Mukasey’s Hunting for a “Lone Wolf,” Too

Earlier, I suggested that one reason Joe Lieberman may be anxious to have a hearing on the Fort Hood attack is to serve up Nidal Hasan as a “Lone Wolf” that would require further erosion of the Fourth Amendment.

Well, Lieberman’s not the only one rushing to label Hasan as a “Lone Wolf.” So is Michael Mukasey–at least, he’s describing Hasan as a member of a “leaderless jihad.” (h/t Main Justice)

Michael Mukasey, the U.S. attorney general from 2007 to 2009, criticized an FBI spokesman and a New York Times article that said the gunman, Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, is not connected to terrorist groups, saying that Osama Bin Laden has sought to create a “leaderless jihad” that promotes solo attacks.

“In that respect, there certainly are very close links to terrorism,” he said during the event’s main address.

“In that respect, this is, in fact, the worst terrorist act carried out on U.S. soil since Sept. 11, 2001.

“And to tell us to believe that someone has to have a membership card in al-Qaida or any other organization in order for them to act as a terrorist, and in order for us to call what he does an act of terrorism, is to tell us to refuse to look facts in the face, and to refuse to believe what we see and hear with our own eyes and ears.”

And, as a side note, can I just say what a tribute it is to our criminal justice system that the former Attorney General is willing to get up and make these broad declarations without, presumably, any first hand evidence himself?

Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Reddit0Share on Facebook0Google+0Email to someone

15 Responses to Mukasey’s Hunting for a “Lone Wolf,” Too

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15

Emptywheel Twitterverse
bmaz Hateful Eight looked killer; great writeup from Kim RT @SunsetGunShot Thoughts on The Hateful Eight live read http://t.co/JnaJqVs559
19mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @laRosalind The red is the best color on the Tesla. Would look even better on the Jaguar Musk STOLE his body design from.
32mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @BradMossEsq @SpyTalker At any rate, this is minuscule in relative scope, but helpful in showing there can be a deal cut.
36mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @BradMossEsq @SpyTalker Whether it is successful, or to what extent, who knows. But it is usable infer and precedent for fashioning the arg.
46mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @BradMossEsq @SpyTalker Irrespective, you get there by making arguments; I could sure fashion this and other cases into one.
47mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @SpyTalker That is a completely different criminal jurisdiction. Also, a defense atty has to try everything he can. I'd find this useful.
48mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @SpyTalker Is it a "winning" argument, no of course not; is it useful for mitigation, absolutely.
54mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @SpyTalker What displays is govt can move downward on such charges, there IS precedent; and there are many other instances too.
55mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @SpyTalker They are not in scope. But if you look at general overview, both involve removal of class info, both charge espionage etc.
57mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @SpyTalker also, stop calling me Shirley!
1hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @SpyTalker Mostly, yes. But it fits into an overall defense theme I've had in mind for a while as far as plea and sentencing.
1hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz RT @MikeScarcella: Then: Six felony counts (three under Espionage Act). Now: One misdemeanor http://t.co/G2oKpbHl2h New charging doc: http:…
1hreplyretweetfavorite
November 2009
S M T W T F S
« Oct   Dec »
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930