ACLU Says Bush Choice for Homeland Security Head Worrisome

[struggle4progress]

Chertoff Played Key Role In Formulating Controversial 9/11 Policies
January 11, 2005

Statement of Gregory T. Nojeim
ACLU Washington Legislative Office Associate Director
Chief Legislative Counsel

<snip> He has been a vocal champion of the Bush administration’s pervasive belief that the executive branch should be free of many of the checks and balances that keep it from abusing its immense power over our lives and liberty.

His nomination as head of the Department of Homeland Security - a new and untested agency with great influence on civil liberties - means that Chertoff should be questioned aggressively to ensure his fitness for the position, and the strength of his dedication to the Bill of Rights.

This is made more imperative by the fact that, as with Attorney General-nominee Alberto Gonzales, some of Chertoff’s post-9/11 policies have been repudiated by others in the government. Namely, two reports by the Justice Department’s inspector general, released in June and December 2003, castigated Chertoff’s use of rarely enforced and minor immigration violations to hold non-citizens shortly after 9/11 for as long as possible, without bail or access to a lawyer. None of these non-citizens was found to have any connection to the 9/11 attacks.

Chertoff was also an architect of the USA Patriot Act, which has come under increasing fire from conservatives and progressives alike since its passage in 2001. <snip>

http://www.aclu.org/SafeandFree/SafeandFree.cfm?ID=17293&c=206

[miss_kitty]

1. all of his choices are worrisome

[ixion]

3. indeed...

Everything they do is troubling and despicable, IMO.

[Skidmore]

4. It's amazing how bad they are, yet Schumer seems to

think they are all good choices. What's up with Schumer these days?

[annabanana]

7. Schumer may be feeling some heat:

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-usgonz114111214jan11,0,1836277.story

Schumer sours on nominee after answers

WASHINGTON -- Sen. Charles Schumer is now uncertain whether he can vote to confirm Alberto Gonzales as attorney general because of what Schumer calls Gonzales' "lack of candor" at his confirmation hearing.

Schumer (D-N.Y.) said yesterday he had gone into last week's Senate Judiciary Committee hearing favorably disposed toward Gonzales, but said the nominee's answers on several issues lacked responsiveness.

In particular, Schumer said that Gonzales, currently the White House counsel, gave no indication he would play a conciliatory role on the controversial question of appointments to the federal bench.

[Just Me]

9. Hope that's a sign he's stepping outside his small, political box,...

,...and starting to pay attention to what the hell is happening.

I wrote him a firm (not nasty) letter concerning some of his confusing stands on recent matters. Wish I could believe it had an impact but I know I am merely one small voice among the masses.

[0007]

13. Not enough Alpo!

[democratic wing]

25. Brown nose Charlie

If his vomit-inducing performance at the swearing-in reenactment broadcast on C-Span is any indication,the senator should change his name to Schmoozer. Sucking up to Cheney like best pals;CS made some comment about candidates and 10 million dollars apparently not realizing that microphones were present along with tv cameras. I watched the entire disgusting display of our elected reps. kissing up to their masters,Cheney and Hastert,and was sickened beyond even my own comprehension.

[Comicstripper]

12. This is very true

And, sad as it is, I've come to think that this is the best we're gonna get.
I mean, the guy could be worse. He could be Kerik, Ashcroft, Gonzalez, et al.
I mean, when a nominee comes along whose grievances aren't jaw-droppingly heinous, I say we grin and bear it.
Well, put up a fuss. Block him if we've got the numbers. But save our energy for bigger gattles (there will be many)

[democratic wing]

23. Chertoff

Once the fascists are in office the battles will be over. Kiss democracy goodbye.

"And, sad as it is, I've come to think that this is the best we're gonna get.
I mean, the guy could be worse. He could be Kerik, Ashcroft, Gonzalez, et al.
I mean, when a nominee comes along whose grievances aren't jaw-droppingly heinous, I say we grin and bear it.
Well, put up a fuss. Block him if we've got the numbers. But save our energy for bigger gattles (there will be many)"

[Been Fishing]

27. We have to push back on georgie

and fight to hold on to our Civil Liberties.

If the nominee is going to rob us, we must fight back now and hard.

Forget being nice people.

[BrklynLiberal]

2. Sen Butt-kisser Schumer from NY said he is a good choice. Cannot wait

to get rid of that pissant.

[eagler]

5. And the Fuhrer tightens his grip on the Fatherland

nt

[Megahurtz]

15. I think this is exactly what's going on.

:(

[DoYouEverWonder]

21. Yep, now W is installing

the real thugs to do his dirty work. Home much longer before we're all on W's enemies list?

[Maat]

6. Very troubling, very worrisome ..

and most of what they do seems blatantly unconstitutional to me. Great - he picked this guy! He is bound and determined to install the worst totalitarian into that position.

[MADem]

8. A dispatch from Bizarro World

Where left is right, right is wrong, and up is down.

Today, both Rush Limpball's girlfriend on CNN and her counterpart on MSNBC spouted the same essential piece--that this guy is a GOOD pick for HS because (drum roll, now).....he doesn't go for TORTURE!!! Congress should love him because he doesn't have Gonzalez STINK all over him....I'm not making this up, both networks gave the same spin on the issue, one right after the next.

What do they do, come to work in the morning, have their coffee, waddle over to the fax machine, rip off the WH talking points, get into makeup, and go on the air and read that shit?

They oughta just get it out in the open, and start their reports with "Resistance is Futile." I was appalled!

[Just Me]

11. Um, actually, you described precisely what they do ->"talking points". n/t

[chomskysright]

30. ITS THE CHENEY STRATEGY!!.....

He has stated that no one could be more conservative than he is; and so everyone de facto looks more liberal standing next to him.

Same phenomenon: different faces.

Stand up Gonzales: Mr. Torturer: stand up this schmuck: NOT a torturer and therefore A-OK!!

[Cats Against Frist]

10. And from our fearless leaders, we get this:

http://www.forbes.com/work/2005/01/11/0111autofacescan04.html

Chertoff: Pleasant Surprise As Democrats Hail Bush Choice For Homeland Security

Michael Chertoff



Will two times be the charm? President George W. Bush is hoping so. On Tuesday, Bush named Judge Michael Chertoff as the next head of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Chertoff, currently a jurist who presides over the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia, had served as a federal prosecutor. Leading the U.S. Justice Department's criminal division from 2001 to 2003, he was instrumental in shaping America's legal strategies in the early aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

--snip--

This time around, Chertoff's naming was immediately hailed, and the acclaim was bipartisan: Senate Democrats also approve of the would-be secretary. "Judge Mike Chertoff has the résumé to be an excellent Homeland Security secretary, given his law enforcement background and understanding of New York's and America's neglected homeland security needs," declared U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.).

[NYC]

14. Didn't Schumer say something similar about Kerik?

I'm pretty sure he did. On the other hand, since Schumer doesn't listen to me, I no longer listen to him.

[cosmicdot]

16. "making exceptions to the Constitution on a case-by-case basis"

from June 11, 2003, "Michael Chertoff: Ashcroft's Top Gremlin -
Spreading Mischief from DoJ to the Federal Bench" By ELAINE CASSEL

... and, now to HS ...

"What's so scary about Michael? Well, besides having no judicial experience and being a right-ring radical who does not believe in the Constitution and wants to rewrite federal law and rules of procedure on an ad hoc, case by case basis, as it suits him, nothing I guess."
http://www.counterpunch.org/cassel06112003.html

I'm sure having met confirmation once already will make this a routine confirmation. Fool me once ...

[teryang]

17. Cassel's coverage of these neo fascist lawyers

...is incredible and a great public service! Homeland security indeed. This article reads like a nightmare from Nazi land.

[bling bling]

18. bling bling says America's choice for head of our country Worrisome. n/t

[hmogrief]

19. ACLU

Today I spoke via phone with an intake person at ACLU in Chicago.

Yesterday I received a phone call from a special agent for Homeland Security (for real) who demanded that I stop communicating with Health and Human Services, or else I'd be "prosecuted".

On behalf of my 80 year old mother and 84 year old step-father, I have been trying to get The Center For Medicare and Medicaid Services to enforce Medicare law

I am thus guilty of being a pain in the ass.

I explained to the intake person at ACLU {she was a very nice lady and of course she was just a volunteer] that I was not seeking legal representation etc., but that I only wanted to advise the ACLU that that DHS was being used to do the dirty work for a federal agency.

The nice lady told me that she was told that they were not interested, because it was not a free speech issue.

[struggle4progress]

20. Can you work through a Senator or Representative? eom,

[hmogrief]

33. Politicians

The case workers and legislative correspondents in Senator Durbin's office claimed that they did not understand what the problem was with the HMOs. The caseworker tolk me that she thought that I was just not being told what I wanted them to tell me. I told her that I wanted them to tell me what the law required them to tell me, but she could not distinguish the difference.

Senator Peter Fitzgerlad did not run for re-election. HIs caseworker went throught the motions, but kept referring my complaint to state agencies. Medicare issues are regulated by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services. I think that she ws probably busy packing.

Philip Crane was voted out of office. His caseworker told me that she did not understand what my problem was.

I sent all of these people ample documentation and testimony supporting my complaints. I do no think that these staff members spent much time going over it. In any case, they did not appear to be very intelligent.

I will be speaking with a caseworker in the office of my new representative, Melissa Bean. However, she has been in office a week.

Senator Barak Obama is the new senator. I think taht he is already running for president, so I do not know how much time his staff will spend on issues such as mine.

http://chicago.indymedia.org/newswire/display_any/49773

Click here to go back to the main forums.

[struggle4progress]

34. I saw a recent interview with Obama indicating he planned ...

... to focus some on constituent service.

[hmogrief]

38. Politicians

I wish that I could be optimistic. If I need to, I will contact his office. However, I wasn't kidding about the president thing.

[struggle4progress]

40. Well, there's an idea! Call his office, tell them that you think ...

... he's only interested in the Presidency and that you therefore are certain about he won't really do anything to help you. Be sure to make these accusations before he's been in the Senate even a month. For extra bonus points, be loud and obscene. Good luck!

[hmogrief]

41. Hey, come on...

I will most likely not ever be communicating with the Senator himself, but I will be dealing with a caseworker in his office.

My opinion is based on my experiences with other caseworkers over the years. I have spoken with quite a few who didn't want to be bothered with the mundane issues that the boss'es constituents brought to their attention.

To this day I have never been shunned by a U.S. representative or senator, however, I have been shunned by some of their caseworkers, interns, legislative correspondents etc.

So perhaps it would be more accurate for me to say that I am more concerned by how his popularity will affect the people in his office, rather than the man himself, because those are the people that I will be dealing with.

[struggle4progress]

42. You predict Obama's staff will stiff you, and you blame it on ...

... Obama's supposed Presidential aspirations, before even talking to his staff and before he's been in the Senate more than a couple of weeks. So, hey, come on, yerself, Bub.

[hmogrief]

43. OK

How should I present the issue to them?

[vixengrl]

22. After even the little I saw on the news I found myself saying--

"Oh, a *Big Brother* kind of guy." And I sure didn't mean working with disadvantaged kids.

[democratic wing]

24. Worrisome? You bet your ass.

An article from 2002 with Chertoff extolling the virtues of domestic spying at a Fascist Society (or Federalist Sociey,if you're into Orwell-speak) meeting. Viet Dinh was the primary author of the Patriot Act;Chertoff had a hand in it too. :puke:

"Two top Justice Department officials Friday defended the need for government agencies to aggregate large amounts of personal information in computer databases for both law enforcement and national security purposes.

Speaking on two separate panels about privacy and civil liberties at the Federalist Society, Assistant Attorney Generals Viet Dinh and Michael Chertoff both said information is a key weapon in combating terrorism.

Chertoff, head of the criminal division and a key drafter of last year's major anti-terrorism law, said in a Friday morning panel that critics of Bush administration's civil liberties record are overstating their case."


http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/1102/111502td1.htm

[Ms. Clio]

26. Of course he's worrisome

otherwise he wouldn't be the Bushista nominee.

[ozzy]

28. does not matter who Bush picks

Dem's will find something to complain about this person. as well as if Kerry had won.... his pick would be degraded by the Rep's. it is all endless fighting.

[Ms. Clio]

29. It does matter who Bush picks

You are kidding yourself if you think the Dems could even begin to run this fascist shit by a Republican-dominated Congress. Oh, the shrieking and shrilling that would resound throughout Freeperland at the thought of "Hitlery" in charge of DHS!

[ozzy]

31. that is exactly what i mean

The "shrieking and shrilling" to any Dem in charge of anything. All I see here in DU is complaining about Bush and the rep. Go to any rep. site, and all you will read is complaints about the dems. Who is right.... Who is wrong...... It is so sad each party HOPING/WAITING for the other to mess up. As it is, half the population is wishing for the US to tank. Then in 2008 when there is a Dem. president. The other half will be hoping/helping the US to tank.

[Ms. Clio]

32. It is not the same--there really are differences here

Differences in philosophy and style that are vitally important to us, the ordinary American person.

I don't believe Kerry would nominate Bernard Kerik or Michael Chertoff for DHS. I don't believe he would nominate Ashcroft for AG. I don't believe he would nominate Alberto "the Geneva Conventions are quaint" Gonzales for AG. I don't believe he would attempt to pack the federal courts with Federalist Society judges.

There is a right and a wrong here, and the rightwing nutters are wrong.

[ozzy]

35. It is the "same"

You or I have no idea who Kerry and his party would nominate for those positions. What we do know, is the Rep. would find something wrong with them. Anyways, it's thier turn. Plus if they are the wrong choices as you say. Then they will screw up and help the Dems. win in 06/08. From what I can see/read here, that is what most at DU want.

[Ms. Clio]

39. You seem to have a poor opinion of DU

Why are you here if you don't think Dems are different and believe there's no hope?

[Al-CIAda]

36. Did Bush's New Homeland Security Nominee Protect Terror-Linked Doctor from

Did Bush's New Homeland Security Nominee Protect Terror-Linked Doctor from Prosecution?
 Bernard Kerik, Michael Chertoff... Who's Next?  Tony Soprano?
Daniel Hopsicker
January 12, 2005 - Venice, FL

Michael Chertoff, appointed by President Bush to head the Homeland Security Department, may have shielded from criminal prosecution a former client suspected by law enforcement of having funneled millions of dollars directly to Osama Bin Laden while in charge of the U.S. Government’s 9.11 investigation.

Egyptian-born Dr. Magdy el-Amir, a prominent New Jersey neurologist, was at the center of terrorist intrigue in Jersey City.

-El-Amir gave money to a conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center Bombing Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman.

-His brother in Cairo was caught on tape attempting to buy weapons from an American undercover agent for Islamic militant groups.

-Before being arrested in a terrorist deal involving oil and heroin for guns and training, arms smuggler Diaa Mohsen was paid at least $5,000 by one of Dr. el Amir's companies, NBC’s Dateline reported.

And his HMO was suspected by law enforcement of being used to funnel money directly to Osama bin laden.  


Wire Transfers to "Unknown Parties"

Chertoff’s client "caused more than $5.7 million to be paid by wire transfers to unknown parties," said the lawsuit filed shortly before the state took over his failing HMO. News accounts about el-Amir’s legal difficulties contain unanswered questions about undue political influence and its effect on national security.
For example, how did el-Amir, who only the month before had been granted a state license to operate an HMO, finagle a lucrative contract from the state of New Jersey in 1995?

“Why was this doctor allowed to start a health plan?” asked the October 25, 1999 issue of the medical trade journal Medical Economics.

“How could this medical entrepreneur, who had no experience running a managed-care or health insurance company, receive a license for an HMO that now provides care to 44,000 of New Jersey's most vulnerable citizens?" asked The Bergen Record. “Moreover, how could the state pay such a novice $ 6 million a month in taxpayers money to take on such a responsibility?”

Why did Michael Chertoff even take the case? 

Con't-
http://www.madcowprod.com/01122004.html

[chomskysright]

37. Here's ?'s for Congress re: Chertoff.....

as associated with mad cow site: see below:

that writer wrote an amazing article on Chertoff:



I've composed some questions to send to senators and to begin to consider. There are some of the yahoo groups I have backed out from as re: the volume of e mail. Feel free to pass these questions around wherever. I have simply gleaned them from the information below passed on by CLG.



thanks, marsha: asheville, NC


Dear Senator:

We would like Mr. Chertoff's relationship with Dr. Magdy el-Amir made explicit. We believe this is important as pertaining to Mr. Chertoff's relationship with a former client who was an alleged Bin Laudin operative.

1. 'Did you shield your client, Dr. Magdy el-Amir from investigation as associated with said client donating money to a conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center Bombing?"

2. We understand that your client, Dr. Magdy el-Amir donated $18,000 to New Jersey Republicans in 1996. Is it TRUE that a foreign intelligence report made available to the Chairman of the House International Committee alleged that an HMO owned by Dr. el Amir in New Jersey was “funded by Ben Laden,” and that in turn Dr. el Amir was skimming money from the HMO to fund “terrorist activities.”’…?

3. We understand that after merely 3 years, the HMO, American Preferred Provider Plan Inc, that Dr. Magdy e.-Amir created was insolvent with bills left behind totaling $45 million, thus, leaving in the cold many patients and care-takers. Apparently the money had been skimmed by Dr. Magdy el-Amir. Did YOU know where the stolen money was going?

4. Per DATELINE, and as associated with a report given to senior member of Congress, Ben Gilman, in 1998, when he was chairman of the House international Relations Committee, a foreign intelligence report that makes a startling allegation about the doctor, that he has had financial ties with Osama bin Laden for years. Is this TRUE?

5. Did you not see a conflict of interest related to you representing the soon-to-be Homeland Security Chief Michael Chertoff representing a known bin Laden operative and heading the U.S.’s investigation into the September 11th attack.? as described in the New Jersey Law Journal, August 4, 2003:

6. Is it true as related to the 9-11 investigation that you were considered to be 'the last word' as per the news media and the FBI?

( Since the September 11th terrorist attacks, Chertoff’s office has become the funnel for what is probably the most important criminal investigation in American history, as prosecutors and F.B.I. investigators pour in to seek the boss’s approval. What leads can we use from the search of a hijacker’s car in Portland, Maine? Where do the hijackers’ credit-card records lead?… For day-to-day decisions, Chertoff has the last word”…)




The investigatory questions are drawn from the following web site:
http://www.madcowprod.com/01122004.html