By JOHN HEILPRIN
Associated Press Writer
Following are comments on
“UPDATED: Antonin Scalia AND Samuel Alito hold you and me in contempt”
Perhaps the linked post is one that Scalia also objects to on the internet. This explores the hypothesis that during Bush v. Gore John Yoo may have passed embarassing information to Silberman, whom Yoo clerked for, and then to Scalia that Russia had obtained billions in low interest rate loans during the 1990’s from Clinton profs that it had detailed information on.
Yoo was a prof at Berkeley, where a victim of academic misconduct had been for decades and it was well known at the B school, econ dept and law school. Howard Shelanksi got his Ph.D. in econ and JD at Berkeley and clerked for Scalia and is good friends with John Yoo, Yoo thanks him in his book defending torture.
There is a history of circumstantial evidence going back to 1925 of Russia gathering information about possible plagiarism or at least failure to cite prior art and using that to try to pressure profs in physics or economics for benefits. This includes pressuring Niels Bohr during WWII with letters from Kapitza.
There was an investigation of Harvard econ profs with respect to a grant to Russia that started in 1997. Harvard and the Clinton profs were likely not telling whatever they knew of such issues to the USAO Mass. In 1998, Russia got more money while the investigation was going on and Wall Street was trading Russian govt bonds while it knew of some of these issues.
This investigation was still going on during Bush v. Gore and lasted until August 2005. It appears that neither the Bush nor Clinton administration, including profs at DOJ in both, told USAO Mass of these issues.
Scalia may be bothered that speculation and hypotheses on these issues has been posted on the web.
This is all hypotheses and speculation.
Scalia “You talk about independence as though it is unquestionably and unqualifiably a good thing,” Scalia said. “It may not be. It depends on what your courts are doing.”
Scalia added, “The more your courts become policy-makers, the less sense it makes to have them entirely independent.”
Senate Judiciary Hatch with Chief Counsel John Yoo in 90’s, Yoo was also a clerk for Silberman and Thomas, Supreme Court, DOJ, Yoo was a DAAG in 2001, all show the same people moving back and forth. Clerks, judges, staff at Senate Judiciary, DOJ DAAGs, law profs, big law firms are all one group of people. A small group controls all the judicial power in all 3 branches.
Does this group also pass information amongst itself on key issues or at moments of crisis? One of those was Bush v. Gore, and one hypothesis explored above is that there was information exchange on the pending case US v. Harvard, Shleifer and Hay whose investigation lasted from 1997 to 2005.
If one considers such a hypothesis, and explores its implications, it supports Yoo being willing to write a torture memo. If Senate Judiciary, Sup Ct, DOJ HQ DAAGs and above are all linked together in withholding info about Russia using kompromat to get loans from USAO Mass investigation of Harvard, then they are safe to engage in torture, because they are already joined at the hip.
As some of this is speculated about on the internet, Scalia might get hot and bothered.
This is just a hypothesis and speculation.
from American Prospect.
“I’ll bet the deed to my house that ex-parte contacts between Scalia’s office and the Bush campaign in November of 2000 will be established historical fact before my mortgage is paid off in 2020.”
A discussion of this is at the associated URL. In particular, John Yoo may have known that Russia had gotten embarasing info from Clinton profs at IMF and Treasury about whom they had decades of detailed knowledge on. Russia may have applied pressure on relatives of these profs through a conference in Warsaw in 1972 for them to nominate Kantorovich for the 1975 Nobel Prize in economics. Jacob Wolfowitz, Paul’s father may have known that.
Yoo may have heard it himself at Berkeley law school. Profs in Berkeley econ dept and B school knew about some of this. Yoo taught the IMF treaty in spring 2000 at Berkeley.
There was a USAO Mass investigation of Harvard from 1997 to 2005. By 2000, the Clinton team may not have disclosed info to them. Yoo may have passed speculation on that to Scalia through Silberman or Hatch or directly.
More details are at US v. Harvard TOC
John Yoo by being a clerk to Silberman and Thomas, Chief Legal Counsel to Senate Judiciary Committee while Hatch was chairman, and a DAAG in DOJ HQ leadership himself embodies the lack of independence of the judiciary. Judge Bybee has a similar record. Moreover, they were part of the transition team at DOJ from Clinton to Bush. The revolving door, including a small group of large law firms and law profs makes the judiciary a clique with the other 3 branches, Senate Judiciary Committee and DOJ HQ. There is no independent judiciary. Many of the judges and justices are former DAAGs. The judiciary isn’t independent anymore. Its one group of people in revolving doors. The law school, law clerk, DOJ HQ, Senate Judiciary, judiciary network is a clique.
The laws have made almost anything illegal if a prosecutor wants to claim it is. The sentencing guidelines and mandatory minimums together with stacking charges penalize anyone who wants to not plea bargain.
Cases like Dr. Thomas Butler and Dr. Steven Kurtz, Sibel Edmonds, etc. are meant to warn insiders in academia, DOJ HQ, etc. to keep quiet and not discuss this openly.
This is speculation and a hypothesis.