DXer’s comment …
- In a lengthy interview, AUSA Rachel Lieber recently affirmed her confidence to Frontline interviewers in Dr. Ivins guilt.
- Yet when you go to the February 2010 Amerithrax Investigative Summary that she wrote — which reflects her understanding of the facts — there is no mention whatsoever of the 52 rabbits over which Dr. Ivins had charge and which were the reason he was in the lab.
- The rabbits delivered on September 25 and subject of the experiments in early October 2001.
- The word “rabbit” nowhere appears in her lengthy report!
- Instead, at page 32, in a footnote, she refers to only some mice needing his attention and says that they would not have explained all his time.
- Rather than relying on a review of the documents, she relied on Pat Fellows’ self-serving characterizations.
- In short, in the rush of events in July 2008, it is understandable that Rachel had not mastered the facts — alleged to Ivins’ counsel that Dr. Ivins used a lyophilized etc.
- Heck, she had the private knowledge of what the first counselor, Judith (who reports she feared nasty astral entities were trying to kill her) had said about what the murderous Dr. Ivins had told her in July 2000 about his murderous plans.
- With that fueling their suspicion of Dr. Ivins, who wouldn’t be suspicious?
- And the first counselor’s delusions are explained quite clearly in her 2009 book that was available to Rachel to read before issuing her 2010 report.
- But what’s her excuse for failing to explain in February 2010 the reason Dr. Ivins was in the lab –which is established by the documentary evidence she nowhere mentions and that DOJ has not uploaded?
- What’s her excuse for telling me that we would never get the lab notebooks showing how he had spent his time under FOIA?
- After Dr. Ivins killed himself, there was no meaningful reassessment of the case. Ken Kohl was busy dealing with the aftermath of the botching of the Blackwater murder prosecution.
- The Amerithrax Investigative Summary is an unsourced and unmitigated crock — not supported by citation to any documentary evidence for good reason.
- An analysis sourced to the documentation tells a quite different story.
- As an example, all the letters claimed by Rachel to have been double-lined in fact were not.
- Isn’t the country sick and tired of the CYA motivation of federal officials potentially putting the country at peril?
- The Amerithrax Investigative Summary should have been sourced to the documents which should have been provided in an Appendix.
- They now should be uploaded under FOIA — before 9/11 please.
LMW COMMENT …
It is this purposely misleading behavior by FBI Director Mueller and Attorney General Holder and their subordinates which infuriates me. That fury caused me to write my novel CASE CLOSED, which posits an alternative (fictional) scenario for what really happened in the anthrax attack and in the FBI investigation which followed.
Read the opening of CASE CLOSED (below) and then buy a copy at …