TPM: FBI Appears To Change Theory In Anthrax Case

[mhatrw]

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/08/fbi_appears_to_change.php

Last week, the Washington Post published a story that appeared to finally tie Bruce Ivins to that New Jersey mailbox where the 2001 anthrax letters were mailed -- something the feds have been unable to do in their six-year investigation. The Post breathlessly reported in a story -- headlined "New Details Show Suspect Was Away On Key Day" -- that Ivins took part of the day off on Sept. 17.

A partial log of Ivins's work hours shows that he worked late in the lab on the evening of Sunday, Sept. 16, signing out at 9:52 p.m. after two hours and 15 minutes. The next morning, the sources said, he showed up as usual but stayed only briefly before taking leave hours. Authorities assume that he drove to Princeton immediately after that, dropping the letters in a mailbox on a well-traveled street across from the university campus. Ivins would have had to have left quickly to return for an appointment in the early evening, about 4 or 5 p.m.

But then Glenn Greenwald over at Salon drilled down into the details and found that the whole story didn't make any sense -- and that the timeline described by the FBI and the Post may actually give Ivins an alibi, since the anthrax letter was stamped Sept. 18. Now today's story in the Post appears to propose a new theory on when Ivins allegedly drove to New Jersey.

Investigators now believe that Ivins waited until evening to make the drive to Princeton on Sept. 17, 2001. He showed up at work that day and stayed briefly, then took several hours of administrative leave from the lab, according to partial work logs. Based on information from receipts and interviews, authorities say Ivins filled up his car's gas tank, attended a meeting outside of the office in the late afternoon, and returned to the lab for a few minutes that evening before moving off the radar screen and presumably driving overnight to Princeton. The letters were postmarked Sept. 18.

That's a big shift. But the Post didn't play it that way. ...

[EFerrari]

1. I nailed them on that at the WaHo comments.

Have you read them? There are few if any FBI apologists there. Mueller must be hating this. lol

(And, TPM, that wasn't Greenwald, that was DU. :) )

[mhatrw]

2. Again, the ONLY apologists I have seen for the FBI's "case" are the corporate media

and a few politicians. Why is that? Have they no shame?

[EFerrari]

3. The AP has been the worst offender by far. They spammed up

the tubes very well and they have no feedback loop besides a contact address. At least the WaHo and the Times have public editors. The L.A. Times comes in fourth in the line up, imho.

I don't understand the Carry Johnsons of the world. She didn't really move the story "forward" with the hair piece and the new, completely unproven timeline. She just helped fuzz it up more.

[EFerrari]

4. This is a little OT but amplifies how the pressitutes work.

This L.A. Times article:

Anthrax scientist Bruce Ivins stood to benefit from a panic
August 2 2008

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-anthrax2-2008aug02,0,3650657.story?page=2

Look at this passage:

"The Times sought earlier this year to obtain annual financial disclosure statements filed by Ivins with his employer. USAMRIID spokeswoman Caree Vander Linden said last month that Ivins had filed financial reports exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.

Ivins' apparent suicide and the Justice Department's decision to bring criminal charges against him were first reported Thursday night by The Times. On Friday, Ivins' lawyer, Paul F. Kemp, defended his client and said that Ivins had cooperated fully with the FBI.

"We assert his innocence in these killings, and would have established that at trial," Kemp said, implicitly confirming that Ivins had been about to be formally charged. "The relentless pressure of accusation and innuendo takes its toll in different ways on different people. . . . In Dr. Ivins' case, it led to his untimely death."

Kemp did not respond to telephone calls and e-mails for this article.

[e-mail]"


1. How come I could communicate with Mr. Kemp but Willman couldn't?

2. How come I know that Ivins signed a standard contract that limits the royalties he can earn to 150K per year but the resources of the L.A. Times couldn't figure that out?

3. Why couldn't Willman find out that Ivins had a new vaccine in progress and that he'd likely stand to earn more from that one than from the one he was fixing for BioPort?

This is just very basic stuff that a civilian like me can find out doing simple searches and without FOIA. :crazy:

[Supersedeas]

5. Willman appears to be an important cog in the Mukasey trial by innuendo machine

[robertpaulsen]

6. K & R!

:kick:

[mhatrw]

7. U-G-L-Y

Ivins doesn't even need an alibi.