"repeatedly lied to the court, lied to the media, breached their ethical obligations as lawyers," and violated "some of the most basic and fundamental principles of professionalism."

Wait...a Republican federal attorney said this about a Democrat????

Jesus, you just blew up my Hypocrisy Meter. It's in pieces, laying on my floor.

jolly,
it's crazier than that...Thornburgh is *a Republican* (tho' I don't know about Rush and McDevitt).

And Jake--"So, the DoJ is NOT supposed to seek indictments of Democrats anymore?"

Of course, Paul said no such thing. RTFP.

Paul, you can't "center around" something.

You can "revolve around" a thing or "center on" a thing, but you can't "center around" a thing, since by definition, you are at the center. (Duh!)

It's amazing how often this mistake appears in otherwise solid writing.

Heff, I hope you'll find "stem from" an adequate substitute.

Jake D: As for being a flight risk, I doubt it was based on the good Doctor's religion . . .

You seem to have trouble distinguishing between "Jew" as an ethnic group and "Jew" as a religious group.

Clue: these are not one and the same.

Or you are just an odiously dishonest toad.

Wait, I think that hit the nail on the head!

I was including everything from religion, ethnicity, or even political affiliation in response to the "Jew" comment -- obviously, if the good Doctor does not have the means for international travel, he's never been out of the country before, he has no friends or family outside the U.S., etc., and there's no other reason to consider him a flight risk besides the fact he's Jewish, then that would be wrong -- bail was granted, right? Since he's not still in jail, according to the news article.

Jake D 5:50 PM: I was including everything from religion, ethnicity, or even political affiliation in response to the "Jew" comment . . .

Jake D 5:05 PM: I doubt it was based on the good Doctor's religion . . .

Jake D 5:50 PM #2: I don't post anonymously . . .

You don't post honestly either.

At this point, I'm not sure how loudly the Democrats should be complaining about this sort of stuff.

After all, a viciously partisan Justice Department that goes after political enemies on trumped up or exaggerated charges could be a handy thing for Hillary to have at her disposal once the Dems take back the White House next year.

Dr. Wecht is not exactly regarded as a choir boy here in Pittsburgh. He has a long and checkered past, including past indictment in the early 80's where he was accused of embezzling from Allegheny County (I think he was acquitted).

While I love the irony in Dick Thornburg defending him, let's not have a pity party for Cyril just yet.

Good point by The Pittsburgh Kid. Dick Thornburg also defended CBS re: Rathergate, so I have no problem with attorneys vigorously representing their clients.

For the record, every single post of mine above dealt with the topic of the thread.

Lost in the thicket of this case is the curious timing Wecht's indictment and its announcement by Buchanan at a news conference. It occured on the eve of his testimony for the defense at the Colorado court martial of Chief Warrant Officer Lewis Welshofer for the alleged murder of Iraqi Maj. Gen. Abed Hamed Mowhoush. Welshofer, it was alleged, had suffocated the general while leading an interrogation to determine the whereabouts of Saddam Hussein, who was then still at large.

Testimony at the trial revealed that the CIA, Special Forces, and an Iraqi paramilitary group known as "the Scorpions" were also involved in the general's interrogation, and that he had been severely beaten two days before his death. One news account of the trial called the CIA "the ghost at the banquet"; much of the testimony was closed to reporters and sealed.

The defense argued that Mowhoush had long been suffering from heart disease, and that he died as a result of the beatings he received. So, what the jury was to make of the medical facts in the case, and the credibility of Dr. Wecht's testimony as to the manner and cause of Mowhowsh's death, were crucial to the outcome. Once Wecht's credibility was damaged by Buchanan's announcement, the Colorado jury convicted Welshofer of negligent homicide and dereliction of duty. He received a reprimand. The case was closed, and no one else was ever prosecuted for Mowhoush's death. For that matter, while Buchanan's mentor, Paul McNulty, held sway in his dual role as Deputy Attorney General and U.S. Attorney for Virginia, which had jurisdiction over alleged CIA crimes, no CIA employee or operative was ever prosecuted for the POW abuses that have been widely reported.

Cyril Wecht is a loose cannon and has been for 30 years, but he's a local character - busting him over $1800 in gas bills, come on.

Dick Thornburgh is not just any old sort-of Republican - in addition to being a US Attorney and Attorney General for 2 years, he was also Republican Governor of Pennsylvania for 8 years!

Not to excuse what it clearly a hatchet job aspects of the case by "loyal Bushies" and "Karl's Shop", I'd point out that Jerry McDevitt is a well known weasel in the legal profession who will say and do pretty much anything in the name of defending/protecting his clients. While *I* wouldn't want to say that he has a history of being an unethical and being one who is all too often closer to "truthiness" than "truthful", I'm sure others would say that.

"You might say that, I couldn't possibly say that."
-Francis Urquhart

Ok, as a Pittsburgh resident, I feel compelled to respond. First, Mary Beth Buchanan's charges relate to misappropriation of roughly $1,788 out of billings over $1.78 million. That is less than 0.1%. Actually, the number of $1,788 was put forth by Wecht's defense after over two years of time in which Mary Beth Buchanan's crack team has yet to provide a $$$ amount of the alleged misappropriation.

Next off, the day of the indictment, Mary Beth Buchanan goes on television starts accusing Dr. Wecht of body snatching and turning down deals. Months later (after the third circuit appeals court ruled it was ok for Wecht's lawyers to talk to the media), Wecht's lawyers responded to the accusations to the press. Mary Beth Buchanan retorted with a motion to have the lawyers disbarred and thrown in court. After a tirade of motions, both the actions of US Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan and Wecht's Lawyers were sent to the PA Disclipinary board of review (where they have still not ruled).

This past week, Mary Beth Buchanan attacked Dick Thornburgh for going to congress to testify. She raised in the press that it is inappropriate for Dick Thornburgh to answer a Congressional request for testimony outside of the court process. I thought Congress has an oversight role? Can an attorney really say no to congress because he/she is still in the court battle?

As for the FBI agent, Mary Beth's Office attempted to move the agent off cases and keep him out of the courtroom and the case. What has surfaced is the FBI agent was brought up on disciplinary charges for circumventing the rules of evidence procedures and forging records (not in the Wecht case but in prior cases).

I'm not saying Cyril is some sort of angel. However, if someone is using the unending resources of the federal government to go after a citizen of the US, such an individual needs to be held accountable. I do not care it you are rich, poor, young, old, etc. If the US Attorney's Office brings a lawsuit against you, good luck. By the time you even get to court, your assets are going to be drained. With a US Attorney (with an unprecedented press agent) using the media to vilify you, good luck getting a fair jury of your peers. In the end, winning a federal criminal lawsuit is an extreme longshot. That's why 97% conviction rate is what is out there and most people plead to a crime (even if they are innocent) in order to not risk getting years in jail for a crime they never committed.

Talk about using a cannon to hit a fly. The tone of Buchanan's prosecution of the defendant and attacks on anyone who dares to take sides smacks of serious overkill, in keeping with what seems to be a universal style of all Bush Co. attack dogs.
No issue, no matter how small, elicits immediate full throttle attacks and charges. Re Move On ad, or Sen Stark, or
Seigkman...endless list.

Hallmark of the true bully, btw....