
Joe Iosbaker (left) and Stephanie Weiner (right) talk to the press about their subpoenas and the FBI raiding activists’ homes. by Kevin Gosztola
Weeks after the FBI raided their home, two Chicago activists, Stephanie Weiner and Joe Iosbaker, stood before a crowd of about 150 Chicagoans gathered outside the Dirksen Federal Building and declared during a press conference they, and twelve others who were subpoenaed, have no intention to go before any grand juries and participate in a "fishing expedition."
Weiner read a statement on behalf of the Committee to Stop FBI Repression, a coalition formed in response to the FBI raids on activists in Chicago and Minneapolis. She recounted, "On September 24, the FBI raided the homes of anti-war and international solidarity activists and delivered grand jury subpoenas to activists across the country. The subpoenas claim that the grand jury is investigating violations of the 1996 law on the issue of "material support" of "designated foreign terrorist organizations."
Weiner, Iosbaker and three other activists had been called to testify before a grand jury on October 5th. He shared that he was outside the Federal Building at a press conference and not inside giving testimony to a grand jury, as he and Weiner had been scheduled to do, because they were given a postponement until October 19th. Three others submitted letters invoking their Fifth Amendment right not to testify.
Iosbaker reported, "Nine others who have dates scheduled for later this month have also submitted letters invoking their right not to testify." And declared, "Today, we are here to state to the press that we too have nothing to say to a grand jury."
The fourteen activists have not been charged with anything. That is why they were called before a grand jury — so the government could find information they could possibly use to press charges. Attics and other parts of activists’ homes have been searched, property has been seized, but none of the activists at the press conference spoke as individuals charged with committing any crimes.
Weiner explained to the crowd and press that were present, "One does not even need to be opposed to U.S. foreign policy to recognize that the government is working here to establish a dangerous precedent in targeting us. This case endangers the right of every person in the U.S. to organize for and express their views."
The statement appeared to encapsulate the reason for the outpouring of support and solidarity the activists have been experiencing. Reverend Dan Dale, senior pastor of United Church of Christ, read an interfaith statement by the Faith-Based Alliance of over thirty Muslim, Jewish and Christian organizations and over eighty religious leaders and clergy.
"We are people of faith and conscience who condemn the recent FBI raids in Chicago as a violation of the constitutional rights of the people in organizations raided. They are a dangerous step to further criminalize dissent," declared Rev. Dale. "The FBI raids chisel and bypass fundamental constitutional rights by hauling activists before grand juries under the guise of national security. An overly broad definition of "material support for terrorism’ in the June 2010 Supreme Court ruling concerns us as people of faith who continue to actively engage in humanitarian work and peacemaking."
Anne Sullivan, an individual who had been involved in the struggle to end apartheid in South Africa, and Miryam Rashid from the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC), a Quaker organization of people of various faiths committed to social justice, peace, and humanitarian service both expressed solidarity with the subpoenaed activists. Sullivan reminded people of how Nelson Mandela and the ANC (which Mandela was part of) had been regarded as a "terrorist" organization by the U.S. government at one point. And, Rashid told the crowd and press:
"The AFSC has worked for over 90 years to end the wars and to help give voice to the most vulnerable members of society. This is not the first time that our government has come after Palestinians and the progressive community in Chicago. Recently, the target was Muhamma Salah and it was intended to make Palestinians afraid of helping their families who are struggling for civil rights and equality in Palestine. Now the target is Hatem Abudayyeh, a father and a friend to many of us and to many members of the progressive community in Chicago."
A man from the Michigan Emergency Committee to End War and Injustice was invited to go up to the microphone and give a few words on his organization’s support for the targeted activists.
Weiner shared how those targeted "have been very involved in the anti-war and international solidarity movements for many years" and "all worked together to organize an anti-war protest attended by tens of thousands at the Republican National Convention in 2008." Some even "traveled to other countries to understand [the U.S.] government’s role in places like Palestine and Colombia."
The Committee’s statement outlined the U.S. government’s history of using grand juries as tools of repression:
"The grand jury has been used as a tool of political repression against many movements for social change in this country. From the pre-civil war abolitionist movement to the Civil Rights movements, the movement against the war in Vietnam, the American Indian Movement, the Central America solidarity movement, the Puerto Rican Independence movement, animal rights and environmental movements, there have been many targets of political repression and grand jury inquisition."
In fact, on GreenistheNewRed.com, Will Potter has written regularly about the ongoing criminalization of environmental activism in America. Recent revelations on FBI surveillance of the Thomas Merton Center in Pennsylvania, which the FBI engaged in to connect antiwar activism to terrorism, is another indication of FBI involvement in the suppression of dissent. Finally, all one has to do is look at drafted legislation that was put together years ago (but didn’t pass) the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Act to see how government has been growing increasingly interested in obstructing dissent and activism.
Jim Fennerty, a lawyer representing activists subpoenaed, mentioned the government has, in connection to this case, been asking for "documents on how people are indoctrinated. You know, it’s amazing." And, he urged those present to call their congressman and express support for a new Church Committee to be formed to look into routine violations of civil liberties by agencies like the FBI in this country.
Despite the government’s history of political repression of activists, those subjected to raids displayed a sense of empowerment. The knowledge that over 60 demonstrations were held across the country in the past weeks to show solidarity gave them hope that the people will be there to help them through this injustice. It also gave them hope that there will be a groundswell of activism aimed at re-asserting the people’s right to fundamental civil liberties in America.
As Iosbaker said to the press, "I think the government never expected that thousands of people would speak up against repression after their home raids and subpoenas. I think that they are very surprised." And as Stephanie added, "The American people do not want laws that can be rolled out on a whim with no lawyer there, with no judge, and no charges. The American people don’t want America to go there. That’s what this is about."
On Monday, Minneapolis activists protested and declared that they would not be traveling to Chicago to testify before the same grand jury Chicago activists have been called to testify before either. TheUptake.org has coverage of the activists targeted in Minneapolis.
*Here is video of the statement raided activist Stephanie Weiner read at the press conference:



17 Comments

Good for them. I hope none of the subpoenaed witnesses show up.
Here’s some basic information on grand jury proceedings.
Anyone subpoenaed to appear has the right to be represented by counsel and if they cannot afford to retain a lawyer, the Clerk of the United States District Court in the district where the grand jury is located will appoint a lawyer to represent the witness.
The lawyer will not be permitted to be present in the room when the witness is questioned, but the witness not only has the right to invoke the Fifth Amendment right to remain silent in response to any question, the witness also has the right to ask for a recess to go outside the room and consult with the lawyer regarding whether or not to answer the question.
Rather than go any further, I think I’ll put together a diary on grand jury proceedings. I’m very familiar with the process as I’ve represented many clients who were subpoenaed by the grand jury.
And now back to your regularly scheduled program.
Will they be arrested if they do not show up for the grand jury? What would come next.
If a witness pleads the 5th on every question, what happens then?
Thanks kgosztola.
Mason, will be watching for your fonts on this.
Thanks for the info. good diary.
Thanks for posting this. Let’s keep the spotlight on intimidation tactics like this. We’re back to the days of J. Edgar Hoover infiltraiting the Viet Nam Anti-War movement, the original Black Panthers, and the women’s consciousness raising groups. Citizens should be very concerned to see the rise of such tactics yet again.
And I encourage Mason to write the diary about the Grand Jury, as it would be beneficial for all to know.
My first thoughts were of the personal and destructive antics of our WI native son, Joseph McCarthy.
Yes, I believe so. Not responding to a subpeona or refusing to testify can be grounds for contempt of court (?? Is that the right phrase??) charges. Remember all of those journalists in the past who’ve been jailed for refusing to testify??
I’d argue we’re FAR past anything we’ve ever encountered in this subject in the history of this nation.
FISA alone suggests there are no protections left for those with dissenting opinions who choose to share them with others in order to promote change.
Great diary, great update news and hope the outcry, actions and statements DO shake up the political and judicial system . . . it NEEDS to be shook up.
Rcc’d of course KG.
In the statement from the Committee to Stop FBI Repression (which Stephanie Weiner is reading in this video), information on grand juries is outlined:
It is extremely worrisome that our FBI might be working at the behest of the AIPAC lobby…! *gah*
FYI: I just posted my diary entitled Grand Jury 101. For those who are interested, here’s the link.
Thanks. Didn’t mean to interrupt. My diary supplements this excellent piece.
But this repression is hopey-changey, right? right?
is it “least-worst” in any way, or is it actually worse-worse to have supported for and voted for the administration conducting these persecutory raids?
Thank you for this diary. I’ve been watching this story very apprehensively. It smells pretty rotten.
Lots of information here that needs to be questioned.
Of course someone subpoenaed to a Grand Jury has a right to assistance of an Attorney, but in the Grand Jury process, the Attorney is never present in the Jury room. The Subpoena is to the person named on it. If the witness wishes to ask his/her attorney about a response to a question, they must leave the room, ask the question, and then return alone.
An Attorney cannot enter a Fifth Amendment Claim for a client. Only the person requesting that protection can do this. Since they now say they will not attend the Grand Jury, no such Fifth Amendment Claim will enter.
By not attending, they are setting themselves up for Contempt of Court charges, and are likely to be Arrested, and the Prosecutor and Judges will decide how long and under what conditions they are held. In theory, they can be held as long as the Grand Jury is sitting, which could be up to 18 months. We all should remember Judy Miller of the New York Times. They won’t get the attention she got in the Plame/Wilson Case, but just as she did, they will sit for days in a County lock up someplace, doing not much of anything. The only way they exit the Contempt while the Grand Jury is sitting is by coming into compliance with the Subpoena. Expect this.
One should not expect any agency, FBI, Department of Justice, State and Local Police, to act in a way that brings disrespect to the US Federal Court System. While some may wish to make Political Theatre of it — that will probably be a one or two day flash, and then it will be replaced by another hot issue. No one knows what kind of evidence the Prosecutors in this case hold — or what charges might be under consideration. Prosecutors do not have to turn over discovery until an indictment is brought, and trial is scheduled. They are not going to let people who refuse to show up when under subpoena rewrite the normal rules of Civil and Criminal Proceedure for them, just because people who know nothing of the Grand Jury’s interests make claims that this is “repression” or “Harassment” or whatever it seems appropriate to call it today.
This action by the FBI and DOJ in Minneapolis comes against a very complex background of trials, plea bargains, and much else, including other Grand Juries that have worked over the past several years, most of the cases are in Federal Judge Jack Tunheim’s Court, so if you want to check out what they are about, look them up. Tunheim was a Clinton Appointee — and he was recommended to the bench by Senator Paul Wellstone. In the past, before his appointment, Jack Tunheim was fairly active in ACLU. For some reason, in this case, things have been moved to another Court Circuit in Chicago. Don’t know why. Maybe that is a question to ask.
So a group of corporate tools can have an armed march on washington DC to engage in second ammendment remedies….
But the fbi raids people campaigning for an increase in green energy and anti war activists?
Theeee laaaaand offf theee freeeeee aaannndddd theeee hoommmmme offf theeeee haaaccckkkcckk /choked to death by cia assassin
Perhaps the best strategy if one were cooperating with a Grang Jury would be to consult his attorney (sitting nearby outside the courtroom) for each and EVERY QUESTION.
That way, a jury may be less inclined to believe that one is guilty based on attorney consultation relative to a specific question or questions.
It sounds like there is a great potential for abuse of individual rights. I wonder how Karl Rove skated multiple Grand Jury inquiries.
Karl should do a special program on FOX on how to beat a Grand Jury when you are guilty as sin.
Right. Or some attention addicted monsters hiding behind religious rants can spew anti American hate speech at military funerals, and it’s free speech.