5.5(b) (emphasis added).
[7] Id. at 5.5(c).
[8] Id. at 5.5(e)(1).
[9] Id. at 5.5(b).
Karl Rove's Nondisclosure Agreement
A BUZZFLASH NEWS ALERT
Rep. Waxman released a fact sheet today that explains that the nondisclosure agreement signed by Karl Rove prohibited Mr. Rove from confirming the identity of covert CIA agent Valerie Wilson to reporters. Under the nondisclosure agreement and the applicable executive order, even "negligent" disclosures to reporters are grounds for revocation of a security clearance or dismissal.
* * *
Committee on Government ReformU.S. House of Representatives
July 15, 2005
Fact SheetToday, news reports revealed that Karl Rove, the White House Deputy Chief of Staff and the President's top political advisor, confirmed the identity of covert CIA official Valerie Plame Wilson with Robert Novak on July 8, 2003, six days before Mr. Novak published the information in a nationally syndicated column. These new disclosures have obvious relevance to the criminal investigation of Patrick Fitzgerald, the Special Counsel who is investigating whether Mr. Rove violated a criminal statute by revealing Ms. Wilson's identity as a covert CIA official.
Independent of the relevance these new disclosures have to Mr. Fitzgerald's investigation, they also have significant implications for: (1) whether Mr. Rove violated his obligations under his "Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement" and (2) whether the White House violated its obligations under Executive Order 12958. Under the nondisclosure agreement and the executive order, Mr. Rove would be subject to the loss of his security clearance or dismissal even for "negligently" disclosing Ms. Wilson's identity.
Karl Rove's Nondisclosure Agreement
Executive Order 12958 governs how federal employees are awarded security clearances in order to obtain access to classified information. It was last updated by President George W. Bush on March 25, 2003, although it has existed in some form since the Truman era. The executive order applies to any entity within the executive branch that comes into possession of classified information, including the White House. It requires employees to undergo a criminal background check, obtain training on how to protect classified information, and sign a "Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement," also known as a SF-312, promising not to reveal classified information.[1] The nondisclosure agreement signed by White House officials such as Mr. Rove states: "I will never divulge classified information to anyone" who is not authorized to receive it.[2]
The Prohibition Against "Confirming" Classified Information
Mr. Rove, through his attorney, has raised the implication that there is a distinction between releasing classified information to someone not authorized to receive it and confirming classified information from someone not authorized to have it. In fact, there is no such distinction under the nondisclosure agreement Mr. Rove signed.
One of the most basic rules of safeguarding classified information is that an official who has signed a nondisclosure agreement cannot confirm classified information obtained by a reporter. In fact, this obligation is highlighted in the "briefing booklet" that new security clearance recipients receive when they sign their nondisclosure agreements:
Before ... confirming the accuracy of what appears in the public source, the signer of the SF 312 must confirm through an authorized official that the information has, in fact, been declassified. If it has not, ... confirmation of its accuracy is also an unauthorized disclosure.[3]
The Independent Duty to Verify the Classified Status of Information
Mr. Rove's attorney has implied that if Mr. Rove learned Ms. Wilson's identity and occupation from a reporter, this somehow makes a difference in what he can say about the information. This is inaccurate. The executive order states: "Classified information shall not be declassified automatically as a result of any unauthorized disclosure of identical or similar information."[4]
Mr. Rove was not at liberty to repeat classified information he may have learned from a reporter. Instead, he had an affirmative obligation to determine whether the information had been declassified before repeating it. The briefing booklet is explicit on this point: "before disseminating the information elsewhere ... the signer of the SF 312 must confirm through an authorized official that the information has, in fact, been declassified."[5]
"Negligent" Disclosure of Classified Information
Mr. Rove's attorney has also implied that Mr. Rove's conduct should be at issue only if he intentionally or knowingly disclosed Ms. Wilson's covert status. In fact, the nondisclosure agreement and the executive order require sanctions against security clearance holders who "knowingly, willfully, or negligently" disclose classified information.[6] The sanctions for such a breach include "reprimand, suspension without pay, removal, termination of classification authority, loss or denial of access to classified information, or other sanctions."[7]
The White House Obligations Under Executive Order 12958
Under the executive order, the White House has an affirmative obligation to investigate and take remedial action separate and apart from any ongoing criminal investigation. The executive order specifically provides that when a breach occurs, each agency must "take appropriate and prompt corrective action."[8] This includes a determination of whether individual employees improperly disseminated or obtained access to classified information.
The executive order further provides that sanctions for violations are not optional. The executive order expressly provides: "Officers and employees of the United States Government ... shall be subject to appropriate sanctions if they knowingly, willfully, or negligently ... disclose to unauthorized persons information properly classified."[9]
There is no evidence that the White House complied with these requirements.
ENDNOTES
[1] Executive Order No. 12958, Classified National Security Information (as amended), sec. 4.1(a) (Mar. 28, 2003) (online here).
[2] Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement, Standard Form 312 (Prescribed by NARA/ISOO) (32 C.F.R. 2003, E.O. 12958) (PDF here).
[3] Information Security Oversight Office, National Archives and Records Administration, Briefing Booklet: Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement (Standard Form 312), at 73 (emphasis added) (PDF here).
[4] Executive Order No. 12958, sec. 1.1(b).
[5] Briefing Booklet, supra note 3, at 73.
[6] Executive Order No. 12958, sec. 5.5(b) (emphasis added).
[7] Id. at 5.5(c).
[8] Id. at 5.5(e)(1).
[9] Id. at 5.5(b).
Tuesday, July 12, 2005
Fox Rocks
More crap from FOX News. Today Fox News host John Gibson said that Karl Rove should be given a "medal" for outing the identity of Valerie Plame. Gibson also said that he is glad that someone finally outed Valerie Plame.
Gibson also shared his thoughts on Joe Wilson or as Mr. Gibson likes to call him, "a peacenik".
It sounds like another partisan hack thinks that it's acceptable to disclose the name of an undercover CIA agent.
Contact John Gibson - myword@foxnews.com
CNN's Kyra Phillips: "definitely a major smear campaign going on" against Rove
CNN anchor Kyra Philips responded to a call by Democratic senators for President Bush to fire White House senior adviser Karl Rove for his alleged role in the outing of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame by saying: "definitely a major smear campaign going on."
Phillips made her comment on the July 12 edition of CNN's Live From ..., following footage of Sens. John Kerry (D-MA) and Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) calling for Rove to be fired:
KERRY: Is the value of day-to-day politics, and the value of political advice, and the value of his position greater than the national security of our country, and the protection of the identity of people, as well as their own word and their own policy? The White House's credibility is at issue here. I believe very clearly Karl Rove ought to be fired.
CLINTON: I'm nodding. [laughter]
BOB FRANKEN (national correspondent): And just a nod from the president, but no answer, Kyra, when he was asked about Karl Rove today at a photo op. Kyra?
PHILIPS: Bob, definitely a major smear campaign going on. I mean, what's the chances of hearing from Karl Rove? Could he speak? Could he come forward? A lot of people said that could just clear the air if he just came forward and gave the facts.
FRANKEN: Well, the White House would respond that the Democrats are involved in something akin to a smear campaign. The Democrats would only say that they're only interested in good government. And the White House says that in the context of an investigation that's ongoing Karl Rove should not speak.
whoops. AP News must be slipping. It's sounding "liberal":
http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGBRWILR1BE.html
It seems that everyone in journalism knows who outed Plame. Why they waited until the dog was down to start kicking it I might never know. From Tompaine.com comes the "turd blossom":
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/20050712/turd_blossom_must_go.php
"talking points" sent to those familiar with and sympathetic to Rove's miseries:
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Exclusive_GOP_talking_points_on_Rove_seek_to_discre_0712.html
and please don't forget the original newspaper article that outed Valerie Plame, ruined her career and put in physical jeapordy herself and all of her subordinates, associates and underground contacts:
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/robertnovak/rn20030714.shtml
why has robert novak not been convicted of conspiracy to out a CIA agent, held in contempt for not disclosing those agents responsible for leaking her name? why does he get away with appearing before a grand jury and walking? is it because he named names and the D.A. can't do anything with it based on administration pressure?
second day of the McClellan Press Conference strafing. he still won't answer, the press still won't stop asking (there may be other issues that need answers, but this one is the most fun and indicative of what we voted back into power):
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000977648
Gibson also shared his thoughts on Joe Wilson or as Mr. Gibson likes to call him, "a peacenik".
It sounds like another partisan hack thinks that it's acceptable to disclose the name of an undercover CIA agent.
Contact John Gibson - myword@foxnews.com
CNN's Kyra Phillips: "definitely a major smear campaign going on" against Rove
CNN anchor Kyra Philips responded to a call by Democratic senators for President Bush to fire White House senior adviser Karl Rove for his alleged role in the outing of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame by saying: "definitely a major smear campaign going on."
Phillips made her comment on the July 12 edition of CNN's Live From ..., following footage of Sens. John Kerry (D-MA) and Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) calling for Rove to be fired:
KERRY: Is the value of day-to-day politics, and the value of political advice, and the value of his position greater than the national security of our country, and the protection of the identity of people, as well as their own word and their own policy? The White House's credibility is at issue here. I believe very clearly Karl Rove ought to be fired.
CLINTON: I'm nodding. [laughter]
BOB FRANKEN (national correspondent): And just a nod from the president, but no answer, Kyra, when he was asked about Karl Rove today at a photo op. Kyra?
PHILIPS: Bob, definitely a major smear campaign going on. I mean, what's the chances of hearing from Karl Rove? Could he speak? Could he come forward? A lot of people said that could just clear the air if he just came forward and gave the facts.
FRANKEN: Well, the White House would respond that the Democrats are involved in something akin to a smear campaign. The Democrats would only say that they're only interested in good government. And the White House says that in the context of an investigation that's ongoing Karl Rove should not speak.
whoops. AP News must be slipping. It's sounding "liberal":
http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGBRWILR1BE.html
It seems that everyone in journalism knows who outed Plame. Why they waited until the dog was down to start kicking it I might never know. From Tompaine.com comes the "turd blossom":
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/20050712/turd_blossom_must_go.php
"talking points" sent to those familiar with and sympathetic to Rove's miseries:
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Exclusive_GOP_talking_points_on_Rove_seek_to_discre_0712.html
and please don't forget the original newspaper article that outed Valerie Plame, ruined her career and put in physical jeapordy herself and all of her subordinates, associates and underground contacts:
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/robertnovak/rn20030714.shtml
why has robert novak not been convicted of conspiracy to out a CIA agent, held in contempt for not disclosing those agents responsible for leaking her name? why does he get away with appearing before a grand jury and walking? is it because he named names and the D.A. can't do anything with it based on administration pressure?
second day of the McClellan Press Conference strafing. he still won't answer, the press still won't stop asking (there may be other issues that need answers, but this one is the most fun and indicative of what we voted back into power):
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000977648
Ahem...A Po-em
I noticed that Lecram is posting excerpts of his plays. How pretentious. How "artistic". How...Tower. In that vein, I feel I have something to offer. And so, I present you with a po-em:
That's a goddam goodlooking sandwich
she's eating all alone
enough for me and the twin I never had
and I'll have it too
if I have to break both
her glazed face and her diamond teeth
my last repast
paisley pastrami and
lettuce so latticed that it
couldn't hold its folds
ain't sittin' so pretty
like two lovers in love should
I'll break her fucking arms
the one holding the food
and the one holding his wood
and he looks like a guy
who can't get it up without-
goddam that's a goodlooking sandwich
grease slips soft and over
her busy little lips
red red meat and moist moist green
shoving their way past her gullet
musky dusky cheese and wet dripping
au jus
a Picasso of a poorboy
a thick quick slice of Van Gogh
I'll break her arms
both fucking one of them
just to force it whole
down her throat
it's that goddam goodlooking a sandwich.
That's a goddam goodlooking sandwich
she's eating all alone
enough for me and the twin I never had
and I'll have it too
if I have to break both
her glazed face and her diamond teeth
my last repast
paisley pastrami and
lettuce so latticed that it
couldn't hold its folds
ain't sittin' so pretty
like two lovers in love should
I'll break her fucking arms
the one holding the food
and the one holding his wood
and he looks like a guy
who can't get it up without-
goddam that's a goodlooking sandwich
grease slips soft and over
her busy little lips
red red meat and moist moist green
shoving their way past her gullet
musky dusky cheese and wet dripping
au jus
a Picasso of a poorboy
a thick quick slice of Van Gogh
I'll break her arms
both fucking one of them
just to force it whole
down her throat
it's that goddam goodlooking a sandwich.
Monday, July 11, 2005
Aaaaannnnddd Introducing Rove's Laaaaawwwwyyyyyeeeeerrr!
(July 11, 2005 -- 12:21 AM EDT // link // print)
Now that it's clear that Karl Rove's defense amounts to some sort of cover-blowing 'I didn't inhale' defense, I thought I'd check in a bit on what his lawyer's deal
is. Reason being, as near as I can tell, Rove attorney Robert D. Luskin has made a series of, shall we say, contradictory statements over the last week or so, each necessitated by further revelations about his client's conduct.
So I was curious: Is Robert D. Luskin the sort of lawyer who never gets caught in a fib or a misstatement on his client's behalf? Or is he a bit more fast and loose?
Well, it turns out that Luskin is a rather colorful figure with not a bad sense of humor. In 1999, when the Legal Times asked him why he was shutting down his boutique litigation firm, he quipped: "To paraphrase Hobbes: The life of a boutique is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short."
One case that jumps out at you is his representation of Stephen A. Saccoccia.
Saccoccia and his wife Donna were eventually convicted of laundering more than a hundred million dollars for various Colombian drug kingpins. Stephen is currently serving a 660 year sentence. Their racket was laundering drug money through companies which traded in precious metals.
Saccoccia was convicted in 1993. And Luskin took up his case on appeal.
Eventually the Feds got the idea that the money Saccoccia had paid Luskin and his other attorneys for their services was itself part of the $137 million in drug money he was ordered to forfeit. Now, on the face of it this seems a bit unfair since under our system everyone is entitled to good representation and how was Luskin to know it was tainted money.
Well, the prosecutors thought he should have gotten some inkling when Saccoccia started paying Luskin's attorney's fees in gold bars.
Yep, you heard that right. Luskin got paid more than $500,000 of his attorney's fees in gold bars from his client who was trying to appeal his conviction on charges that he laundered drug money through precious metals dealers. Who woulda thought that was drug money?
Luskin insisted that he "never have, and never would, knowingly accept a fee that was the proceeds of illegal activities."
But when federal prosecutors finally got a chance to depose Luskin and Saccoccia's other lawyers, they found that their lawyers' fees had come in forms "such as gold bars, cash that was dropped off at hotels and trunks of cars, and money transfers from Swiss bank accounts."
Eventually, in 1998, Luskin came to a settlement with the government in which he agreed to cough up $245,000 of the money he'd gotten from Saccoccia.
(ed.note: At first I couldn't believe that Saccoccia's Robert Luskin was the same guy Rove had defending him. The Saccoccia articles refer to Luskin as a partner in a firm called Comey Boyd & Luskin. But Luskin's bio page at Patton Boggs, where reporters working the Rove story confirm that Rove's lawyer works, makes no mention of such a firm. But a snippet in the December 20-27, 1999 Legal Times seems to settle the matter: "The D.C. litigation boutique of Comey, Boyd & Luskin is history. Name partner Robert Luskin is leaving the firm to join Patton Boggs Jan. 1.")
Late Update: Also on Luskin, look at this piece today in the Times by Adam Liptak, and see if Luskin didn't screw up and get his client in a lot of trouble by shooting off his mouth to the Journal.
Later Update: If you'd like to share your views on this, we're discussing Rove and Luskin over here at the TPMCafe politics discussion table.
-- Josh Marshall
(July 10, 2005 -- 11:04 PM EDT // link // print)
Now that it's clear that Karl Rove's defense amounts to some sort of cover-blowing 'I didn't inhale' defense, I thought I'd check in a bit on what his lawyer's deal
is. Reason being, as near as I can tell, Rove attorney Robert D. Luskin has made a series of, shall we say, contradictory statements over the last week or so, each necessitated by further revelations about his client's conduct.
So I was curious: Is Robert D. Luskin the sort of lawyer who never gets caught in a fib or a misstatement on his client's behalf? Or is he a bit more fast and loose?
Well, it turns out that Luskin is a rather colorful figure with not a bad sense of humor. In 1999, when the Legal Times asked him why he was shutting down his boutique litigation firm, he quipped: "To paraphrase Hobbes: The life of a boutique is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short."
One case that jumps out at you is his representation of Stephen A. Saccoccia.
Saccoccia and his wife Donna were eventually convicted of laundering more than a hundred million dollars for various Colombian drug kingpins. Stephen is currently serving a 660 year sentence. Their racket was laundering drug money through companies which traded in precious metals.
Saccoccia was convicted in 1993. And Luskin took up his case on appeal.
Eventually the Feds got the idea that the money Saccoccia had paid Luskin and his other attorneys for their services was itself part of the $137 million in drug money he was ordered to forfeit. Now, on the face of it this seems a bit unfair since under our system everyone is entitled to good representation and how was Luskin to know it was tainted money.
Well, the prosecutors thought he should have gotten some inkling when Saccoccia started paying Luskin's attorney's fees in gold bars.
Yep, you heard that right. Luskin got paid more than $500,000 of his attorney's fees in gold bars from his client who was trying to appeal his conviction on charges that he laundered drug money through precious metals dealers. Who woulda thought that was drug money?
Luskin insisted that he "never have, and never would, knowingly accept a fee that was the proceeds of illegal activities."
But when federal prosecutors finally got a chance to depose Luskin and Saccoccia's other lawyers, they found that their lawyers' fees had come in forms "such as gold bars, cash that was dropped off at hotels and trunks of cars, and money transfers from Swiss bank accounts."
Eventually, in 1998, Luskin came to a settlement with the government in which he agreed to cough up $245,000 of the money he'd gotten from Saccoccia.
(ed.note: At first I couldn't believe that Saccoccia's Robert Luskin was the same guy Rove had defending him. The Saccoccia articles refer to Luskin as a partner in a firm called Comey Boyd & Luskin. But Luskin's bio page at Patton Boggs, where reporters working the Rove story confirm that Rove's lawyer works, makes no mention of such a firm. But a snippet in the December 20-27, 1999 Legal Times seems to settle the matter: "The D.C. litigation boutique of Comey, Boyd & Luskin is history. Name partner Robert Luskin is leaving the firm to join Patton Boggs Jan. 1.")
Late Update: Also on Luskin, look at this piece today in the Times by Adam Liptak, and see if Luskin didn't screw up and get his client in a lot of trouble by shooting off his mouth to the Journal.
Later Update: If you'd like to share your views on this, we're discussing Rove and Luskin over here at the TPMCafe politics discussion table.
-- Josh Marshall
(July 10, 2005 -- 11:04 PM EDT // link // print)
fe fi fo fum, i smell the blood of a Rovian
so, it's heating up and the spin has only begun as has the CYA. most likely, there will be no conviction, no firing, no tar lingering on the cheek of anyone; but it's still nice to see the White House twist in the wind for once.
a short history of scottie's dance steps:
http://www.swingstateproject.com/2005/07/scott_mcclellan_1.php
a short history of scottie's dance steps:
http://www.swingstateproject.com/2005/07/scott_mcclellan_1.php
"the president wants to get to the bottom of this"
very fun excerpts of today's white house press corps briefing. makes you wonder if the reporters get together in the green room and lay bets on who can be the most annoying to scottie:
http://jabbs.blogspot.com/2005/07/nine-days-later-white-house-press.html
http://jabbs.blogspot.com/2005/07/nine-days-later-white-house-press.html
Sunday, July 10, 2005
Steven Spielberg Gettin' Historical Again
Spielberg's next movie is described here:
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1525239,00.html
and a prominent blogger (ha ha, no, not me) gives his two (not ten) cents about the uproar in the conservative camps that has started already:
http://jameswolcott.com/archives/2005/07/oliver_stone_an.php
note for anyone who has seen Angels In America: its writer is involved in this new movie as well.
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1525239,00.html
and a prominent blogger (ha ha, no, not me) gives his two (not ten) cents about the uproar in the conservative camps that has started already:
http://jameswolcott.com/archives/2005/07/oliver_stone_an.php
note for anyone who has seen Angels In America: its writer is involved in this new movie as well.
The Twenty Third Qualm
THE TWENTY THIRD QUALM
President Bush is my shepherd; I shall dwell in fear.
He causeth the trees to be cut down in national forests.
He sendeth earth movers into the virgin wilderness.
He restoreth my insecurity.
He leadeth me in the paths of international disgrace for his ego's sake.
Yea, though I walk through the valleys of pollution and war,
I will find no exit, whilst thou art in office.
The tax cuts for the wealthy and thy media control they discomfort me.
Thou preparest an agenda of deception in the guise of religion.
Thou annointest my head with foreign oil.
My health insurance runneth out.
Surely meglomania and false patriotism shall follow me all the
remaining days of thy term in office.
author unknown
President Bush is my shepherd; I shall dwell in fear.
He causeth the trees to be cut down in national forests.
He sendeth earth movers into the virgin wilderness.
He restoreth my insecurity.
He leadeth me in the paths of international disgrace for his ego's sake.
Yea, though I walk through the valleys of pollution and war,
I will find no exit, whilst thou art in office.
The tax cuts for the wealthy and thy media control they discomfort me.
Thou preparest an agenda of deception in the guise of religion.
Thou annointest my head with foreign oil.
My health insurance runneth out.
Surely meglomania and false patriotism shall follow me all the
remaining days of thy term in office.
author unknown
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
