Obama’s DEA Appointment Looks To Confront Drug War With Anti-Terror Tactics

Posted: May 16, 2015 in Politics

Before 9/11, Rosenberg served as the Assistant U.S. Attorney in the Eastern Virginia district. Before taking charge of that region in the mid-2000s, he worked as Assistant U.S. Attorney in Southern Texas. When he was in Texas, he argued strongly against a congressional bill intended to protect freedom of the press. S. 1419, or the Free Flow of Information Act of 2005, was intended to “…maintain the free flow of information to the public by providing conditions for the federally compelled disclosure of information by certain persons connected with the news media.”

The bill eventually died and Rosenberg had made his position on freedom of expression versus government power clear. As an ardent supporter of “fighting terrorism” and enabling the government, he sided with censorship and intrusive policy over freedom. Further, he made this power a priority over a rational conversation about the Drug War. In 2005, while defending the Patriot Act’s solidification of “delayed warrants” (as assistant Deputy Attorney in Southern Texas), he testified to a Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security on the Judiciary House of Representatives that the “sneak and peek” warrants were essential for “detecting and incapacitating terrorists, drug dealers and other criminals before they can harm our nation.”

It is well-documented that sneak and peek warrants are overwhelmingly not used in terrorism cases. Rather, the Patriot Act—as a whole—has been used mostly for drug prosecutions.

Rosenberg’s belief in the Drug War (and consequential support of the Patriot Act) is further demonstrated by the opinion of a sheriff with whom he worked when he was the lead attorney in Eastern Virginia. When Rosenberg departed his position in 2008 to join a private law firm, Arlington Police Chief, Doug Scott, stated that his absence would be a “tremendous blow for the law enforcement community to absorb” because “…Chuck’s leadership and willingness to help local law enforcement went well beyond what any of the chiefs or sheriffs in the region could have ever expected.“

Rosenberg used his experience in the system to evade the laws he once enforced. Nevertheless, while testifying on corporate crime and prosecution, he argued that the system was working:

So I guess it is not very interesting for me to show up here and tell you that the system is not broken, but actually, I am not very interesting, and that is why I am here, to tell you that the system is not broken.

In spite of the fact that since his 2009 testimony corporate crime has not been deterred (and the instigators of the financial collapse have escaped with slaps on the wrist), Rosenberg still felt confident in saying that the Justice Department was doing a stand-up job in its handling of corporate crime.

Full Story @ [Anti-Media]

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s