After DOJ briefing Daschle now finds the evidence against Dr. Ivins as "complete and persuasive"

[sabra]

http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2008/08/daschle-tells-r.html?loc=interstitialskip

Former Senate majority leader Tom Daschle says the evidence against the government scientist accused of carrying out the 2001 anthrax attacks was "complete and persuasive."

...

Daschle, who spoke during a meeting at the USA TODAY bureau in Washington, says he was "very dubious" about the government's case before the briefing.

Here's what changed his mind:

• the ability to identify the DNA of the anthrax: "It's like a fingerprint," Daschle said.
• the flask used to make the anthrax. "That's as close to a smoking gun as I think you're going to get," Daschle said.
• the limited number of people who were authorized to enter the laboratory. (Here's a chart that shows the spike in Ivins' late-night visits to the laboratory.)

Daschle says investigators came up with three possible reasons that Ivins targeted his office and that of Sen. Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat who also received one of the anthrax-laden letters.

Those motives include Ivins' concerns about abortion, the USA Patriot Act and waning support for an anthrax vaccine.

[MadrasT]

1. Motive?

And what was Ivins' motive to off the photographer in Florida?

[Muttocracy]

2. show me a microbiologist and geneticist who are convinced

about the fingerprint match and the magic flask which can only be opened by one man to get material for anthrax letters, not to have material removed by anyone else to go to any other flask.

Maybe some microbiologist or geneticist has reviewed the evidence and says it's good and I've missed it - but I haven't heard it yet.

[sabra]

4. he's calling it the smoking gun - while the details of this still have not been made public

plus - how did the Feds rule out all the other scientists who had access to the same lab. Additionally I read somewhere that there still needed to be "host" (I think that was the term) from where this originated...

[Muttocracy]

7. "smoking gun" was the term used in the DoJ press conference.

:eyes:

When I read the affidavits (before I gave up on following this), it seemed to me like they had narrowed it to 8 or 9 Ames anthrax sub-strains, and picked the one that was nearest where they thought the envelopes were purchased (DC area) - and wow, only one of those strains was in that area.

If that's how they did it, that ain't a genetic fingerprint in my book. It's multiple circumstantial pieces tied together.

And that's ignoring the hundreds of other researchers with access to Ames over the years, plus people who they may not KNOW had access to it (starting from a list of suspects and narrowing down can make you miss ones you haven't considered).

[asjr]

3. Some people like to make fools

of themselves.

[atreides1]

5. Poor Man

I used to think he was intelligent, but I was wrong!

[EFerrari]

6. Maybe he's having flashbacks.

[Bob Dobbs]

8. DOJ briefed Daschle on what they had on Daschel.

Suddenly, the case against Ivins became convincing.

[truebrit71]

9. Sadly I think that maybe close to the truth...

...certainly closer than the bullshit the FBI are spoon-feeding the media lapdogs...

[barbtries]

14. my thought as well

whatever convinced him probably had nothing to do with ivins or anthrax. i don't know that, but i have just completely lost faith in the government of the united states and any of its agencies. there is no trust.

[Alexander]

16. Yup, I think they bribed and/or threatened him.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

23. Geez, talk about a lack of evidence for an accusation.

[backscatter712]

20. That, or they showed him the real flask of anthrax...

and suggested he might get another letter in the mail if he doesn't play ball.

[EFerrari]

10. sabra: check this out. The good people of Frederick don't agree with Tom.

Talk Back: Do you believe Bruce Ivins was responsible for the anthrax attacks?
Originally published August 13, 2008

The Frederick community is reacting skeptically to the FBI's claim that Bruce E. Ivins, a Fort Detrick scientist and leading anthrax researcher, was solely responsible for the 2001 anthrax mailings that killed five people, according to the results of The Frederick News-Post's online poll posted last week.

Thirty-four percent of 128 voters responding said Bruce Ivins was not responsible for the anthrax attacks. Twenty-seven percent of them said "more investigation is needed," 26 percent said he is responsible, and 13 percent voted they were "not sure."

On the streets of Frederick on Tuesday, more than a week after Ivins apparently committed suicide, questions concerning the case, and even reactions to the community's reaction against the FBI's investigation were expressed by residents.

http://www.fredericknewspost.com/sections/news/display.htm?storyid=78746

[sabra]

12. most people find the Feds case against Ivins dubious at best

but the case is "closed" now... :-(

[EFerrari]

15. There may be a case against the FBI. Meryl Nass raises a good question

regarding his death while under "24/7" surveillance:

Saturday, August 9, 2008
Through surveillance, was FBI complicit in Ivins' death?
In his news conference on Wednesday, August 6, US Attorney Jeffrey Taylor mentioned (evidence point 4) that while Ivins had been under 24/7 surveillance, he discarded some materials on DNA coding.

If the FBI was about to charge Ivins, you would expect he was still under 24/7 surveillance, right?

Well, a tylenol overdose is entirely treatable--curable--during many hours after consumption. The patient receives N-acetyl cysteine or glutathione, which allows the body to detoxify the tylenol. Those who make it to hospital within about 16--24 hours will live.

SO...why was the FBI twiddling its thumbs during and after the time Ivins ingested his Tylenol #3 (acetaminophen with codeine)? Attorney Taylor began his remarks saying, "We regret that we will not have the opportunity to present the evidence to a jury to determine whether the evidence establishes Dr. Ivins' guilt beyond a reasonable doubt."

Really? I'd like to see the medical records. Was there really no autopsy in this high-profile case? I'd also like someone to investigate the "traffic" between the agents performing surveillance and FBI headquarters while Ivins was ingesting his poison and starting to die at home.
Posted by Meryl Nass, M.D. at 3:04 PM

(Comments follow at link.)

http://anthraxvaccine.blogspot.com/2008/08/bombshell-was-fbi-complicit-in-ivins.html

[Supersedeas]

19. what does the good doctor know -- Tom had a private, personal meeting with the FBI

[spanone]

11. i don't care what the FORMER senator thinks...why is he briefed anyway?

[AZ Criminal JD]

17. He got one of the letters.

[Supersedeas]

21. maybe, he's part of the closing argument -- sort of like a paid consultant to make the case to

and through the Media

[CrazyDude]

22. He's a victim n/t

[Jim Sagle]

24. With a Stockholm mentality.

[spanone]

29. duh.....my dumb

[robertpaulsen]

13. Flask? Smoking gun? Not so, says Olbermann.

"Anthrax – Gate" - The WSJ reported that at least 100 other people had access to the Dr. Ivins flask of anthrax? Damn!

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/8/11/212254/048/30/566457

[alcibiades_mystery]

18. That's our Tom!

:puke:

[Winterblues]

25. The Patriot Act was not even written at the time.

It could hardly be an excuse.. I don't buy it..

[truebrit71]

26. The "Patriot Act" was already written...PRIOR to 9/11

They were just waiting in the unlikely event that it would be needed, after, say, a terrorist attack inside the USA occurred...Who would have thought it would actually happen?

Maybe this guy already knew about it...??

[OnyxCollie]

30. But the AUMF that denied bushco war powers in the U.S. was written less than three weeks before.

Daschle: Congress Denied Bush War Powers in U.S
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/22/AR2005122202119.html

Power We Didn't Grant
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/22/AR2005122201101.html

[Jack Rabbit]

27. Is any one surprised?

Mr. Daschle has a long and unfortunate history of being completely convinced by the last person with whom he spoke.

[Piewhacket]

28. What the Blasted ^^&$#####!!!, Tom ....

Tom Daschle,

I'm saying it to you plain. I've come to expect venal stupidity
from republicans, but I sure don't want any of it from democrats.

What lunatic gets an unchallenged "victims" briefing from the FBI,
declares the evidence "complete and persuasive", and supports it by saying
the DNA of the Anthrax is "like a fingerprint".

I'll tell you who.. an idiot who knows nothing of science, nothing of law,
and who lacks even the most modest of critical thinking skills,
in other words, a republican. Now that isn't you, is it Tom?
Of course not, so here's your second briefing...

First, the FBI is not unbiased in this , they are often
enough 'political', this has been made a political matter,
and they have previously in even ordinary cases amply earned a rather
unsavory reputation (including in the scientific community) for
their willingness to 'manipulate' the evidence and overstate to the point
of perjury (and sometimes beyond), its validity. This has also been true
of their forensic labs. Not all cases, but enough to earn the healthy
skepticism of the public.

Neither I, nor you, know the truth of the evidence, what it would show if it was
challenged (it hasn't been), or what it would show if it were examined
by unbiased experts (which it hasn't been), but I'm pretty sure that
EVERYTHING you were told, and the manner you were told it, were designed to
persuade you by exploiting the "mystique" (ie ignorance) of science while hiding
critical flaws in both the forensic and scientific evidence and by overstating
their significance.

In short, it was almost certainly a flat pack of lies.

Your first clue should have been the unchallenged assertion that they have
a DNA fingerprint of something. Everything they told you after that depended
on that being true, right? I don't even want to tell you how many times
such claims are made by the FBI and then finally, the last lie having been
laboriously stripped away, the claim stands naked and exposed as a fraud.

Now it might be that all is correct and the conveniently dead Ivins "is the guy" (TV Monk)..
But I suggest you still don't know and that you should return to your
initial skeptical view until there is more transparency at the FBI, some
critical examination of the evidence by unbiased experts, and some
challenges to the validity of the evidence and the conclusions the FBI
has reached from it. That will put you back on track.

Remember, they've been wrong before, right?
Recently? Remember?
So chill and think again. I know you can. Rooting for you Tom. Best Wishes.