Glenn,

Excellent work!

You are in a very unique position to own this story. You can run with it as far as you want. The republican Party won't touch it because it completely destroys the "War on Terror" narrative. The democratic Party won't touch it because it gives credibility to 9/11 conspiracy, mocks the FISA "compromise", and marginalizes the Obama's "Look to future, not to the past" narrative to the point of caricature.

The MSM won't touch it because the democratic Party and the republican Party won't touch it.

I look forward to see where this goes. You have made one hell of a great start. Thank you.

----

To those that support a journalist shield law. The first question that must be answered before all others--

Do you support a law for the licensing and designation of "official" journalists by the government?

There is no other way to implement a "journalist" shield law. If it applies to everyone then it is just a "shield law" that will also completely destroy our current understanding of the judicial system and make it almost impossible for a court or government to compel testimony or evidence.

If you want the government to determine who is and who isn't a journalist, then this is not a bug in the "journalist shield law" but a feature.

If you see a journalist shield law as a way to limit government power, I see one hell of an uphill climb to find benefits that will outweigh the power granted to the government through the licensing of journalists.

Noted a comment that linked to a Judy Miller story.

Many simialr facets to this story.

Perhaps a hook to get MSM involved in the story is to suggest parallels to the Judy Miller case?

Journo's just LOVE writing about themselves.

Of course, this is case is far worse - murder investigations, obstruction of justice, and illegal domestic propaganda/PSY-OPS building cases for war and intimidation of Congress.

Today's article in the LATimes shows us one route to getting the FBI's information on the anthrax killings out into the open. It appears the only route left for many of the government's secrets, since Congress refuses to dig appropriately:

And the lawyer for the family of another victim, Bob Stevens, said they felt both vindicated at the apparent confirmation of their belief that a government biodefense worker was behind the attacks, and suspicious that Ivins might be a fall guy in a bungled investigation.

"He fits the profile that we had advanced, but they would like to see the evidence," said lawyer Richard D. Schuler, of West Palm Beach, Fla. He has filed a lawsuit, pending in the Florida Supreme Court, seeking damages from the government for the wife and three children of Stevens, a photo editor for the Sun tabloid who died after inhaling anthrax sent to the Boca Raton, Fla., offices of American Media Inc.

"The family definitely wants to be able to see the evidence that the FBI has accumulated, that they're not just trying to make this guy a scapegoat . . . allowing them to close their file and be done with it," Schuler said.

Link: http://tinyurl.com/5j2ucm

I fully expect the government to claim "state secrets" everywhere they can, but a lawsuit such as this may well be the best route to getting everything the FBI has put into the record. Ironically enough, I think that process gets easier if the FBI declares the case closed. They would have much less justification for withholding what they have.

Because of this lawsuit and the questions being raised by many outside the M$M, I would be very surprised if the FBI actually closes the case this week. If they keep the investigation open, they can claim that disclosing what they have will hinder the investigation.

Maybe retroactive immunity for everyone at Battelle and Ft. Detrick will be suggested by Cass Sunstein as a way for us to put this unfortunate event behind us. After all, we can't run around criminalizing the use of anthrax to get balky Democrats on board for important legislation.

If Ivins' name was "Abdul" or rhymed with "Hussein," the NRO would be screaming themselves blue in the face, and insisting their attention in no way derived from race or nationality, nuh-uh, that all they care about are grave threats to national security.

The anthrax letters were addressed to Daschle and Leahy. Why those two in particular?

At the time, Daschle was the Senate Majority leader and Leahy was head of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Both were identified in the media as holding up the proposed Patriot Act (signed into law on October 26, 2001) because of concerns that it would violate civil liberties.

Conclusion? Whoever did this was trying to push through the Patriot Act!

Now if somebody thought it was a good idea to have a “New Pearl Harbour” like 9-11, mightn’t they think that getting the Patriot Act though in the aftermath was also critically important?

....don't worry about Ross's future, he'll soon be "FOX news' newest coup: we stole Brian Ross from ABC, just like we got Brit Hume, two of the most respected journalists covering Washington....", and with a raise to boot....

Curious to see the brave ideologues at the National Review and The Corner are wholly ignoring this story. Those "journalists" are partying hard about Rush Limbaugh's 20th anniversary, but finding the truth about the anthrax scare, bio-terrorism and the state of America's national defense are now largely distractions and inconveniences not worth mentioning.

You Rock It!

Glennzilla indeed.

I'm beginning to wonder why I go read (almost) anybody else. I like emptywheel a lot but not being a lawyer I don't know what half the abbreviations are! She needs to have a glossary.

You know I'm really not a conspiracy theorist type though when I was young I was much more inclined that way. I guess I subscribe to the idea that where there is smoke there might be some embers. This administration however has all but destroyed that carefully constructed "rational" response ability.

There is a conflagration and I think I need to go to the dollar store and stock up on tinfoil.

All day yesterday I had the cable news channels on and listened to their chatter on this issue. There was be a huge outpouring of near unanimous certainty of case closed. Not necessarily said in those words but you heard it. My response was this is ridiculous, very fishy. Then the reports of what the Shrink said about him brought me up short.It just seems utterly transparent! WHAT?

When did she say it, who did she sy it to? Isn't there an ethical obligation to disclose violent intent? Particularly when she knows where he works and what he does? If she did why was he still there? How long have they been "closing in on him?"

Very, Very suspicious.

The shock of 9/11 brought a certain patriotism out that had been dormant for a long time, at least I felt that way... sort of shocked out of my complacency, shaking my head about politicians and going about my life. . I remember people telling me there was something rotten in Denmark- that it was staged, all of the 0/11 conspiracy theories. I was horrified thinking anyone would think someone/our government would participate/perpetrate in something so heinous. I was living in Maine at the time and there is a big base in Bangor. A friend hinted about jets scrambled etc but never told me the whole story.

I thought they were all crazy.

NOW?

I am sad to say I do not put anything past these people. Nothing. ESPECIALLY after reading the PNAC manifesto. Wish I still had access to that, it is now offline. In any case the whole thing about how it would take a very long time to implement their "vision" unless/without a catastrophe on the order of Pearl Harbor "happened" has always stuck in my head... not saying they did it... but there are embers there for sure.

In any case I would have no problem believing that this, the Anthrax event was a false flag operation. I'm going over to ABC site and write in to Ross demanding explanations. I wonder how many people are doing that... hopefully they are being flooded with outrage.

also going to write my Congresspeople.I'm proud to say I live in Rep Holt's district.

As an aside, where is Obama on this issue?

So many things happen he does not weigh in on. It is very disturbing. I remember in one of the debates I think he once again criticzed Bill Clinton and said his administration was one of the most secretive in history and he, by comparison was for transparent government and would have everything going on shown on C-Span.

Why are we not hearing anything else about that? This would be a great place to start talking about it agaiin... a transparent investigation etc.

I don't really believe him to tell you the truth. After Fisa not much I believe that he says. Another " Will Say and Do anything to get elected" politician. Ironic that, he used that meme against HRC continually.

OH, and this is OT but I can't get ift off my mind.

it seems odd to me that during the Papa Bush administration we had a Savings and Loan meltdown-- with one of the brothers, Ned? somehow involved all over the place. Details escape me... and now we have this banking and financial meltdown.

Gotta get some tinfoil and make a new hat on this one.

LOL

Sorry this is so long... and again Glenn, Thanks so much for the fine work you are doing.

I am always amazed.