For weeks now I have been reading press releases and calls to action from various groups all worked up because the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Illinois has issued some Grand Jury subpoenas returnable for testimony on January 25. The latest action will involve protestors delivering a “citizens’ subpoena” on Pat Fitzgerald.
…local students will deliver a “people’s subpoena” to U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald tomorrow morning, calling for an end to a federal investigation of antiwar activists in Chicago and Minneapolis.
“Fitzgerald is leading the outrageous political witchhunt against antiwar activists, international solidarity activists, and Palestinian-Americans, in an attempt to intimidate and criminalize those who speak out against U.S. foreign policy,” said Chapin Gray of the UIC chapter of Students for a Democratic Society.
First of all, summoning a witness to give testimony does not turn that witness into a criminal. If you happen to be on the street when a bank robber makes his getaway and you are summoned to a grand jury to tell what you saw, is that “targeting” you or “criminalizing” you? No, you are a witness. If you don’t have any relevant testimony, your appearance will be pretty short.
When you are summoned to the grand jury, you still have all of your Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination and can invoke them whenever you feel that the answer to a question might incriminate you. In fact, if you notify the government, in writing, that if compelled to appear before the grand jury you will invoke your Fifth Amendment rights, the U.S. Attorney’s Manual suggests that your appearance should be excused.
If the government still needs that information, it will be forced to grant you immunity; which is why TARGETS of investigations usually don’t get subpoenas to testify (not NEVER, just not usually). Go read the link, it’s to the Grand Jury Manual for the Department of Justice; it explains this in great detail.
If you are worried about being the target of an investigation, a grand jury subpoena is usually like Christmas in July. In fact, some people who are targets actually ASK to testify before the grand jury if they believe they possess exculpatory evidence. Of course, if you pull a Scooter Libby and lie to the grand jury you can create a new problem for yourself, but telling the truth along with appropriate invocation of the Fifth Amendment usually means you don’t have to worry about being a target.
In fact, DOJ requires its lawyers to NOTIFY YOU if you are a target of the grand jury. You can find a sample “target letter” at section 160 of the DOJ Criminal Resource Manual. If you don’t get a target letter, guess what you are not? . . .
Lastly, all this hyperventilating language about being “targeted” by the government and “witchhunts” and these protests and other publicity stunts may get you 15 minutes of fame, and are probably great for building your lists and pumping up your fundraising, but if you were even the tiniest bit serious about not wanting to testify, you would probably want to try something that actually has a snowball’s chance in hell of ending your testimonial obligation. It’s called a Motion to Quash. Here is a sample Motion to Quash a federal grand jury subpoena.
If you really and truly believe that this is just a fishing expedition, as opposed to an excuse to gin up controversy and try to make yourselves out to be martyrs, get a lawyer not a press agent.
[Important: This article is for informational purposes only and not intended to provide legal advice to any individual or group. Individuals and groups should obtain competent legal counsel from lawyers admitted to practice in the jurisdictions where they are subject to legal process.]




15 Comments




Recommended.
Sounds like the agent provocateurs (link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_provocateur ) are redoubling their efforts …
Today in World War Never Stop we all are targets unless we are doing the targeting. With Castro`s favorite lawyer Attorney General Holder incharge, freedom of the individual is the last thing that the Justice department cares about. When they tell you that you are not a target, most of the time they are telling the truth. Most career US attorneys are decent ,hard working folks with a sense of purpose and very little sense of humor; a chilling recipe for tyranny stew.
Zenostoa
Take a gander at this recent ‘press conference’ held by ex-FBI agent Coleen Rowley on the FBI’s infiltration in Minnesota…!
“Get a grip.” – Coleen Rowley, former FBI
Patrick Fitzgerald. He fooled many people by pretending to support the rule of law. But Fitzgerald is just another lying neo-con piece of shit.
This is more COINTELPRO. The Constitution is just a goddam piece of paper to Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald is trying to censor Peter Lance’s “Triple Cross’, because Lance revealed that the US government has protected and assisted Al Qaeda double agents, such as Ali Mohamed.
http://www.peterlance.com/peterlance.com/Home/Entries/2009/6/7_Patrick_Fitzgerald_tries_to_kill_TRIPLE_CROSS.html
Fitzgerald also has concealed and covered the criminal behavior of the “intelligence community”. US spies enabled the Underwear Bomber Christmas day attack. Fitzgerald and the CIA protected David Headley, who worked with Pakistan in carrying out the Mumbai 26/11 murders.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/08/AR2010010803671.html
That’s actually quite a good history lesson about how the standards changed and now we end up with all of the evils of conterlpro w/o any of the safeguards.
I agree with her, that this is counter productive to law enforcement.
This was screwed up by an Attorney General, it can be fixed be an Attorney General. Holder has the power to reinstate those rules, or even better rules
Ah, dude, the underwear bomber got arrested, he was in jail wing of hospital fromt he get-go.
Nobody protected Headly, the guy pled guilty to all charges
http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/03/18/mumbai-terror-suspect-pleads-guilty/
As for the Peter Lance nonsense, I won’t even dignify that. No one who has actually read his book could possibly take him seriously.
I have thought your contributions about mortgage fraud have been valuable. When it comes to National Security, your expertise is quite lacking. The National Security shills you defend might be your friends but they are not mine. This Post supports the criminal COINTELPRO against Americans who oppose Obama’s and Fitzgerald’s and Jeh Johnson’s wars.
Undie was approved and put on board Flight 253 by the “intelligence community”. Fitzgerald has not identified Undies “handler” who put him on board. Also the Saudi Bomb maker who made the bomb is still not been captured. The US government put Undie on board with a bomb. Then that attack was used by the government as an excuse for dangerous X-ray scanners at airports.
Headley was clearly protected by Fitzgerald and our official “authorities”. Headley frequently and freely traveled to Pakistan to train with and to assist Pakistan ISI sponsored terrorists. Headley’s Pakistan partner was in Mumbai a few days before 26/11. If an ordinary person makes a donation to oppressed Palestinians that is enough to be targeted by Patrick Fitzgerald. But Headley was helping terrorists for years, without Fitzgerald or the other “counter espionage” spies noticing. Does Fitzgerald know how many terrorists that Headley’s “Travel Agency” brought to the United States?
Headley was actually there at the ISI control center during 26/11. These ISI agents communicated in real time with terrorists directing who should be murdered. The circumstances of Headley’s arrest, a year after Mumbai, remain unclear.
Why do you think it is nonsense that Patrick Fitzgerald is trying to destroy Peter Lance and censor his book? Fitzgerald has validated Lance since Fitzgerald continues to protect the Al Qaeda terrorist Ali Mohamed. The neo-con US government only censors books because they expose the government’s criminality. Government censorship also has targeted James Risen and Anthony Shaeffer.
Obviously you refuse to discuss Lance because the governments censorship of Lance is indefensible. You want to ignore the fact Fitzgerald is a liar and protects torture and protects war crimes, and protects Al Qaeda terrorists.
Then you are also defending that other liar
Jeh Johnson who invokes Martin Luther King Jr and Jesus to support phony Oil wars. You personal relationships with government officials have turned you into an unquestioning sock puppet.
That’s a surprise. How does that work with a judge? :-)
What using the word Dude?
Never with a judge when s/he’s ont eh bench and rarely with a judge even off the bench.
I was on a PTA committee with a federal judge once (our kids were in the same class) and he made a funny, and I might have called him dude then, but that’s probably it.
No, I dismiss Lance because I actually read the book, it’s fiction with footnotes.
You dismiss the whole book yet you cannot cite any inaccuracies by Lance. What is a fact is the Fitzie called Ali Mohamed one of the most dangerous Al Qaeda agents. Then Fitzie allowed Ali go free-with presumably a government pension.
But it is not about dismissing. It is about the Department of Justice COINTELPRO, targeting Peter Lance to destroy his career and steal every penny he has. We should also mention Fitzie’s greatest success, the Libby Case. Patrick Fitzgerald kept the secrets of the Niger Forgeries. Fitzie protected the phony nuclear weapons threat cooked up by the neo-cons. Fitzie allowed the neo-cons to expose Valerie Plame with no consequences. Patrick Fitzgerald has done his best to promote wars and protect torturers and warmongers.
Now Fitzie is escalating the war against American citizens who tell the truth about this rotten corrupt regime. Bring it on Fitzie.
If I shop at Target, can I expect to get a target letter?/s
I usually agree with you, but I’m not there on this one.
While “target” has a meaning peculiar to a prosecutorial process, it also has a lot of every day impact – every day speech meanings as well.
As we know, for the last decade and continuing under Obama, anti-war groups HAVE been “targeted” for infiltration and for spying. Not just by the DOJ, but also by the Military – domestic military spying on the likes of Quakers. Might people in organizations attempting to exercise their first amendment rights to protest the war feel “targeted” after a decade of infiltrations and surveillance. Might they feel that their department of justice, far from working to protect their first amendment rights, has spent a decade doing something far less admirable?
That’s just generic, though. So let’s be more specific.
The Minneapolis anti-war activists, Mick Kelly, Jess Sundin and Meredith Aby didn’t just get an invitation to appear and chat with the grand jury. In addition to a subpeona, they all had their homes raided.
I think its a pretty big God Damned (in the moral as well as the everreadyexpletive sense)deal to raid a person’s home. Who in their right mind wouldn’t feel targeted after having a slew of strangers descent on them and ransack their home and cart off their belongings? That’s pretty damn devastating.
You can just throw up some snark about how someone’s not a target if they haven’t received a target letter when their homes have been ransacked and invaded and they’ve watched boxes carted out of them. I’m not saying that the DOJ didn’t get warrants (although more on that in a minute) but the fact that they followed process is never going to change those moments in someone’s life. If they really are in up to their ears in murder plots – then there you go. But surely to God someone has that kind of evidence and ties to justify what they did with sending out those warrants for home searches, because any normal person is going to feel targeted – and shaken – after something like that. It’s a horrible thing to do to someone – you need to have a really good reason to justify it. So a shrug off that they didn’t get a letter, so they should be hunky dory, isn’t a lot of weight to throw on the other side of the scale.
Back during some of the raids in Sept ’10, a Huffpo article had this info:
So let’s see, the *narrow* and *focused* DOJ insertion into the free speech rights of anti-war protestors is based on an investigation into Columbian terrorist ties. Or wait, no, make that Jordanian and Syrian terrorist ties. Ummm, wait, what if that doesn’t roll up everyone we want – how about let’s add the PLO and socialist organizations. But wait – why stop there. Let’s include Hezbollah and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia (btw – do you think any Chiquita execs – ex Holder clients for example, got any of their homes and offices raided over their payoffs to terrorists in South America?).
Who operates relief orgs in the ME without having some kind of Hezbollah contacts at some point?
I guess after the blinders DOJ has worn to keep its Libby and Yoo and Bybee and Rizzo and Ashcroft and Thompson etc. “investigations” so absurdly narrow that they would have politely stepped over the body next to the hole any of them were digging in their backyards – it’s good to see they know how to be expansive, but it’s sounding a bit ridiculous. Do you think Pete King is having Fitzgerald crawl up his shorts and invade his home to find old IRA/Gerry Adams info?
If DOJ has more of a game plan than just harassing the snot out of anyone who might be an embarassment to Chi-boy Obama if the Dem 2012 Convention is held in MN – it’s keeping it close to the vest. And if there is a big Jordanian-Columbian-PLO-FARC-Syrian-Hezbollah plot – kudos for breaking it up.
But it is coming at a cost to people who ar just plain vanilla anti-war activists and I won’t play along with the proposition that its not. When you see people who have worked with you in a cause you believe in being drug before Grand Juries and having their homes invaded – and when having a cup of coffee with one of them results in you having the FBI descend on you almost immediately therafter —it’s pretty damn legitimate to feel targeted.
I know you think the world of his professionalism, but the way Chicago is running this organization IT IS making anti-war activists feel targeted just for being anti-war activist.
Of course, after all the years of revelations of the low rent DOJ and military and local law enforcement infiltrations, planned provocations, data base maintenance, abuse of national security letters, warrantless wiretapping, etc. – maybe Fitzgerald is just trying to make sure that they understand the reality of the world in which they are operating.
OTOH – I never gave Obama his wall certificate for eleventy-dimensional chess either, so I guess I’m just churlish by nature.