No matter the exact wording...what part of "a gag order Oct. 23, 2001, barring lawyers from making public comments", do you find difficult to understand?
Because of intense publicity surrounding the case, Rosen imposed a gag order Oct. 23, 2001, barring lawyers from making public comments.
Eight days later, Ashcroft said at a news conference that "three Michigan men suspected of having knowledge of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, for example, were arrested on charges of possessing false documents."
He retracted the remarks, and one of his aides, Michael Chertoff, apologized to the judge during a conference call.
(So the judge actually let him off the first time. ashcroft, as a lawer involved with the case, then, like an idiot, proceeded to violate the order again):
Ashcroft...publicly praised a government informant, Youssef Hmimssa. "His testimony has been of value, of substantial value," Ashcroft said at an April 17 speech in Washington. "Such cooperation is a critical tool for our war on terrorism."
Gag orders are quite generic..."say nothing publically" or be charged with contempt of court.
It's very telling that ashcroft treats this country's court system with contempt.
If he can't even obey a gag order how can he be expected to investigate the White House trators.
An independent counsel is necessary. |
