Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ThirdEye who wrote (141685)	5/1/2001 7:29:08 PM
From: Thomas A Watson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Well, I'm just reporting the news article. It does seem however that none of the main stream press seem concerned. PA Evidence Tampering Could Warrant Special Prosecutor newsmax.com EPA Evidence Tampering Could Warrant Special Prosecutor Former Clinton Environmental Protection Agency chief Carol Browner could be in legal hot water if investigators can prove she was aware on Jan. 19 of a court order directing her agency to preserve records relevant to a lawsuit filed by the Landmark Legal Foundation last year. But the Justice Department is currently representing Browner while it investigates charges she destroyed evidence - a conflict of interest that could warrant the appointment of a special prosecutor to get to the bottom of the burgeoning scandal. Jan. 19 was the day Browner instructed her aides to erase her office computer's hard drive. A week later, two other top EPA officials did the same. In an interview Monday with WABC Radio's Sean Hannity, Landmark Legal Foundation President Mark Levin suggested that Browner could be legally vulnerable if she was aware of U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth's order enjoining her agency from "transporting, removing or in any way tampering with information potentially responsive" to Landmark's suit. HANNITY: This is obstruction of justice, contempt of court, a violation of ... LEVIN: Well, of course, the element of obstruction is if it was done willfully. Now, I should tell you that those multiple members from the U.S. Attorney's office who walked in the court told the judge that the EPA was on notice; that they saw articles on [Judge's Lamberth's order], they were aware of our letters, they were aware of our lawsuit, they were aware of the judge's preliminary injunction. Levin contended that the Justice Department has an inherent conflict of interest in the Browner-EPA case. HANNITY: If [the U.S. attorneys probing Browner's case] are the same people that are representing her, then I wouldn't trust them as far as I can throw them. LEVIN: Well, we are saying that they have an obvious conflict of interest. Later in the day Levin expanded on the issue during an interview on Hannity's Fox News Channel TV show "Hannity & Colmes." LEVIN: The United States attorney today, as we sit here, represents Carol Browner and these people at the same time they say they're investigating. So we asked the court today ... HANNITY: They're investigating the people they're representing? C'mon, tell us that's not true. LEVIN: That's correct. And we said to the court today, "Look, the U.S. attorney cannot zealously represent Carol Browner and at the same time investigate her. That's absurd." So we've asked for them to be moved out of the case. Levin did not expressly call for Attorney General John Ashcroft to appoint a special prosecutor, but offered no other remedy to the Justice Department's compromised position on the case. The EPA-Browner scandal stems from a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by Landmark last year requesting the names of any special interest groups that had any input into a slew of last-minute regulations then being considered by the agency. While the EPA did release documents relevant to the case, none of them came from Browner's office. On Friday U.S. Attorney Craig Lawrence confirmed that Browner had her computer files destroyed. ..................... tom watson tosiwmee