Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Sibel will NOT go away! Motion to boot Judge Walton off case.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
wiggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-22-06 08:14 PM
Original message
Sibel will NOT go away! Motion to boot Judge Walton off case.
Her determination is amazing. The information she has must be mind-blowing....

Former FBI whistleblower files against judge in Libby trial over secrecy issues

Ron Brynaert
Published: Wednesday March 22, 2006

Former FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds filed a motion asking for the recusal of the judge assigned to her case because of his alleged "bias to secrecy," RAW STORY has learned.

more at:

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Former_FBI_whistleblower_files_against_judge_0322.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Independent_Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-22-06 08:19 PM
Response to Original message
1. K&R!
Edited on Wed Mar-22-06 08:21 PM by Independent_Liberal
Sibel is one of my favorites!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stillcool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-22-06 08:23 PM
Response to Original message
2. wow....same judge....
and blacked out his entire financial records?...

Edmonds' motion for recusal is partially based on Judge Walton’s financial disclosure statement for 2003, which is almost completely redacted save for the date of the filing and the judge's name (pdf link). According to Edmonds, this redacted statement "appears to be in violation of the Ethics in Government Act." The Act requires judges and other high-level judicial branch officials to file annual financial disclosure reports as a check on potential conflicts of interest.

According to a 2004 Government Accountability Office study (link), judges were allowed in only 55 instances from 1999 through 2002 to completely withhold information from their statements on security grounds.

The motion for recusal (pdf link) ties Judge Walton's redacted statements to an alleged "deference to secrecy in his rulings on Edmonds' previous claims where he was the presiding judge, and the unusual operations of the case assignment system concerning Edmonds' cases."


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HysteryDiagnosis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-22-06 08:54 PM
Response to Original message
3. WTF is this gag order bullsh*t??? Who the #!&!!$$$ has the right to
tell someone they can't talk about a thing, ESPECIALLY WHEN it involves national security or rather the reasons for the lack of it.... I swear to the stars and comets above that I would leak and shout and tell everyone who would listen EVERYTHING I KNEW. They could all pretty much go to hell if they didn't like the truth coming out, or is that too much to ask for in a "democratic" nation????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wiggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-23-06 09:27 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. Another thing
..there are numerous senators and 9/11 commissioners who have heard her whole story, including the parts about money laundering/drugs/foreign countries and high officials going to jail, and who have not been hinting, leaking, talking, lobbying for Sibel, or bringing lawsuits. Sibel is really, really trying. These other guys are hiding, and if Sibel's information comes out and if it's as explosive as generally believed, these cowards are going to have a lot of explaining to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Babel_17 Donating Member (948 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-22-06 09:13 PM
Response to Original message
4. Seriously, am I alone in thinking ....
she's still breathing air and walking around free because she's let the wiretappers hear her reference the numerous copies of the information she knows that are located overseas?

I'm thinking hours and hours of video testimony of all the stuff she's prohibited from saying.

If they off her it would be nearly as bad for our kleptomaniacal theocracy as having her testify before congress. Getting murdered lends credibility.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QuettaKid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-23-06 09:38 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. that woman is a TRUE Patriot.
can't say enough good things about her..... the whole house of cards may come tumbling down because of her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-23-06 09:48 AM
Response to Original message
7. One of Martin Luther King, Jr's
favorite poems, by "that noble bard of yesterday, James Russell Lowell," was often quoted at the end of his speeches. In fact, King used it to close his most important speech, "A Time to Break Silence (Beyond Vietnam)."

"Once to every man and nation,
Comes the moment to decide
In the strife of truth and falsehood
For the good or evil side;"

Sibel Edmonds needs to decide if she is going to follow the letter of the law, or if she is going to do the right thing. Great figures like Martin should be her guide.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oilwellian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-23-06 10:49 AM
Response to Original message
8. I had no idea she had judge reassignments SO MANY TIMES
The convoluted route the Edmonds’ case has taken to Judge Reggie Walton’s courtroom appears suspicious and creates the perception that the system has been manipulated. Edmonds’ First Amendment case, filed in July 2002, was assigned to Judge James Robertson who recently resigned from the FISA Court in protest of warrantless NSA eavesdropping. In February 2003, Edmonds’ case was removed from Judge Robertson and reassigned to Judge Walton with no explanation provided. Edmonds filed a motion to request the case to be transferred from Judge Walton, and be assigned to Judge Ellen Huvelle who had been presiding over Edmonds’ related FOIA case since July 2002. The court granted Edmonds’ request and transferred her case to Judge Huvelle. However, two days later, Edmonds’ case was removed from Judge Huvelle and reassigned to Judge Walton with no further information or reason provided. On July 6, 2004, Judge Walton granted the government’s motion to dismiss based on the assertion of the State Secrets Privilege.

In March 2005, Edmonds filed in D.C. Federal Court a separate claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act, and the case was randomly assigned to Judge James Robertson. However, five days later, Edmonds’ claim was removed from Judge Robertson and reassigned to Judge Reggie Walton. This set of facts reveals apparent violations of local rules governing the assignment of cases.

SOMEONE has worked very hard to make sure Ms. Edmonds case would be heard by a member of the Bush crime family. How conveeeeenient. :eyes:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ufomammut Donating Member (576 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-23-06 10:51 AM
Response to Original message
9. This woman is brave PATRIOT
Can't believe she hasn't been "Silkwooded" yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 02:36 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC