Comments on: DOJ Clears McCallum of Misconduct Charges

By: Hippocrates

Hippocrates — Wed, 14 Jun 2006 19:32:44 +0000

Perhaps the most important question is what forward remedies- such as court monitors, will be imposed, and what they will be tasked to do. Large Financial punishments have seemingly been curtailed by the DC Court of Appeals. McCallum specifically tried to throw out monitors, and per Bazerman and Myers testimony, he asked them to dramatically downplay or throw out the need for monitors in their testimony. Monitors were not ruled out by the Court of Appeals and the fact McCallum tried to do this is very telling- it reveals whose side he was on- Big Tobacco. The Office of Prof. Resposibility absolved him of wrongdoing but I cannot fathom under what pretense he would ask Bazerman to drop his testimony unless McCallum was doing Tobacco’s bidding. This requires further review by the Senate and others. The DOJ is incapable of investigating this, for obvious reasons, namely Gonzalez and Bush.
Finally, Court Monitors could provide a partial measure of oversight as Tom Delay, Abramoff, and RJR thwarted FDA Regulation of tobacco, most importantly for aflatoxin levels on tobacco, as FDA regulates Aflatoxin on all other crops. Aflatoxin is the most carcinogenic substance known and is immunosuppressive and is enhancing the worldwide spread of AIDS. Google “tobacco aflatoxin” to see how many documented orphans this toxin has caused. We just hope the orphans will be heard. Perhaps McCallum silenced them as well. That would be a major criminal obstruction of justice leading to God only knows where…..

By: Krueger

Krueger — Mon, 12 Jun 2006 18:39:41 +0000

Sharon Eubanks:

“Robert McCallum definitely was not supportive of the trial team’s efforts … He took aggressive actions to destroy our efforts when it became clear that we had firm legal bases for seeking much more meaningful remedies from the court.

“I should be clear about this: Robert McCallum directed the position taken on remedies sought by the United States. It did not matter to him what the evidence actually demonstrated and supported, rather, it was only the bottom line that mattered to him — the lower the better”

A second former Justice Department lawyer, Brett Spiegel, backed Ms Eubank’s version of events.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/envoy-under-tobacco-cloud/2006/06/10/1149815362144.html

By: Krueger

Krueger — Mon, 12 Jun 2006 18:39:13 +0000

Sharon Eubanks:

A second former Justice Department lawyer, Brett Spiegel, backed Ms Eubank’s version of events.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/envoy-under-tobacco-cloud/2006/06/10/1149815362144.html

By: Gene Borio

Gene Borio — Fri, 09 Jun 2006 13:42:54 +0000

>>Finally, speaking of remedies, its been nearly a year since Tobacco asked Judge Kessler to look at the DCCA decision on remedies and give summary judgment on the availability of the smoking cessation remedy. It was a concise motion of only a few pages. Where has she been on this?

Writing the verdict?

As to the cessation remedy, I’d love to hear what Sharon Eubanks thinks of all this, as I believe she was probably the toughest fighter against McCallum, et. al.

I’ll bet, when it’s all over, she could turn out a pretty interesting book–

By: tobacco observer

tobacco observer — Fri, 09 Jun 2006 06:10:38 +0000

For some reason the DOJ trial team seemed to think that asking for exhorbitant and illegal remedies all the way through the trial was going to pressure tobacco into settling. That approach may have made sense before the DCCA said the gov’t couldn’t have remedies like the ones it was asking for, but certainly not afterwards!

As he said at the time, and has been pointed out here before, all McCallum did was FINALLY try to align the DOJ’s remedy requests with the clear directives of the DCCA appeals court, something that the DOJ trial team itself appeared unprepared to do.

So much for allegations of political influence, though I suppose no amount of investigation or clear-minded explanations or investigations will ever convince anyone who wants to believe in partisan conspiracy theories.

Ironically, even with all the hype over the decision to finally reduce the remedy requests, that decision may have come too late. The DOJ didn’t submit its formal remedy requests until the very last second of the trial. That could pose a serious problem for the DOJ on appeal since there is Supreme Court precedent that remedy requests have to be submitted in a timely manner (its actually USA (DOJ) vs Microsoft, if I remember right).

Finally, speaking of remedies, its been nearly a year since Tobacco asked Judge Kessler to look at the DCCA decision on remedies and give summary judgment on the availability of the smoking cessation remedy. It was a concise motion of only a few pages. Where has she been on this?