Recent Appearances...

Warning: Undefined array key "rbname" in /data/rantburg.com/www/pgrecentorg.php on line 14
Hello !
Recent Appearances...

Home Front: Politix

How to Deal with Activist Judges

2025-03-12

[TennesseeStar] ‘We’ve Got to Stop This Judicial Resistance’: Craig Huey Offers Solution for Congress to Block Activist Judges from Shutting Down Trump’s Executive Actions

Craig Huey, California refugee and marketing expert, offered a solution that Congress could pursue to bar activist leftist judges from issuing rulings designed to block executive actions made by President Donald Trump.

Since Trump assumed office, many of his executive orders have been blocked from taking effect by rulings issued by district court judges.

For example, Trump’s executive order pausing funding of foreign aid assistance programs was struck down by a single judge, U.S. District Judge Amir H. Ali, last month.

In another example, Trump’s executive order directing the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to take down webpages promoting gender ideology was also struck down by a single judge, U.S. District Judge John Bates.

Huey said the conduct by the judges ruling to block Trump’s executive actions is “judicial resistance.”

“These judges at a district level are trying to impose their own political ideology on the entire nation,” Huey explained on Tuesday’s edition of The Michael Patrick Leahy Show.

“They are legislating from the bench with their own political ideology. They do not look at the Constitution. They do what they interpret to be the right thing to do in their political, ideological eyes,” Huey added.

Huey said the transformation of the judiciary began under the Obama administration and ramped up during the Biden administration.

“What has happened is that the judiciary has been transformed by Obama, by Biden, where they have cherry picked ideologues. Now, that’s contrary to what Trump has done in appointing strict constructionists who look at the Constitution, look at the law, and whether they agree with it or not, they interpret it. That’s what you want,” Huey said.

“These judicial activists are part of the judicial resistance to stop anything that Trump is doing,” Huey added.

Huey said there are two ways to stop activist judges from overriding executive actions – impeachment and congressional action on restructuring the district court process.

“We’ve got to be able to hold these judges accountable. Again, these are people who are Democrat donors, they go to political rallies. They’re activists in a black suit, and they got a gavel. This is a battle for the soul of America with these judges. So Andy Ogles and several other congressmen are willing to impeach some of these activist judges, and I think that is an incredible spotlight on what is going on in the abuse of the judiciary. That is one thing that can be done,” Huey explained.

“The second thing, we have to take a look at how to restructure this. One district court cannot make a decision for the whole United States. That’s what’s happening. So Congress can reconfigure so that you have, say, three district court judges who have to be in agreement, and then you’d have a fast track way to the Supreme Court,” Huey added.

Huey said he believes restructuring the district courts so that a majority of three district judges must be in agreement to block an executive action is “the most logical way to be able to ensure a judiciary does not abuse its own power.”

Link

Government Corruption

‘Impeachathon’ Ensnares Growing Number Of ‘Get-Trump’ Judges

2025-03-01

[DailyWire] House Republicans have now unveiled articles of impeachment against three federal judges who have issued rulings against the President Donald Trump

...dictatorial for repealing some (but not all) of the diktats of his predecessor, misogynistic because he likes pretty girls, homophobic because he doesn't think gender bending should be mandatory, truly a man for all seasons...
’s second-term administration in what has been dubbed an "impeachathon" of "judicial activists."

In a post to X on Thursday, Rep. Andy Ogles (R-TN) revealed an impeachment resolution accusing United States District Judge Amir Ali, a Biden appointee, of "high crimes and misdemeanors" for blocking the Trump administration’s foreign aid pause.

The measure faults Ali for an order that "without merit marginalized the President’s Article II authority, which vests power to conduct foreign policy ... and has further compromised the President’s fiduciary obligation to review federal agencies and programs."

Ogles introduced his resolution after Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts granted the Trump administration’s request to put on hold Ali’s order commanding the Executive Branch to pay an estimated $2 billion in foreign assistance funds, per CBS News.

Rep. Eli Crane (R-AZ) previously introduced articles of impeachment against U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer, an Obama appointee, for restricting Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) team from accessing a Treasury payment system.

Ogles then unveiled impeachment articles against U.S. District Judge John Bates, an appointee of former President George W. Bush, who ordered health agencies to restore data after Trump acted to stop the government from promoting "gender ideology," The Hill reported.

Judges have been subject to impeachment proceedings over the course of United States history. Some cases have resulted in a guilty verdict and removal from office. It remains to be seen whether this new push will be taken up by the Republican leadership in the House.

Rep. Andrew Clyde (R-GA) has also said he was drafting articles of impeachment for U.S. District Judge John McConnell Jr., another Obama appointee, who ordered the Trump administration to unfreeze payments for grants and other programs, according to NPR.

Ogles posted a video to X on Thursday in which he provides an update on the "Impeachathon" using a chart of "Known Get-Trump Judicial Activists" that showed the four judges under "Articles Drafted/In Process" and seven others in a "Wanted" section.

"James Madison, Founding Father, warned us about an overactive — a too powerful, quite frankly — a woke judiciary, and we see it coming to pass," Ogles said, adding later he was placing the sign so people would know, "We’re going to hold these judges accountable."

🚀IMPEACHATHON UPDATE:
More rogue judges are targeting President Trump.

I'm turning up the heat. pic.twitter.com/EMYZCKniUf
— Rep. Andy Ogles (@RepOgles) February 27, 2025

Link

Government Corruption

Obama-Appointed Judge Halts Democrat Attempts to Stop DOGE Review of Federal Agencies

2025-02-19

[PJMedia] A federal judge appointed by former President Barack Obama ruled that 14 Democratic state attorneys general had failed to prove that granting Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) access to federal data or firing federal employees had caused "imminent harm."

On February 12, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan refused to impose an immediate temporary restraining order that would have imposed wide-ranging restrictions on DOGE's investigations into government corruption.

Chutkan, who is not a known ally of President Donald Trump, was the same judge who previously oversaw the now-dismissed Jan. 6 criminal proceedings against him.

"Plaintiffs legitimately call into question what appears to be the unchecked authority of an unelected individual and an entity that was not created by Congress and over which it has no oversight," wrote Chutkan in her ruling.

"In these circumstances, it must be indisputable that this court acts within the bounds of its authority. Accordingly, it cannot issue a TRO, especially one as wide-ranging as Plaintiffs request, without clear evidence of imminent, irreparable harm to these Plaintiffs. The current record does not meet that standard," she continued.

However, Chutkan suggested in a footnote that the Justice Department may have stretched the truth a bit regarding DOGE’s authority over federal personnel issues.

“Defense counsel is reminded of their duty to make truthful representations to the court,” she wrote.

A coalition of 14 Democrat states, led by New Mexico Attorney General Raul Torrez, filed a lawsuit last week, accusing Musk's appointment to run DOGE unconstitutional, as he was not confirmed by the Senate. State attorneys general from Arizona, California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington joined Torrez.

"There is no greater threat to democracy than the accumulation of state power in the hands of a single, unelected individual," complained Torrez.

The Democrat plaintiffs argued that Musk's appointment by President Trump to oversee DOGE as a private citizen represented an "unlawful delegation of executive power." They claimed that his presence in DOGE caused "widespread disruption" for government employees working for various federal departments and government contractors.

Despite her initial sympathy towards the plaintiffs, Chulkan noted that their initial arguments failed to adequately meet the high legal standard of "imminent harm" required for a temporary restraining order.

"The things I’m hearing are troubling indeed, but I have to have a record and findings of fact before I issue something," Chutkan said the day before her ruling.

Trump gave Musk a mandate to lead DOGE as a temporary agency that would reorganize the federal government by streamlining operations, terminating employees who have no useful roles, and slashing trillions in wasteful spending, but this quickly drew legal challenges from the Washington establishment.

DOGE has targeted critical data at the Office of Personnel Management, the Department of Education, the Department of Labor, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Energy, the Department of Transportation, and the Department of Commerce.

The Justice Department has made the argument that DOGE staffers were "detailed" U.S. government employees who were entitled to access to government data under provisions of the Economy Act.

A lawyer with the DOJ, Harry Graver, explained to Chutkan during arguments that there are “very clear paper trails” for all the actions DOGE has taken and that there’s “not a single instance” of Musk misusing his presidential appointment as a non-federal employee to interfere with government operations.

“Nowhere have my friends offered a shroud to show that Elon Musk has any formal or actual authority to make any government decision,” Graver said.

“I think you stretch too far,” Chutkan responded, adding, “I disagree with you there.”

After the hearing, the DOJ released an official declaration clarifying that Musk was not a DOGE employee but was instead a senior adviser to President Trump.

Chutkan's decision is the latest blow to Democrat attempts to temporarily restrict DOGE's access to data on government employees in seven federal agencies. The lawsuit is one out of a dozen Democrat-led legal challenges filed across the country, in an attempt to block or restrict DOGE's operations.

Last Friday, U.S. District Judge John Bates, a George W. Bush appointee, also rejected a separate request to prevent Musk's team from accessing records of three government agencies, ruling that the plaintiffs "have not shown a substantial likelihood that [DOGE] is not an agency."

Another Obama appointee, U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss, ruled on Monday that he would not block DOGE from reviewing student borrowing data at the Department of Education.

Link

Government Corruption

Judge won't block DOGE from accessing Labor Department systems

2025-02-09

[THEHILL] A federal judge Friday evening refused to block the Labor Department from giving Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) access to confidential systems or firing employees for refusing to hand over the credentials.

U.S. District Judge John Bates found the plaintiffs hadn't show enough injury to have legal standing to bring the lawsuit.

''This data includes the medical and financial records of millions of Americans,'' wrote Bates. ''But on the current record, plaintiffs have failed to establish standing. So although the Court harbors concerns about defendants' alleged conduct, it must deny plaintiffs' motion at this time.''

The lawsuit, filed Wednesday by the AFL-CIO and several of its affiliate government employee unions, claims that giving Musk's team access to the Labor Department systems violates federal privacy law and is without any legal authority.

At a hearing earlier in the day, Bates voiced concerns about the DOGE team's access and its broader efforts to rapidly implant itself across the federal bureaucracy in the early weeks of President Trump's administration.

''A couple people who, according to public reports, are very young, who have never been in the federal government, never had any training with respect to the hands of confidential information — you're asking me to just put absolute confidence in the fact that nothing inappropriate will happen,'' said Bates, an appointee of the younger former President Bush.

''Doesn't seem to me to be a setup that would very easily give me confidence that there will be no misadventure,'' the judge continued, laughing under his breath.

Bates's ruling doesn't reach whether the access is unlawful, however, by finding the challengers had no legal standing.

Heading into the weekend, the plaintiffs have indicated they will expand their lawsuit to other areas where DOGE has implanted, including the Department of Health and Human Services and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. They also are considering adding the Education Department but may instead defer to Public Citizen's lawsuit on that front, which has already commenced.

Link

Home Front: Politix

Federal judge rules not to immediately block DOGE access to Labor Department systems

2025-02-08

[FoxNews] A federal judge on Friday said he would not immediately block the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, from accessing systems at the Labor Department.

U.S. District Judge John Bates said he had concerns about DOGE but that the labor unions who sued to block their access to the systems have not yet provided evidence of any legal injury.

"Although the court harbors concerns about defendants’ alleged conduct, it must deny plaintiffs’ motion at this time," Bates wrote.

The ruling comes after the Trump administration agreed earlier this week that DOGE would not receive access to the Labor Department until this court decision.

The Justice Department said there are three DOGE staffers assigned to the Labor Department and reporting to its acting secretary, although they have been made special government employees and are required to follow the law with any sensitive information about corporations or workers as they conduct a review.

Musk’s DOGE team had gained access to sensitive Treasury Department payment systems, although a judge has since blocked that access to Treasury records containing sensitive personal data such as Social Security and bank account numbers for millions of Americans. DOGE has also largely dismantled the U.S. Agency for International Development and offered financial incentives to millions of federal workers to resign.

"At every step, DOGE is violating multiple laws, from constitutional limits on executive power, to laws protecting civil servants from arbitrary threats and adverse action, to crucial protections for government data collected and stored on hundreds of millions of Americans," labor union lawyers represented by the ~~Democrat~~ advocacy group Democracy Forward wrote.

Link

Government Corruption

Another Late Addition to the J6 Hunt - Pink Beret

2023-04-28

[Epoch Times] The FBI has added the mysterious woman known on social media as "Pink Beret" to its Jan. 6 most-wanted list, two months after a defense attorney suggested the woman could be a government cooperator who lured a defendant into the Capitol.

The FBI’s photo gallery of most-wanted individuals now lists Pink Beret as No. 537. The Bureau posted five photographs of the woman from Jan. 6, 2021, on its website and on social media.

Although the woman and her actions on Jan. 6 have been widely discussed on social media, she was not added to the FBI wanted page until April 27, some 27 months after the Capitol incursion.

On Feb. 27, defense attorney Kira Anne West filed a motion with U.S. District Judge John Bates in Washington saying that she needs to identify the Pink Beret woman to fully defend her client, Darrell Neely.

Link

Home Front: Politix

Obama resists Republican bid to see gun smuggling operation documents

2013-04-25

A U.S. Justice Department lawyer said on Wednesday that if a judge agreed to consider a Republican bid to get administration documents related to a botched operation against gun-trafficking it would prompt a flood of requests for courts to referee Washington political disputes.

President Barack Obama is resisting a congressional subpoena for documents related to how the administration responded to the revelation of the failed operation known as "Fast and Furious" on the U.S.- Mexican border. It has already turned over thousands of pages of documents about the operation itself.

Justice Department lawyer Ian Gershengorn told a hearing the matter was best left to the give-and-take of the U.S. government's two elected branches, the president and Congress, and should not be a matter for the courts.

"That is how it has worked for 225 years," said Gershengorn, referring to the ratification of the U.S. Constitution in 1788.
U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson was skeptical and told Gershengorn, "There are three branches here, not just two." She did not say how she would rule, but questioned Gershengorn for more than twice as long as she did House of Representatives lawyer Kerry Kircher.

Kircher told Jackson that if she did not intervene, presidents could withhold documents from Congress at will with no consequence and thwart oversight of government agencies.

The fear about more subpoena cases is overblown, he added. "You will not be flooded by lawsuits," Kircher said.

Both sides agree that the question of whether Jackson will step in goes to the heart of how the U.S. president and Congress interact with each other.

Lawyers cited court precedents from the Watergate era and from a more recent document fight in which Democratic lawmakers sent a subpoena to aides of President George W. Bush.

In a decision that now helps Republicans, U.S. District Judge John Bates ruled in 2008 that he did have the authority to enforce a subpoena by congressional Democrats in connection with the firing of nine U.S. attorneys.

In the "Fast and Furious" operation federal agents trying to build a case against big gun traffickers supplying firearms to Mexican drug cartels did not immediately prosecute low-level traffickers even as they bought 2,000 potentially illegal guns.

The operation came to light after two of the firearms were found in Arizona at the scene of a shooting where a U.S. Border Patrol agent died.

Gun rights activists denounced the operation as part of a broader gun control agenda by the Obama administration and urged Republicans to investigate.

A report by the Justice Department inspector general faulted the operation's tactics but dismissed accusations of wrongdoing against U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder.

Link

Home Front: WoT

Judge tosses bid to block assassination of al-Awlaki

2010-12-08

[Yahoo/AP] A judge on Tuesday threw out a lawsuit aimed at preventing the United States from targeting anti-American holy man Anwar al-Awlaki for death, but questioned whether a president or his aides can unilaterally order a U.S. citizen assassinated for terrorist activity.
Why not if he's engaged in warfare against the U.S.? What's the diffo between al-Awlaki and Yamamoto?
U.S. District Judge John Bates said in an 83-page opinion that he does not have the authority to review the president's military decisions and al-Awlaki's father does not have the legal right to sue to stop the United States from killing his son.
"Case dismissed..." But instead he said:
But Bates also said the "unique and extraordinary case" raised vital considerations of national security and for military and foreign affairs.
Only if you go counterintuitively looking for them...
Among the "stark and perplexing questions" Bates said the case raises
"Yes, they're stark! Unrelieved white against deepest black! That's why I'm so perplexed! I can't quite make out the nuances, even though I'm sure they're there...
is why courts have authority to approve surveillance of Americans overseas but not their killing.
The courts have until recently kept their distance from the military chain of command...
And he questioned whether the president or his advisers can order the liquidation of a U.S. citizen without "any form of judicial process whatsoever, based on the mere assertion that he is a dangerous member of a terrorist organization."
Probably from the time the intended victim assumes operational control of an enemy unit he should find himself on the wax list, whether he has a lawyer or not.
"The serious issues regarding the merits of the alleged authorization of the assassination of a U.S. citizen overseas must await another day or another nonjudicial forum," wrote Bates, an appointee of President George W. Bush and an Army veteran.
Because there are some things the courts aren't in charge of.

Link

Arabia

Awlaki's father says CIA "kill list" unconstitutional

2010-11-10

[Al Arabiya] A U.S. judge held a hearing Monday on CIA targeting of key terrorist suspects as a lawyer for the father of radical U.S.-Yemeni holy man Anwar al-Awlaki argued it was unconstitutional for his son to be on a "kill list."

U.S. District Judge John Bates heard arguments in the case on the same day that a video of Awlaki calling for the killing of Americans "without hesitation" was posted on cut-thoat websites.

President Barack B.O. Obama's administration has refused to officially acknowledge the existence of a assassination program but sources have told AFP that Awlaki is on a "capture or kill list."
Nasser al-Awlaki argues that his son, an American citizen suspected of being a leader of al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and of instigating a string of attacks against the United States, still has a constitutional right to due process.

Jameel Jaffer, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union, which along with the Center for Constitutional Rights has taken Awlaki's case, accused the U.S. government of imposing the death penalty without trial.

The administration is empowered to use lethal force against American citizens deemed an imminent threat to national security and wants the case thrown out on the basis that such matters are not the realm of the courts.

"Your honor, if an injunction is issued here, it provides to the leader of al-Qaeda (in the Arabian Peninsula) the ability to continue planning operations" against the United States, a government lawyer said.

Yemeni authorities, under mounting U.S. pressure to fight al-Qaeda after a foiled air cargo bomb plot, charged Awlaqi last week with alleged ties to al-Qaeda and ordered his arrest by any means possible.

The Yemen-based branch of al-Qaeda has grabbed credit for the parcel bomb plot and said it was also behind the September downing of an American cargo plane in Dubai, according to the SITE Intelligence Group.

Link

Home Front: WoT

Bush assassin suspect suing U.S.?

2005-02-25

The family of a 23-year-old Muslim scholar accused of plotting with al-Qaida to kill President Bush said yesterday they want to sue the Bush administration for allowing their son's detention and alleged torture in a Saudi prison. Ahmed Abu Ali "was tortured on orders of the USA; they are monsters," his mother, Faten, said outside a federal courtroom.

The young man's father, Omar, said, "The Saudi government are slaves of the Americans" and the U.S. government is lying when it says his son was under Saudi control for the 20 months before he was flown to the United States and charged.

An indictment filed Tuesday alleges that Abu Ali discussed assassinating Bush, conducting a terrorist attack in the United States and establishing an al-Qaida cell here. More than 100 of his supporters ridiculed the judge during the reading of the charges against Ali.

Born in Houston and raised in Virginia, he was valedictorian of the Islamic Saudi Academy in Alexandria, Va., then went to Saudi Arabia to study. The school is funded and controlled by the Saudi government, which propagates a rigidly anti-Western strain of Islam, a WorldNetDaily investigation has shown. The academy teaches Wahhabism through textbooks that condemn Jews and Christians as infidels and enemies of Islam. The Saudi government funds the school, which has a sister campus in Fairfax, Va. "It is a school that is under the auspices of the Saudi Embassy," said Ali al-Ahmed, executive director of the Washington-based Saudi Institute, a leading Saudi opposition group. "So the minister of education appoints the principal of the school, and the teachers are paid by the Saudi government."

He says many of the academy's textbooks he has reviewed contain passages promoting hatred of non-Muslims. For example, the 11th-grade text says one sign of the Day of Judgment will be when Muslims fight and kill Jews, who will hide behind trees that say: "Oh Muslim, oh servant of God, here is a Jew hiding behind me. Come here and kill him."

Al-Ahmed, a Shiite Muslim born in predominantly Sunni Muslim Saudi Arabia, says the school's religious curriculum was written by Sheik Saleh al-Fawzan, a senior member of the Saudi religious council, who he said has "encouraged war against unbelievers." Al-Fawzan has authored textbooks used in Saudi schools.

The federal indictment said that in 2002 and 2003 Abu Ali and an unidentified co-conspirator discussed plans for Abu Ali to assassinate Bush. They discussed two scenarios, the indictment said, one in which Abu Ali "would get close enough to the president to shoot him on the street" and, alternatively, "an operation in which Abu Ali would detonate a car bomb."

Federal prosecutors say Abu Ali joined an al-Qaida cell in Saudi Arabia in 2001. The alleged Bush plot occurred while he was studying in that country. His family contends that U.S. officials were behind his detention by Saudi authorities and wanted him held in that country so he could be tortured for information. A lawsuit brought on their behalf in U.S. District Court in Washington seeks to compel the government to disclose what it knows about Abu Ali and his detention.

According to the indictment, Abu Ali obtained a religious blessing from another unidentified co-conspirator to assassinate the president. One of the unidentified co-conspirators in the plot is among 19 people the Saudi government said in 2003 were seeking to launch terror attacks in that country, according to the indictment.

More than 100 supporters of Abu Ali crowded the courtroom Tuesday and laughed when the charge was read aloud alleging that he conspired to assassinate Bush. When Abu Ali asked to speak, U.S. Magistrate Liam O''Grady suggested he consult with his attorney, Ashraf Nubani. "He was tortured," Nubani told the court. "He has the evidence on his back. He was whipped. He was handcuffed for days at a time."

When Nubani offered to show the judge his back, O'Grady said that Abu Ali might be able to enter that as evidence on Thursday at a detention hearing. "I can assure you you will not suffer any torture or humiliation while in the (U.S.) marshals' custody," O'Grady said.

Abu Ali is charged with six counts and would face a maximum of 80 years in prison if convicted. The charges include conspiracy to provide material support to al-Qaida, providing material support to al-Qaida, conspiracy to provide support to terrorists, providing material support to terrorists and contributing service to al-Qaida.

In a brief court session, U.S. District Judge John Bates anticipated that the family would press the lawsuit that the government seeks to dismiss. The judge set up a schedule over the next two weeks for both sides to file more court papers. The judge wrote in December that there was "at least some circumstantial evidence that Abu Ali has been tortured during interrogations with the knowledge of the United States." In addition, Bates wrote that Abu Ali's family said a U.S. diplomat reported to them that Abu Ali said FBI agents who questioned him threatened to send him to the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Link

Arabia

More on the death of Abu Ali's co-conspirator

2005-02-25

The source of one of the most sensational accusations against an American allegedly involved in a plot to kill President Bush is dead. According to the most recent government filings in the case against Ahmed Omar Abu Ali that advocate his pretrial detention, the Virginia resident discussed a plot to kill the president with a member of Al Qaeda who was later killed in a shootout with Saudi law enforcement around September 2003. Abu Ali, 23, was charged Tuesday with the alleged plot, which prosecutors said was hatched while he studied in Saudi Arabia in 2002 and 2003. His detention hearing is scheduled for Tuesday.

The detainee's family also said Thursday they want to pursue a lawsuit accusing the administration of being behind their son's imprisonment and alleged torture in a Saudi prison. Abu Ali "was tortured on orders of the USA; they are monsters," his mother, Faten, said outside a federal courtroom. The young man's father, Omar, said, "The Saudi government are slaves of the Americans" and the U.S. government is lying when it says his son was under Saudi control for the 20 months before he was flown to the United States and charged.

The U.S. government is also revealing for the first time that items confiscated from Abu Ali's home in Falls Church, Va., in the summer of 2003 include: an undated document praising Taliban leader Mullah Omar and the Sept. 11 attacks; a book written by senior Al Qaeda official Ayman al-Zawahiri in which democracy is characterized as a "new religion that must be destroyed by war"; and audio tapes in Arabic promoting jihad. The document praising the Sept. 11 attacks says the following, according to the indictment:

"In one of the most sophisticated, well-planned attacks seen in modern times, the Twin Towers, the source of providing $5 billion in annual aid to Israel, were destroyed. And what is often conveniently forgotten is that the third plane turned the Pentagon, the symbol of American military supremacy, into a rhombus, whilst the fourth plane was shot down by the US themselves."

"The defendant's possession of these items at his residence makes it clear that even before he departed the United States for Saudi Arabia in September 2002, he already had come to embrace and support the violent ideology and objectives of Al Qaeda," the government concluded. The Justice Department did not state in the court papers that Abu Ali wrote this document, but it did say that this document and other items found in his home make it "clear that even before he departed the United States for Saudi Arabia in September 2002, he already had come to embrace and support the violent ideology and objectives of al Qaeda." The Justice Department also said Abu Ali, a U.S. citizen, should be detained pending trial because he presents an "exceptionally grave danger to the community and a serious risk of flight."

Also Wednesday, a lawmaker expressed concern that Abu Ali's alma mater could be turning out Islamic radicals. Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., questioned whether the academy from which the 23-year-old recently graduated was another example of schools funded by and linked to terrorism in the United States and abroad. Abu Ali's lawyers have expressed concern that the government's case may be based on evidence obtained through torture. At a hearing on Tuesday, Abu Ali offered to show the judge the scars on his back as proof that he was tortured by Saudi authorities. "He has the evidence on his back," lawyer Ashraf Nubani told the court. "He was whipped. He was handcuffed for days at a time."

In a brief court session Thursday, U.S. District Judge John Bates anticipated that the family would press the abuse lawsuit that the government seeks to dismiss. The judge set up a schedule over the next two weeks for both sides to file more court papers. The judge wrote in December that there was "at least some circumstantial evidence that Abu Ali has been tortured during interrogations with the knowledge of the United States." The Justice Department on Wednesday denied that Abu Ali was tortured, saying that such claims appear to be "utter fabrication."

In the Justice Department filings, the government points out that the seriousness of the charges against Abu Ali "militates strongly in favor of detention," adding that the suspect is a flight risk because he faces more than 80 years in prison and has "substantial ties overseas." In addition, the Justice Department said that Abu Ali lived in Jordan from 1993 to 1997 and that he has close family members residing there. The United States claims that Abu Ali "admitted that he possessed a Jordanian passport that he had kept secret from the United States government."

As for Abu Ali's claims of torture, the Justice Department "submits that there is no credible evidence to support those claims, and that they are untrue." The government points out that an American doctor gave Abu Ali a "thorough" physical exam on Feb. 21, after he had been transferred by the Saudi government to U.S. custody. "The doctor found no evidence of any physical mistreatment on the defendant's back or any other part of his body," the Justice Department says in the court filing. "Moreover, the doctor specifically asked the defendant if he had been abused or harmed in any way, and the defendant said no."

The Consul at the U.S. embassy in Riyadh also met with Abu Ali while he was detained in Saudi Arabia, and "on no occasion did the defendant complain of any physical or psychological mistreatment," the Justice Department said. Abu Ali had been detained for nearly two years by the Saudi Arabian government. His family sued the U.S. government shortly after his arrest there, claiming the Saudis were essentially holding him at the U.S. government's request. He was returned to the United States and made an initial appearance in U.S. District Court shortly after his arrival Tuesday at Dulles International Airport. He did not enter a plea, but his lawyer said he would plead innocent.

His father said Ahmed was born in Houston and raised in northern Virginia, just a few miles from the nation's capital. He attended the Islamic Saudi Academy and graduated as valedictorian. The private school's teachings have come under scrutiny since the Sept. 11 attacks. Federal court documents in a case against another academy graduate suspected of terrorism indicate that student discussions following Sept. 11 took an anti-American bent and that some students considered the attacks legitimate "payback" for American mistreatment of the Muslim world. Last year, the school also faced criticism for using textbooks that taught first-graders that Judaism and Christianity are false religions.

Schumer spoke to reporters Thursday, voicing the concern expressed in his letter to Bandar and the Justice Department about the school. "The Saudis have through the years set up madrassas, usually in poor countries like Indonesia ... that teach Wahabi fundamentalism," Schumer said. "In part [those teachings include] that Muslims who are not fundamentalists ought to be scorned ... and they often teach that it's [the students'] purpose to die for Allah. It looks like this school appears to be Saudi funded. I want to find out if this school was one of those maddrassas ... [because I believe] if there were no madrassas, there would have been no 9/11."

Link

Home Front: Culture Wars

Judge Denies Bid to Block Inaugural Prayer

2005-01-14

EFL.Too bad, Mike. Maybe next time. And there'll be one, won't there, asscrack...
An atheist who tried to remove "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance lost a bid Friday to bar the saying of a Christian prayer at President Bush's inauguration. U.S. District Judge John Bates said Michael Newdow's claim should be denied because he already had filed and lost a similar lawsuit in a federal appeals court in California last year.
You can't stop ME! I'll be back! You'll see! You'll see!!! I'll show ALL of you!!!
Bates also said Newdow had no legal standing to pursue his claim. Even if Newdow could show he had suffered injury because he was offended in hearing the prayer, Bates said the court did not have authority to stop the president from inviting clergy to give a religious prayer at the ceremony.
But it offends ME! ME! Don't you understand?
In a telephone interview from his home in Sacramento, Newdow said Bates had written a thoughtful opinion "but he came to the wrong conclusion." He said he planned to appeal.
What does he know?! I'm right! Doesn't he realize that! This is ME we're talking about here! Everybody's heard of ME!
Newdow argued that saying a Christian prayer at the Jan. 20 ceremony would violate the Constitution by forcing him to accept unwanted religious beliefs.
This asshole's done the impossible and made me miss Madeline Murray O'Hare.
Newdow gained widespread publicity two years ago after winning his pledge case before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, which ruled that public schools violated the separation of church and state by having students mention God.
The Supreme Court later threw out the ruling, saying Newdow could not lawfully sue because he did not have custody of his elementary school-age daughter, on whose behalf he sued. Newdow refiled the pledge suit in Sacramento federal court this month, naming eight other parents and children.
Newdow is both an emergency room physician and a lawyer and has represented himself in both legal actions.
And we all know what they say about those who represent themselves in court...

Link

Warning: Undefined property: stdClass::$T in /data/rantburg.com/www/pgrecentorg.php on line 132
-12 More