Meeting of the Minds: Cheney, Rumsfeld, Myers. "Did Not Happen," Says Judge Chin in Dismissing April Gallop's Case. Will the Higher Court Agree?
In 2009, the federal district court judge who heard April Gallop's very strong lawsuit against Cheney (et al) received a request from the defendants to dismiss the case. This is normal; every sued person wants to get rid of a case. When the judge got that request from Cheney, he granted it. This, too, is normal for judges. In fact when the defendant is a powerful corporation or a government official it is "very, very normal' for the case to be dismissed. Of course it should not be normal. The judge should earn his pay and live up to the public trust by ruling according to law.
If a case gets dismissed, a plaintiff can appeal to the Circuit Court, and that is likely to be his/her last chance. Should the appeals court agree with the district judge's decision, in federal suits, that is almost always the last stop. Although a citizen has the right to ask for Supreme Court review, the Supreme Court usually declines the request. A case such as this one, which claims that Cheney arranged the 9/11 attack on the Pentagon, is virtually guaranteed to die on the vine.
Apparently this is how our system blocks the ordinary person from rolling back the control of the unacknowledged power holders. To put it another way, American courts, like courts in Colombia, Denmark, and almost everywhere else, are tools of the powerful. Possibly we could say they are tools of criminals -- not counting smalltime criminals. The conclusion to be drawn is that if your leaders want to bomb your building with you in it (as they did with April Gallop and her infant son), they can do so. Only "rule of law' would stop these leaders, and they appear to be satisfied that the rule of law is no longer in effect.
This means we are all in the greatest possible danger, does it not? So it will behoove citizens to get up of their respective duffs and deal with the case at hand. You can easily do so because this case is unbelievably sloppy. Even if you have never read a case dismissal before, you will perceive that this one must surely be "off.'
You will need to act fast, because the case has already been in the Circuit Court, in Connecticut, for three weeks today, and a ruling can come down soon. If you value your life, you will try to stop that ruling from being an affirmation of the dismissal. Once the dismissal happens, Gallop's case, with its amazing insights into 9/11, will be legally barred from being adjudicated. It will be like Jim Garrison's JFK case. "So near and yet so far.""
The following is an outline of the legal basis on which the defendants (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Myers, and ten John Doe's) asked for a dismissal. These six "reasons to dismiss,' conjured up by the US Attorneys, are the ones that the judge accepted, that is, Judge Denny Chin of United States District Court for Southern District of New York.
Note: the capital letters below do not indicate shouting -- cases are always written this way. If anything, the defendants must be hoping their "reasons' will stay hush-hush. Please don't let that happen! It is truly up to you now. Why waste time marching in 9/11 protests? Better to shout, shout, and shout about this case. If you let the Constitution slip away, do you think you will ever be able to get it back? Not a snowball's chance in hell.
Reasons for Dismissal of Gallop v Cheney: