Is the FBI investigating the Lieberman campaign? If not, why not?
David Sirota reports:
Totally honest question: will Joe Lieberman's Senate campaign be prosecuted by federal authorities? As you may recall, the Lieberman campaign accused Ned Lamont's campaign of hacking its website on election day. Lieberman's campaign has since admitted it had no evidence to support the claim. The major verifiable evidence that has been uncovered (here and here) shows that Lieberman's campaign skimped on its web service, and that its claims of losing email service on election day may have been lies. And as TPM Muckraker reported, the FBI said that if Lieberman's hacking allegations prove false, "the FBI and federal prosecutors could pursue charges against those who reported them." Specifically, if the charges were fabricated to slander the Lamont campaign, "there's Title 18, Section 1001, which is providing false statements to an FBI agent. That can be prosecuted at the discretion of the U.S. Attorney's Office."
Lieberman campaign spokesman Dan Gerstein has a long record of issuing public lies, as documented by Media Matters. And let's be clear - this is no small issue. Making deliberately dishonest claims about a campaign supposedly engaging in Watergate-style tactics goes beyond just the usual tit-for-tat and into pretty serious legal areas. Yes, yes, I know Gerstein has said slandering other Democrats as terrorist sympathizers "is what campaigns are all about" - but clearly, the law is pretty straightforward when it comes to making deliberately dishonest election day charges of fraud. Put in Gerstein's language, the law says that's "not what campaigns are all about" and, in fact, could land people in jail.
So again, not knowing if anyone has conclusively figured out why Lieberman's campaign website died on election day, my honest question: is the Lieberman campaign going to be prosecuted by federal authorities if their hacking charges prove false?
-- David Sirota
Keep in mind that President Bush has all but endorsed Lieberman by refusing to endorse the Republican candidate for Senator in the race, and the Republican National Party Chairman Ken Mehlman has refused to endorse the Republican candidate in that race, too. So the odds that the US Attorney (who reports to Bush through the Justice Department) will actually investigate let alone prosecute Lieberman for violating Title 18 are between slim and none, but if no evidence surfaces that Lieberman’s site was hacked as he claimed, let along hacked by his Democratic opponent as Lieberman’s site led voters to believe, then we all will know that Holy Joe broke the law and deserves to be thrown on the ash heap of politics. Whether the Bush Administration decides to follow the law and prosecute him or not. I don't care if he goes on TV and says, "I am not a crook." He still will be. And so will Bush if he doesn't prosecute him.
Joe
Totally honest question: will Joe Lieberman's Senate campaign be prosecuted by federal authorities? As you may recall, the Lieberman campaign accused Ned Lamont's campaign of hacking its website on election day. Lieberman's campaign has since admitted it had no evidence to support the claim. The major verifiable evidence that has been uncovered (here and here) shows that Lieberman's campaign skimped on its web service, and that its claims of losing email service on election day may have been lies. And as TPM Muckraker reported, the FBI said that if Lieberman's hacking allegations prove false, "the FBI and federal prosecutors could pursue charges against those who reported them." Specifically, if the charges were fabricated to slander the Lamont campaign, "there's Title 18, Section 1001, which is providing false statements to an FBI agent. That can be prosecuted at the discretion of the U.S. Attorney's Office."
Lieberman campaign spokesman Dan Gerstein has a long record of issuing public lies, as documented by Media Matters. And let's be clear - this is no small issue. Making deliberately dishonest claims about a campaign supposedly engaging in Watergate-style tactics goes beyond just the usual tit-for-tat and into pretty serious legal areas. Yes, yes, I know Gerstein has said slandering other Democrats as terrorist sympathizers "is what campaigns are all about" - but clearly, the law is pretty straightforward when it comes to making deliberately dishonest election day charges of fraud. Put in Gerstein's language, the law says that's "not what campaigns are all about" and, in fact, could land people in jail.
So again, not knowing if anyone has conclusively figured out why Lieberman's campaign website died on election day, my honest question: is the Lieberman campaign going to be prosecuted by federal authorities if their hacking charges prove false?
-- David Sirota
Keep in mind that President Bush has all but endorsed Lieberman by refusing to endorse the Republican candidate for Senator in the race, and the Republican National Party Chairman Ken Mehlman has refused to endorse the Republican candidate in that race, too. So the odds that the US Attorney (who reports to Bush through the Justice Department) will actually investigate let alone prosecute Lieberman for violating Title 18 are between slim and none, but if no evidence surfaces that Lieberman’s site was hacked as he claimed, let along hacked by his Democratic opponent as Lieberman’s site led voters to believe, then we all will know that Holy Joe broke the law and deserves to be thrown on the ash heap of politics. Whether the Bush Administration decides to follow the law and prosecute him or not. I don't care if he goes on TV and says, "I am not a crook." He still will be. And so will Bush if he doesn't prosecute him.
Joe
posted by Joe | 8/15/2006 06:08:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home