Posted on 08/08/2008 11:44:22 AM PDT by Shermy
WASHINGTON – Senator Chuck Grassley today began asking tough questions of the Department of Justice and the FBI following the release of documents implicating Dr. Bruce Ivins as the only suspect in the Amerithrax investigation.
“This has been a long investigation full of missteps and mistakes. There’s been too much secrecy up to this point and it deserves a full and thorough vetting,” Grassley said. “There are clearly a lot of unanswered questions and it’s time to start a dialogue so we can get answers.”
Here is a copy of the text of Grassley’s letter.
The Honorable Michael B. Mukasey U.S. Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20530
The Honorable Robert S. Mueller, Director Federal Bureau of Investigation 935 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20535
Dear Attorney General Mukasey and Director Mueller:
Thank you for ensuring that Congressional staff received an advanced briefing yesterday of the information released to the public in the Amerithrax investigation. The three affidavits provided represent an important, but small first step toward providing Congress and the public a full accounting of the evidence gathered by the FBI.
At yesterday's briefing, Justice Department and FBI officials invited follow-up questions after there had been time to read the affidavits. Indeed, there are many important questions to be answered about the FBI's seven-year investigation, the basis for its conclusion that Dr. Bruce Ivins conducted the attacks alone, and the events leading to his suicide. To begin this inquiry, please provide complete and detailed answers to the following questions:
1. What is the date (month and year) that the FBI determined that the anthrax came from a specified flask in Ivins’s lab ("RMR-1029")?
2. When (month and year) did the FBI determine that Dr. Hatfill never had access to the anthrax used in the killings?
3. How did the FBI determine that Dr. Hatfill did not have access to the anthrax used in the killings? Was that because the FBI determined that Dr. Hatfill no longer worked at USAMRIID when the powder was made?
4. Was Dr. Hatfill or his counsel informed that Dr. Hatfill had been cleared of any involvement in the anthrax killings before the Department of Justice offered a settlement to him? Was he informed before signing the settlement agreement with him? If not, please explain why not.
5. Was Judge Walton (the judge overseeing the Privacy Act litigation) ever informed that Dr. Hatfill had been eliminated as a suspect in the anthrax killings? If so, when. If not, please explain why not.
6. Was Dr. Ivins ever polygraphed in the course of the investigation? If so, please provide the dates and results of the exam(s). If not, please explain why not.
7. Of the more than 100 people who had access to RMR 1029, how many were provided custody of samples sent outside Ft. Detrick? Of those, how many samples were provided to foreign laboratories?
8. If those with access to samples of RMR 1029 in places other than Ft. Detrick had used the sample to produce additional quantities of anthrax, would that anthrax appear distinguishable from RMR 1029?
9. How can the FBI be sure that none of the samples sent to other labs were used to create additional quantities of anthrax that would appear distinguishable from RMR 1029?
10. Please describe the methodology and results of any oxygen isotope measurements taken to determine the source of water used to grow the spores used in the anthrax attacks.
11. Was there video equipment which would record the activities of Dr. Ivins at Ft. Detrick on the late nights he was there on the dates surrounding the mailings? If so, please describe what examination of the video revealed.
12. When did the FBI first learn of Dr. Ivins’ late-night activity in the lab around the time of the attacks? If this is powerful circumstantial evidence of his guilt, then why did this information not lead the FBI to focus attention on him, rather than Dr. Hatfill, much sooner in the investigation?
13. When did the FBI first learn that Dr. Ivins was prescribed medications for various symptoms of mental illness? If this is circumstantial evidence of his guilt, then why did this information not lead the FBI to focus attention on him, rather than Dr. Hatfill, much sooner in the investigation? Of the 100 individuals who had access to RMR 1029, were any others found to suffer from mental illness, be under the care of a mental health professional, or prescribed anti-depressant/anti-psychotic medications? If so, how many?
14. What role did the FBI play in conducting and updating the background examination of Dr. Ivins in order for him to have clearance and work with deadly pathogens at Ft. Detrick?
15. After the FBI identified Dr. Ivins as the sole suspect, why was he not detained? Did the U.S. Attorney’s Office object to seeking an arrest or material witness warrant? If not, did anyone at FBI order a slower approach to arresting Ivins?
16. Had an indictment of Dr. Ivins been drafted before his death? If so, what additional information did it contain beyond the affidavits already released to the public? If not, then when, if ever, had a decision been made to seek an indictment from the grand jury?
17. According to family members, FBI agents publicly confronted and accused Dr. Ivins of the attacks, showed pictures of the victims to his daughter, and offered the $2.5 million reward to his son in the months leading up to his suicide. These aggressive, overt surveillance techniques appear similar to those used on Dr. Hatfill with the apparent purpose of intimidation rather than legitimate investigation. Please describe whether and to what degree there is any truth to these claims.
18. What additional documents will be released, if any, and when will they be released?
Please provide your responses in electronic format. Please have your staff contact (202) 224-4515 with any questions related to this request.
Sincerely,
ping
Anthrax : a REAL investigation tells another story (peer reviewed study published in 2007)
Grassley has been on a witchhunt against the FBI for many years. I understand he has, in some cases had a detrimental affect on some sensitive cases
Why?
They paid Hatfill so they wouldn’t have to answer these questions.
Wow. This is disgusting.
Everything about the way this investigation has been handled since Day 1 has been reprehensible.
“I understand he has, in some cases had a detrimental affect on some sensitive cases”
“Detrimental effect” - does that mean embarassment from incompetence being exposed?
I think people here could add numerous more questions.
For one, show us photos of the actual anthrax used in the attacks.
Two, state when Social Worker Duley first cooperated with the FBI.
Three, did Dr. David Irwin also cooperate with the FBI and starting when.
If Hatfill had committed suicide, the case would have been closed and pinned on him.
It looks like Ivins was more cooperative. It’s a little smelly.
That’s because the attack probably originated in Saddem’s Iraq and not in Maryland.
Between Muller and Hayden I'm starting to wonder, "Where's Larry?"
TR posted again yesterday the info how “Dugway” couldn’t reverse engineer the stuff over 18 months, etc. The recent news has Ivins’ superiors talking about “another” piece of equipment and that Ivins couldn’t have made it.
Got me thinking. What if the difficulties Dugway had in recreating the “process” was that the FBI restricted their research to use only equipment available at Ft. Detrick to Hatifll (or Ivins)? E.g., no use of a mill. IOW, the FBI was first interested in proving the stuff could have been made at Ft. Detrick?
How do officials believe Ivins made the anthrax? The FBI says Ivins used his lab to convert anthrax spores into powdered anthrax, but no proof has been presented that he had the equipment or the expertise to do so.
“I’m waiting for it to be shown that the quantity and the quality of the powders in the anthrax letters could have been produced in those suites” at Fort Detrick, said W. Russell Byrne, who retired from Fort Detrick in 2003 and was Ivins’ supervisor from 1998 to 2000. “I don’t know how to make the stuff,” he said.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation/bal-anthrax0807,0,4430001.story?track=rss
And we are supposed to believe them after all the other FBI Lab false results !!
How much has he had to pay out in settlements for his incompetence/corruption anyway? How many perfectly innocent people has he destroyed.
Amazing, isn’t it? Virtually all the real experts in the field say that this was the most incredible product they had ever seen, it was so sophisticated our government couldn’t even reproduce it, yet this one guy supposedly did it by himself in a few nights of overtime after 9/11.
That exactly right. That’s why this investigation has been completely politicized. Saddam’s WMD and terror ties are both confirmed if the truth ever gets out.
Ivins had as much to do with those attacks as you or I.
Answers, Shmanswers, can’t you recognize the spoken truth for what it is.
Dr. Ivins be da “anthrax” man.
At this why would ANYONE want to cover up any purported ties of anthrax to Saddam. Who benefits from that.
OTOH, who benefits from another lone gunman being nailed as the anthrax perp after 7 years of mystery?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.