tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post3034270399445278614..comments2024-03-18T16:53:45.062-04:00Comments on Southern District of Florida Blog: Weekend reading...David Oscar Markushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18386723948607633980noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-2029966448393975832008-02-17T17:49:00.000-05:002008-02-17T17:49:00.000-05:00There is a simple solution here. DOJ wants to hold...There is a simple solution here. DOJ wants to hold Ben accountable for what he knew or should have known. So would the AUSA's or USA's who knew or should of known what was going on please come forward?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-82647239189935119472008-02-17T12:49:00.000-05:002008-02-17T12:49:00.000-05:00Didn't Jiminez's brother play a rather prominent r...Didn't Jiminez's brother play a rather prominent role in the 2000 recount? Isn't that why he, as well as many other attorneys from Southern Florida, landed up in plum jobs in the Bush Administration in DC? What about all of the other Republican lawyers from Miami involved? Did any of them have positions in the Bush Administration in which they could have influenced this case? Have any of them been associated with other instances of smearing innocent people?<BR/><BR/>The answer to several of the above questions is YES.<BR/><BR/>By the way, someone should really ask the former US Attorney about a politically sensitive case he declined to pursue in which immediate family members of a Republican attorney who worked on the 2000 recount were involved. And how he neglected to notice that some of the same people involved in that case were also involved in the ES Bankest case.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9615048.post-67710450508478554272008-02-17T12:23:00.000-05:002008-02-17T12:23:00.000-05:00Jay,Why don't you report on Mr. Jimenez's involvem...Jay,<BR/><BR/>Why don't you report on Mr. Jimenez's involvement in this thing? For example: Mr. Jimenez suggests in an earlier post that:<BR/><BR/>"I find it amusing that these anonymous posters know about meetings I had or things I supposedly did in my capacity as US Attorney. They don't really know, and should check their dates."<BR/><BR/>A check of the dates reveals:<BR/><BR/>"Marcos Daniel Jiménez (Southern District of Florida) was appointed U.S. Attorney on August 5, 2002..."<BR/><BR/>That appointment falls squarely within the indictment's allegations:<BR/><BR/>Paragraph 6: December 2002, Ben hired by defense team<BR/><BR/>Paragraph 7: Between April and September of 2002, Ben drafted memos<BR/><BR/>Who can forget the articles from 2002-2003 that dealt with the Government's refusal to give any opinion propriety of taking the fees?<BR/><BR/>Of course, now we know, thanks to Jay Weaver's reporting that it appears the government was the source of the misinformation being provided to Ben as well as the "dirty" money. The question for you to get down to Jay is the classic, 'what did Marcos know' and 'when did he know it.'<BR/><BR/>Perhaps, as appears to be suggested by Mr. Jimenez, he was not aware of the undercover operation targeting subjects in the Southern District of Florida, relating to transactions originating and ending in the Southern District of Florida -- perhaps...but perhaps not.<BR/><BR/>Do we really want our public officials misleading upstanding members of our community? Do we really want those same officials to be able to later state: "I know that Ben and his attorneys will uphold the highest standards of our profession in the defense of this case" without anybody pointing out that the statement appears to be yelled from atop the apex of hypocrisy?<BR/><BR/>But, the question goes beyond simply scrutinizing the actions of one of the then most powerful political officials in South Florida - it relates directly to innocence of Ben.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com