October 8, 2007, - 2:31 pm

Justice Department Asks About Schlussel Site in Federal Jury Questionnaire; Will Eliminate Readers of this Site from Important Terror Trial

By Debbie Schlussel
Uh-oh. If you read this site, that would get you kicked off the jury in cases about federal prosecutors trying to actually do their jobs and get justice against Al-Qaeda Islamic terror cells.
That’s the case with the trial of former federal prosecutor Richard Convertino. Jury selection begins tomorrow in U.S.A. v. Convertino, and I’ve learned that among the questions to be asked by slimy Justice Department lawyers is whether the jurors read my site, this blog. Yes, my name is specifically mentioned on the jury questionnaire, I discovered several weeks ago. A question about this site was among the questions the Justice Department proposed for the jury questionnaire, and from what I can tell, it remains.

rickconvertino.jpgdebbieschlusselgoldstar.jpg

Former Federal Prosecutor Rick Convertino Persecuted for Fighting Terrorists; Now, You’re Persecuted for Reading This Site

(Yellow Star photoshop by David Lunde/Lundesigns)

Why are they so afraid of me? You know–can’t have anyone exposed to the truth or questioning the Justice Department’s fake, impotent war on terror serving on the jury. No intelligent, critically-thinking jurors wanted by the feds. I rained on their pander bear parade in 2003 when then-U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Collins (then Convertino’s intellectually challenged, very jealous, and extremely pan-Islamist boss) wanted to give Islamic terrorist Imad Hamad a national award at the J. Edgar Hoover Building, and after reading my New York Post column on it, the FBI revoked the award. And they can’t get caught with their shawarmeh-waste filled pants down again.
They just want to get Rick Convertino and reward Islamic terrorists, and they won’t have me stand in the way. Red is blue. Up is down. This used to be America.
As I’ve told you repeatedly on this site and in the New York Post, Convertino valiantly tried and got convictions against members of Detroit’s Al-Qaeda terror cell, with PC Justice Department lackeys at the highest levels–including now-Homeland “Security” Chief Michael Chertoff and Justice Dept. Counterterrorism official Barry Sabin opposing him every step of the way. They really didn’t want Convertino to succeed in getting convictions against these terrorists tied to a PC, established Arab welfare agency. They just wanted headlines over mere indictments. Make us think they were actually doing something . . . all while they were really kissing the butts of extremist Muslims at the local falafel hut.
Because Convertino actually got convictions and headlines, they went after Convertino and his family (wife and five kids), asked a federal judge to overturn convictions against terrorists who wanted to blow up our and Israel’s planes at a military base in Turkey, and then indicted Convertino for daring to go after terrorists.
Now, they want to eliminate you from the jury because you dare to read this site. And they call that a “Justice” Department?
I’ve watched every single day as my site got more and more visitors from the Department of Justice computers. Maybe they should spend a little less time on my site and more time going after terrorists, instead of punishing the select few loyal public servants who actually do that job.
That there is even a trial here is absurd. That readers of this site aren’t allowed to render a verdict in it, is even more so.
But, hey, if you read The Detroit Newsistan, in which “reporter”/fabricator David Shepardson fabricated his reports about the terror trial (and got in big trouble over it when I exposed him) and where Shepardson is best buddies with the pan-Islamist PC crowd at the U.S. Attorney’s office, well, then, you may now be sworn in.
Oh, and by the way, if you watch Al-Jazeera or Al-Manar, that won’t get you kicked off the jury either. Justice Department folks don’t care if those media outlets are in your repertoire. It’s just this site’s readers they want to weed out.
Glad they have their priorities straight. Schlussel Website: OUT. Terrorist News Networks: IN.

Related Posts with Thumbnails
Print Friendly



Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

18 Responses

Sounds just like the lunacy we have here in the UK.

fido on October 8, 2007 at 4:30 pm

This could be a good thing. It would set a precedent for every politically based trial in the future. Jurors could then be disqualified if they read the Daily KOS, Huffington Post, the NYT, watched CNN,ABC,NBC,CBS,MSNBC, read interviews with hollywood celebrities in People Magazine or ever sent in a donation to any PAC.
This could save hundreds of millions of dollars in attorney fees and administrative costs. Go with it Deb. This is you’re ticket to the top. The irony here is you will now be reaching more readers curious as to what they’ve been missing. Ya gotta love them forward thinkers in government.

billyoblog on October 8, 2007 at 4:37 pm

I was just reading the Wikipedia entry on this trial and it says that the FBI has analyzed photographic evidence being used in the case and it says that it matches sketches found in the possession of defendants in the Koubriti case. This is said to significantly undermine the DOJ’s case. It says this information is from an AP article. Sounds like good news.

metal321 on October 8, 2007 at 5:09 pm

Debbie, I hate to say this, but you are a lawyer and you know how the system works. Lawyers don’t want any one with an ounce of brains on a jury. They are looking for folks that can be easily led, so that they will be able to sway the jury as they want.
A number of years ago, I was dismissed from a jury pool when it was discovered in questioning that I did not own a TV. That was considered just too far out of the mainstream and therefore too unpredictable for the tastes of the attorneys. I was glad to leave, but I thought that was an absurd reason to be disqualified for serving.
In the case at hand, it is clear that they consider your web site to be prejudicial to their case. Again as a lawyer, you are surely aware that there is nothing more damaging and prejudicial to a losing case than the truth.
One of the really sad aspects of our legal system is that it has no interest whatsoever in truth or justice; it is all about winning or losing. We have no better justice system than having two gladiators fight it out. Actually, that is exactly the system we have except that they use words rather than swords and both lawyers come away wealthy. But the outcome is entirely dependent on “strength of the gladiator,” the mental agility, verbal ability, etc. and almost entirely independent of the facts of the case. I have observed this in action up close to a limited extent, and I have been simply appalled to see how a truly skilled lawyer can stand the truth on its head and make it dance while a clumsy lawyer, working with the absolute truth can lose everything.

Dr. D on October 8, 2007 at 5:38 pm

Darn, I missed that one, reading WIKIPEDIA should be a disqualifier also.

billyoblog on October 8, 2007 at 5:39 pm

How would they know, unless someone actually tells the truth?

Jauhara Al-Kafirah on October 8, 2007 at 6:08 pm

Yes, Debbie, Dr D nailed it. The opposition lawyers can’t afford to have someone on the jury who can actually think for themselves and through deductive reasoning recognize truth from…um…BS. And, come to a proper conclusion/verdict. Sad state of affairs, we have. And I (and we all) know that this situation is not about to deter you, one bit. Keep exposing them. You are doing a great job. I pray for your safety.
BTW, that is a great pic of you, you are a lovely lady. Wow, pardon my staring…but your picture made my day!

Floyd R. Turbo on October 8, 2007 at 6:20 pm

Trotsky called it creating the mindless automaton. Was it Lenin who called it politically correct thought? Ministry of Islamic Thought?
…yeah, and O.J. was innocent, and so is Sandy Berger.

Nuggler on October 8, 2007 at 8:02 pm

So they wanna get rid of us just for reading truth at sites like this? Let’s face it, freedom of speech is dying and they wanna kill it.
But I couldn’t form more thoughts about it becuase I was too busy wiping my drool staring at debbie in that picture.

Squirrel3D on October 9, 2007 at 12:24 am

Squirrel3D, you too, huh…? Yep, Debbie gets our attention…yep, we’re hopeless, red-blooded males…alas.

Floyd R. Turbo on October 9, 2007 at 2:01 pm

The terrible thing about this is who can afford the expert lawyers need to fight this. I bet they offered him a plea deal so this would go away thinking he wouldn’t fight.

Davod on October 9, 2007 at 2:18 pm

I wonder how long it will be before the question of whether or not one reads DS’s blog rears its ugly head by way of the ICE Hiring Boards?

1shot1kill on October 9, 2007 at 7:08 pm

Debbie…It appears that practically our entire federal law enforcement establishment is owned by islamofascist oil money. Is there anything the readers of your blog can do to help Rick Convertino?? As an HONEST federal prosecutor, he can’t be very wealthy. Has a legal defense fund been set up for him?

joesixpack31 on October 10, 2007 at 2:03 am

Dr D. has it exactly right. And heaven help poor Convertino.

commonsense on October 11, 2007 at 12:22 am

Newsistan Update–10-11-07
Convertino trial hits snag
Prosecution witness in conspiracy case admits he lied at a hearing
http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071011/METRO/710110379
“The prosecution of former assistant U.S. attorney Richard Convertino hit an early hitch Wednesday when the government’s first scheduled witness admitted he lied under oath during a pretrial hearing Tuesday…..”He’s their star witness,” Cranmer said of Jarandogha. “A key witness in the prosecution’s case has done exactly what the government is accusing Rick Convertino and Ray Smith of: lying under oath.
“If it wasn’t so serious, that fact would be laughable.”
Folks, Debbie knows her shtuff!

BB on October 11, 2007 at 4:48 pm

Once this word gets out to the public, your readership should increase by about a million.
Most citizens would do anything to get out of jury duty, this just made it easier.

LocalLawman on October 12, 2007 at 2:18 pm

I didn’t read anything about Rick Convertino before the trial. I think it would take the jury less than an hour to come up with Not guilty verdict if some of the jurors including myself knew more about Mr. Convertino. I wish him and Mr. Ray Smith every luck.
Debbie, your site is pretty interesting. Thanks!

jeff20007 on November 27, 2007 at 12:12 am

Debbie, you created the interesting site. I found it only yesterday despite it was mentioned in the Jury Questionnaire. I didn’t know anything about Rick Convertino before the trial. Otherwise it would probably take half of the time to present Not guilty verdict. Yes, I was in the Jury.
Rick, wish you every luck.

jeff20007 on November 28, 2007 at 12:39 am

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field