See other Dead Constitution Articles
Title: Assistant Attorney General in Texas was commissioned by FDA and prosecuting an FDA case in conflict
Source:
E-Mail
URL Source: http://e-mail
Published: Nov 19, 2005
Author: Alfred Adask
Post Date: 2005-11-19 16:37:19 by boonie rat
Keywords: commissioned, prosecuting, Assistant
Views: 13
Comments: 1
Through a certain amount of dumb luck and the grace of God, a friend and I have received EVIDENCE that an Assistant Attorney General of TEXAS is also a "fully commissioned officer" of the FEDERAL Food and Drug Administration. This evidence consists of a letter written approximately 3 weeks ago and signed by the particular Assistant Attorney General to another officer within the "Open Records" department of the Texas Office of Attorney General (OAG). The letter from the dually-commissioned (State/federal) Assistant Attorney General, was sent to the Open Records department asking to be exempted from disclosing information that my friend had requested under the Texas Publican Information Act. In his letter requesting an exemption, the Ass't AG admitted that he was a "fully-commissioned officer" of the FDA and that both he and the FDA did not want to disclose information that my friend had requested. Somehow, the Ass't AG sent a copy of his letter addressed to the Open Records department to my friend. I don't know if that Ass't AG is a fool, an incompetent, or if the Good LORD wanted this information revealed. But as soon as read that letter, I realized the implications were massive. This letter came to light when this particular Assistant Attorney General was attempting to prosecute my friend for manufacturing and distributing colloidal silver products. The OAG was threatening my friend with fines of $25,000 per DAY in a lawsuit that was initiated in A.D. 2003. Although the lawsuit is being prosecuted by the OAG on behalf of the Texas Department of Health, the lawsuit was initiated based on a complaint from the FDA--for which the prosecuting Assitant Attorney General is a "fully commissioned officer". We believe there is an obvious conflict of interest in having an Ass't AG of TEXAS simultaneously hold a commission from the FEDERAL agency (FDA) and prosecute a suit that was initiated by a complaint from the FDA. This dual-commission phenomenon would seem to violate fundamental "federal" principles of "federal" government in that officers of a State should probably not also be officers of the federal government. More, we believe that if ONE Ass't AG is also a commissioned officer of a federal agency, then there is a strong probability that other Ass't AG's--as well as the Attorney General Greg Abbott--are also "endowed" with one or more federal commissions. We suspect that dual state/federal commissions might be fairly common among "selected" state officers, and might even extend into other state offices and agencies like the Governor's office, state legislators, local police chiefs and sheriffs and even judges. We assume that these federal commissions are not "honorary" but come with a salary. If so, we might be looking at a mechanism to keep "key" state officers in state government despite seemingly low pay. I.e., if a federal commission includes a federal paycheck (in addition to whatever salary a state officer receives from the state), then government "service" could be far more lucrative for selected state officers than most suspect (double salaries, double pensions, etc.). More, if a state-commissioned officer can hold ONE additional federal commission, there's no obvious reason why a particular state-commissioned officer--say a Governor or a legislative committee chairman or even a state supreme court judge--might not hold TWO or THREE (or more) federal commissions in addition to his his state commission. If federal agencies are paying "secret" second (or third) salaries to selected state officers, we can assume the federal agencies are "buying" the services of those dually-commissioned state officers. Presumably, the federal agencies could identify state targets for prosecution, regulation or perhaps even legislation, and instruct their secretly commissioned officers to perform the federale's bidding. This possibility might explain the growing "seamlessness" of state and federal governments as exemplified in "multi-jurisdictional taskforces," etc. We are even intrigued by the possibility that the FDA (a federal AGENCY)--having issued commissions to selected STATE officers--might also issue similar commissions to officers in the federal GOVERNMENT. We have not evidence, but it would be an extraordinary story if it turned out that some federal judges, even Supreme Court judges, were "fully-commissioned officers" of one or more federal agency. What about federal prosecutors who have "discretion" to decide which cases to prosecute and which to ignore? Could their "discretion" be colored whenever a case implicated the federal agency that has issued them a commission? My friend and I received a copy of the letter that admitted the dual commissions on about the 4th of November. On the 9th of November, my friend sent paperwork to the OAG indicating, in part, that we knew about the dual-commissions and complaining of an apparent conflict of interest in having an Ass't AG of TEXAS simultaneously hold a commission from the FEDERAL agency (FDA) and prosecute a suit based on an FDA complaint. On the 16th of this month--just 7 days later--the OAG announced that 1) depositions for my friend scheduled for the 18th of this month had been cancelled, and 2) that the entire case file in this matter had been "lost". Perhaps the case file will be "found" next week or next month. Perhaps the depositions scheduled for last Friday will be reschuled for next January. But, for the moment, the "coincidental relationship" of the timing of the OAG's announcements to their receipt of our November 9th document, suggests that the case may have been permanently "disappeared". We suspect that the OAG may be extremely reluctant to publicly expose the possibility that at least one of its Ass't AGs is prosecuting cases as both a Texas-commissioned officer and federal-agency-commissioned officer. We suspect that the OAG is even more reluctant to expose the possibilty that there may be a HOST of state officers who are dually-commissioned as federal-agency officers. If this dually-commissioned phenomenon is taking place within Texas, we can reasonably assume that the same phenomenon is taking place in other states as well. The implications are considerable. For example, if it could be shown that one or more state-commissioned officers who engaged in prosecuting crimes (like drug dealing) were also fully-commissioned officers of the FDA, the conflict of interest might be sufficient to cause every drug case that that particular prosecutor ever handled to be remanded for retrial or even reversed. Similarly, what if some of our state judges were shown to be "fully-commissioned officers" of some federal agency? How many of their cases might be remanded or reversed? So far, we only have evidence that ONE Ass't AG of Texas is also a "fully commissioend officer" of the FDA. Maybe there are more similar dually-commissioned officers; maybe not. But if it's possible for the FDA to issue "commissions" to state officers within Texas, I see no reason why other federal agencies (like OSHA or the EPA, the DOD, CIA or even the IRS) couldn't issue similar commissions to "selected" state officers. The implications are substantial. How'd you like to be tried by an allegedly impartial state judge who was secretly holding a commission from some federal agency like the SEC, CIA or IRS? Again, we only have evidence that ONE Texas Ass't AG holds a commission from a federal agency. We've only seen preliminary response from the OAG that IMPLIES they'd prefer to "disappear" the case rather than expose this information. We are clearly leaping to conclusions and possiblly over-reacting. For all I know, this dual-commission phenomenon may be common knowledge to just about everyone but me and my friend. But if you have eyes to see and ears to hear--and especially a nose to smell--I think you'll agree that we may be onto something big. For the moment, we are wondering what strategy to use to reliably compel every state-commissioner officer or state-appointed employee to truthfully reveal whether they hold commissions from federal agencies. If anyone can suggest a reliable strategy, please advise. As more info comes in, we'll keep you informed. Sincerely, Alfred Adask
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: boonie rat (#0)
What was the basis of the complaint? I can go to any health food store and buy all the collodial silver that I want?
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest