Isn't what Tamm did illegal and isn't the rule of law to be applied impartially? Or just when the "right" people say so?

Well then, by that reasoning, you should be leading the pack in calling for Bush, Cheney, Gonzales, and the others to be prosecuted immediately for high crimes and misdemeanors, right? Surely then you believe those who commissioned the crimes are much more important to convict and imprison than the one who revealed it was going on, right?

Right?

Right?

Right?

You're a complete and utter idiot, right?

Right?

Right.

I mean, it's well known that the program was illegal, at least at the time it was.

I wouldn't be surprised to find out that disclosure of classified programs is illegal, whether or not they are legal, but it would seem that there would then be no way to hold people accountable?

the details...but the name "Colleen Crowley" comes to mind. [FBI?]

BTW, while I absolutely cannot afford to spend any extra money on nonessentials right now given my current situation, I am going to turn in my change jar if I have to in order to send $100 to Tamm's defense fund.

I hope many others here will support this true American Hero. After the courage he's shown in upholding the ideals of this country, it's the least we can do for him in his hour of need.

the details, but the name "Colleen Crowley" comes to mind [FBI]?

A little O/T sorry, but

I have a love/hate relationship with the word "sanction".

It's one of those English words that can mean one thing AND the opposite.

Like "oversight".

As LondonLad would say: Bollox!

wrt: "sanction": That always strikes me as well...very strange.

Either during the interview or off interview, make a suggestion that Tamm create a way for Internet donations rather than having to send a check and letter. He needs a lot of money to defend himself against taxpayer money (damn it hurts to write that), and a website and soliciting emails would give him a chance to raise considerably more funds. All the major "lefty" sites could help with a DONATE icon, including UT.

Not to minimize the unforgivable pain the Mukasey DOJ has put him through, but as a practical matter, can't he just run out the clock at this point? Is there anything more they can realistically do to him between now and 1/20? I would hope the new team would (at the very least) decline to prosecute.

And an ironic legal pun:

In common law, a writ of qui tam is a writ whereby a private individual who assists a prosecution can receive all or part of any penalty imposed. Its name is an abbreviation of the Latin phrase qui tam pro domino rege quam pro se ipso in hac parte sequitur, meaning "[he] who sues in this matter for the king as [well as] for himself."

In a just world, Tam would be rewarded rather than punished. Perhaps someday we will live in one.

From one of the best lawyer blogs in this universe, a real problem is revealed.

http://blog.simplejustice.us/2009/01/05/when-the-defense-becomes-part-of-the-solution.aspx or click sig

...

As the public defenders relieve the pressure on the system by walking their charges through the courthouse and into the jails at an ever-increasingly brisk pace, the need for outside criminal defense will subside and the efficient conviction of miscreants will allow for the smooth imposition of "justice" without the disruption that old-time criminal defense lawyers would cause. The few who hold the position and maintain the archaic belief in defending their clients, raising a ruckus about their budgets and caseload, will be replaced by nouveau defenders who make swift work of the problem.

The private indigent defense bar will no longer be needed. Thanks for all your help, but it's now time to find other work. The retained bar will still have a few high profile cases, over which they will fight tooth and nail, meaning by ever-more offensive marketing and lower fees, but when there isn't enough work to keep them in Brioni, they too will quietly walk away toward wills and estates. And the government will find no one left to disagree with them, making for a very effective criminal justice system from their point of view.

...

Sound crazy? Check back in five or ten years and see the consequences of Shirk's Disease. It can be stopped, but only if we recognize the symptoms.

If you have not heard of elected Public Defender Matt Shirk, then you need to Google that bastard!

Once again Glenn, you are right on target. However astute your column is, you offer the peons no solutions. I come away from these types of articles unmanned by a sense of overwhelming futility. If the supposed "good guys" are just as bad as the "bad guys," where do we go?

I have asked before that you give guidance, some small method of a mass protest mechanism to help us redirect America from these continuing tragedies. What do we DO?

sort of shit is to abolish the DoJ?

Glenn and most of the posters here, I'm sure, would claim that the Department can be reformed under Eric Holder and President Obama. I say piffle. No it can't.

The problem is institutionalized to the point that "reform" in any substantive sense really isn't possible anymore. There may -- or may not -- be a slight change of investigatory/prosecutorial emphasis under the Incoming Regime, but the problem of politicized and selective investigation and prosecution, and most especially the Two-Tiered Justice System that seeks and destroys lower level lawbreakers and protects and defends high status lawbreakers is part of the institutional ethic, concept and behavior of the Department from top to bottom. And Our Government -- Executive and Legislative together, enabled and enhanced by the Courts -- has sought and has succeeded in making that state of affairs routine and accepted.

Tamm does not in any way disprove that argument; if anything, he is a demonstration of it, as clear as crystal, loud as a bell.

Under the circumstances, the Department is unreformable and activists should be calling for its abolition and replacement.

Of course that'll be the day...