JUDICIAL WATCH UNCOVERS FORMER INS COMMISSIONER'S ORDERS TO DESTROY EVIDENCE...

Judicial Watch ^ | April 9, 2002

[deport]

Not worried about the media and how they report it. It's what the "eWW" claims since he promotes himself as the ethical one and is counsel in the Special Agent Ramirez matter.

[NeoCaveman]

But even a stopped clock is right twice a day; even a blind squirrel finds an acorn every once in a while.

[Tickle Me Pank]

The Miami Gonzalez' were the first, I believe, to assert that JMG had called them prior to the ill-fated departure from Cuba.

That Miami Herald article was wrong in indicating that this was the first time the memo had been seen (unless they were referring to the hand-written note, but the context of their comment belies that).

[FreedominJesusChrist]

Well, I do not think it is safe to say yet that Larry exaggerated the memo.

[FreedominJesusChrist]

They probably meant seen by the public.

[Tickle Me Pank]

That's what I meant - this is not a new memo to us, the contents of it, with the exception of the hand written note, have been well known for ~2 years.

[Tickle Me Pank]

As I said, it's a memo that has been public for ~2 years, and doesn't come close to 'providing proof' (JW's words) of any of the points in the JW press release.

[FreedominJesusChrist]

The memo has not been made public for two years. Here is the most recent Associated Press article about this case:

INS Misstep Claimed in Elian Case

Wed Apr 10,11:52 AM ET

By ADRIAN SAINZ, Associated Press Writer

MIAMI (AP) - The head of the Immigration and Naturalization Service ordered the destruction of an e-mail that could have bolstered the request for asylum filed for Elian Gonzalez during the Cuban boy's stay in Miami, a conservative watchdog group said Wednesday.

A handwritten notation at the bottom of an INS memo dated Dec. 29, 1999, said that Doris Meissner, then the INS commissioner, ordered the memo destroyed the very next day.

A copy of the memo survived and was made public Wednesday by Washington-based Judicial Watch. It discussed the possibility that Elian's father at one time had sought a visa to move to the United States.

It also discussed allegations that the Cuban government had been coercing the father, Juan Miguel Gonzalez.

If coercion could be shown, the roughly drafted e-mail memo said, INS could "potentially accept the child's asylum's application and advise that there is no prohibition on age to child filing application. As such PA should proceed."

"PA" apparently refers to "political asylum."

The memo, written by INS attorney Rebeca Sanchez Roig, summarized a conference call on the Elian case involving several INS employees, including Meissner.

The handwritten notation on a printout of the e-mail memo, added by Roig some point after the memo was written, said Meissner ordered the destruction of all copies of the memo through another INS official.

It also said Meissner ordered that no more discussions related to Elian's case be put in writing.

Elian was rescued at sea off Florida in November 1999 after his mother and most of the other passengers traveling illegally from Cuba to the United States died when their boat capsized.

The boy was temporarily placed with relatives in Miami who, backed by other Cuban exiles, fought to keep the child in the United States.

The federal government said Elian should be reunited with his father in Cuba.

An INS spokeswoman in Miami, Patricia Mancha, said she could not immediately comment on the memo.

Meissner, reached at her home in the Washington area, said she could not comment because she was not aware of the details of the allegations.

Judicial Watch attorneys said the copy of the memo was provided to them this week by INS lawyer Diana Alvarez.

It was cited Tuesday at a civil service hearing on INS special agent Ricardo Ramirez's claims of threats, harassment and anti-Cuban-American sentiment in the INS Miami office at the time of Elian's stay in the United States.

In March, a federal judge dismissed a lawsuit in which Ramirez claimed he was harassed for reporting alleged anti-Cuban bias in the agency after the Elian case.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Judicial Watch claimed that the former head of the INS ordered the destruction of a memo that could have influenced whether or not Elian Gonzalez could stay in America. Judicial Watch said that they would make the memo public today and they made good on their promise.

[FreedominJesusChrist]

Thank-you for the translation and the link--it is much appreciated. I was growing frustrated trying to read that messy scrawl at the bottom of the memo.

[FreedominJesusChrist]

It is obvious that this woman wanted to cover her butt, probably so she could keep her job. However, she should be commended for feeling guilty enough to save a copy of the memo on her e-mail.

[TomServo]

We will see it tomorrow. Judicial Watch would not do a press blitz if they couldn't deliver..

You forgot your 'sarcasm' tag.

[FreedominJesusChrist]

I wasn't being sarcastic, I was stating this as a simple axiom. I do not believe that Judicial Watch would do a press blitz if they could not deliver on their claims. It turns out that they did. They made public today, a memo which shows that the former head of the Miami INS ordered the destruction of documents which probably would have influenced whether or not little Elian Gonzalez would get sent back to a Communist country or stay living in Freedom in America.

[BeAChooser]

I'm saying Larry Klayman never tells the truth

Never? I challenge you to list some lies that Klayman told in the press releases where Chinagate, Filegate, Emailgate, the Riady non-refund and the death of Ron Brown are concerned. Go ahead! If he NEVER tells the truth it should be easy.

I've never depended on Larry Klayman for ANY news

Of course, you won't tell us who you do rely on for news. I'm just curious if what you say is true how you learned about the Riady non-refund ... or did you make up your mind in that case without any facts? And how about Filegate? Where did you go to learn what Tripp said under oath ... or did you just miss her testimony? And most important of all ... what about Ron Brown? What source did you use to decide he wasn't murdered? At first you claimed it was Ken Starr ... but Starr had nothing to do with Brown. Then you latched onto the statement of a democRAT who said she believed the government's report that nothing foul happened. You said you believed that report too, although it is clear you never read it. And you just ignored the fact that the report was put out by the Clinton administration and failed to even mention dozens of highly incriminating facts. So, again, where did you learn enough about Brown to conclude he died by accident?

You continue to ask all of us questions over and over;

Which you never answer. It is curious how you can DEMAND that others answer your questions while blythly ignoring those of ours that you find "inconvenient".

I, for one, believe you have fallen hook, line, and sinker for Larry's view of the "truth," which contrary to the number of times you post it, does't make it 1) true, and 2) proveable.

Why are you afraid to exhume and autopsy Ron Brown's body? And what you are really doing is calling all those who testified UNDER OATH about Clinton/DNC illegalities (like Linda Tripp) liars. Now why would conservative do that?

You all are just like liberals

Oh that's a hoot. Would you like me to list the characteristics you have that are similar to democRATS?

And since you're always demanding the truth and accountability, can you tell me

See ... there you go DEMANDING an answer without answering a single question. No. Howlin, you address my question first ... what source did you use to decide Ron Brown wasn't murdered?

[ImpBill]

Just curious in using vocabulary as an adverb would it be "vocabularily" challenged? /;-)

[Jimbaugh]

Ouch ! ! !

[FreedominJesusChrist]

Thank-you for the thoughtful reply. I am used to being insulted by people like nopardons by now. To tell you the truth, I never knew that verbal abuse could be so entertaining. It surely does not shed a positive light on their opinion and argument against Judicial Watch. When people resort to calling me names, I realize then that they have nothing left to go on to further their argument. Name-calling always hands the debate victory into the hands of the insulted.

I hope that Judicial Watch can successfully pull through this one. To tell you the truth, there has been more positive posts on this thread than I have received or seen for a while. Thank-you, I am sure JW appreciates the encouragement, especially from this forum.

[FreedominJesusChrist]

"concerning Larry, the ambulence chaser,"

I think that you and I both know that Larry is not an "ambulence chaser." He is not a personal injury attorney, he is a public interest attorney with over 22 years of legal experience, including experience as a trial attorney, international attorney, and an attorney for for the Justice Department. You know, people usually sling mud when they have nothing else to go on and no proof to further validate their claims.

And by the way it is 'ambulance' and not 'ambulence.'

[mickie]

BTTT

[timestax]

bump