The Securities and Exchange Commission will be recommending civil fraud charges against Martha Stewart.

"SEC investigators have notified Martha Stewart that they plan to recommend civil securities fraud charges against her in connection with her sale of ImClone Systems Inc. shares, according to media reports Monday."

While the penalty would involve a fine and not jail, there is no assurance prosecutors won't bring criminal charges against her either now or later. If both criminal and civil charges are filed against her, it will be trickier for her lawyers to develop a defense, as they will need to negotiate and/or defend against the civil charges without saying or admitting anything that could be used against her criminally. A global settlement of the civil charges and any potential criminal charges, whereby both are settled at the same time, may be her lawyers' strategy.

Typically, the SEC first sends a "Wells Notice" to the target of the investigation, informing them of their right to appear before the Commission and explain their actions. These notices usually are followed by the filing of civil charges.

Stewart's control over her companies faces an uncertain future as well. If convicted of the civil charges, the SEC might ban her from acting as an officer or director of a publicly traded company.

The Buffalo Six were indicted today on charges that they provided material resources to the terrorist organization Al Qaeda.

Five of the six were denied bond at a hearing last month. The sixth was ordered freed on a $600,000 bond with stringent conditions. He is still in jail as he has not yet been able to meet the conditions of his bond.

Today's Indictment sets out the men's purported illegal acts, stemming from their attending an Al Qaeda training camp in 2001:

"The government alleged the men received basic weapons training in Afghanistan, attended lectures on suicide bombings and were addressed by Osama bin Laden, one of the most wanted men in the United States even before the plane attacks."

The Government's postion, which will be a key point of contention during future proceedings, is that attending a terrorist camp to receive training violates the 1996 law against providing material support and resources to a terrorist organization.

The defense likely will argue that their attendance at the camp is protected activity under the First Amendment's guarantees of freedom of speech and association.

The bottom line is some or all of the men attended an Al Qaeda training camp in Afganistan, stayed for up to five weeks, and then came home and nothing happened thereafter. One of the six left after 10 days. If convicted, the men face sentences up to 15 years.

All six maintain their innocence and four of the six deny going to Afganistan or attending the training camp.

In a statement today, "U.S. Attorney Michael Battle emphasized that "the investigation has failed to establish any immediate threat to the western New York area."

Two people have been taken into custody "following a police raid on a gas station in suburban Richmond, and they are "being questioned in regards to the sniper shootings" that have terrorized Washington, Hanover County Sheriff V. Stuart Cook said today."

Neither of the two have been charged with a crime as of this posting.

Update: They had nothing to do with the sniper attacks. From ABC News,

"However, late this afternoon it appeared authorities did not believe the men were linked to the note or the sniper shootings. The men — one a Mexican and the other a Guatemalan — were turned over to the Immigration and Naturalization Service. An INS spokesman told ABCNEWS both men are illegal aliens, and would be deported. The Henrico County, Va., Police Department said in a subsequent statement that no charges would be filed against the men."

The Supreme Court today refused to accept a case that raised the issue of the constitutionality of juvenile offender executions. Last term some members of the Court indicated they wanted to revisit the issue of capital punishment for those who were 16 or 17 at the time of the crime. Today, in a 5 to 4 split, the Justices refused to do so.

"Four justices said the court should continue a reexamination of the death penalty begun in earnest last year. But the court passed up a chance to reopen the question of whether executing very young killers violates the Constitution's ban on "cruel and unusual punishment." Currently, states that allow the death penalty may impose it on killers who were 16 or 17 at the time of their crimes. The dissenting justices called it a "shameful practice."

The Court also turned down two police search cases "that posed an important question for drivers: can officers freely search your car without getting a warrant if you don't show them identification or registration papers?"

Howard Bashman has more over on How Appealing.

There are now five senate races too close to call, according to the Los Angeles Times today. Another two are expected to be won by Democrats.

In Colorado, there is Tom Strickland in a dead heat to replace Republican freshman Senator Wayne Allard. The other four hot races include a Republican-held seat in New Hampshire and Democrat-held seats in Missouri, Minnesota and South Dakota.

Democrat Frank Lautenberg is favored to win in New Jersey and a Democratic challenger is favored to win a GOP seat in Arkansas.

With a net gain of one seat, Republicans would win control of the Congress.

The seven races being watched, ranked in the order of likelihood that the seats may change hands (according to the Times) are:

"ARKANSAS: Battered by negative publicity about his divorce and remarriage to a former aide, Republican Sen. Tim Hutchinson, a social conservative elected in 1996, is considered the incumbent most likely to lose his seat. Democratic Atty. Gen. Mark Pryor has portrayed himself as a centrist and populist, mixing promises to reach across party lines with pledges to confront pharmaceutical companies and increase education funding."

"NEW HAMPSHIRE: Republicans thought the seat had moved safely into their column when Rep. John E. Sununu beat quirky incumbent Sen. Bob Smith in a primary last month. But the Democratic nominee, Gov. Jeanne Shaheen, has caught — and, in some surveys, passed — Sununu with a populist message that has attacked him for supporting private accounts under Social Security and accused him of cozying up to corporate tax cheats."

"MISSOURI: Democratic Sen. Jean Carnahan was appointed to the seat after her husband, Mel, died in a plane crash just before the 2000 vote and still won more votes than the then-GOP incumbent, John Ashcroft. But she's getting all she can handle from Talent. The two seem to be battling to a draw on issues; the key may be whether Carnahan can convincingly rebut charges she's not up to the job."

"SOUTH DAKOTA: Democratic Sen. Tim Johnson and Thune have engaged in the heavyweight title fight of the election year — a 15-round struggle with relentless charges and countercharges from the candidates, heavy advertising by outside groups and inescapable national overtones. (At times it has seemed a proxy war between Bush and Daschle.) Democrats are optimistic about their turnout efforts, but this state leans strongly toward Republicans."

"MINNESOTA: Democrats remain cautiously optimistic about Wellstone's chances. But Republican Coleman, a former Democrat, was making inroads by questioning Wellstone's defense record, even before the incumbent voted against the use of force in Iraq."

"COLORADO: Sen. Wayne Allard hasn't established much of a public identity in his first term. In polls over the last two years, he has almost always attracted less than 45% support — an ominous sign for an incumbent. The state's GOP inclination could still carry him past Democrat Tom Strickland, whom Allard beat in 1996. But "Republicans are as nervous as can be," Denver pollster Floyd Ciruli said."

"NEW JERSEY: Forrester had surged into the lead amid revulsion over Torricelli's ethics problems. But when Torricelli withdrew in favor of former Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg, Forrester lost his principal argument. Lautenberg quickly went ahead in most surveys by portraying Forrester as too conservative for the state. The bad taste left by Torricelli's departure has kept Forrester close, but the state's strong Democratic lean is tilting the race toward Lautenberg. Over the last six weeks, Republicans benefited from an increased focus on national security issues generated by the debate over a possible war with Iraq. But that advantage may have peaked too soon."

A hearing is scheduled for today in the Central Park Jogger case. The five youths convicted of rape in the case are seeking to have their convictions overturned.

DA Morganthau's office is expected to ask for more time to investigate the claim of Matias Reyes who recently confessed to the crime and said he acted alone. DNA tests on the jogger's sock link to Reyes but no DNA or forensic evidence links to the five youths who allege their confessions were coerced.

How much more time does the DA need? At this point we think it can only be another delaying tactic. So do the fifty supporters of the five men who gathered last night in protest of the DA's request.

United States Representative Charles B. Rangel was one of those who attended last night. He "drew cheers when he described perceived abuses in law enforcement. "In this community," he said, "we're just as afraid of the police as we are of criminals on the street."

The Washington Post covers the case today as well, recapping the lack of trustworthy evidence and reporting recent statements of jurors:

"Police had interrogated the teenagers, keeping them in custody at a Central Park precinct for more than 20 hours before turning on the cameras for their confessions. The confession of one youth was written by a detective, in classic police jargon, and handed to him to sign. Aside from the videotapes, there was precious little forensic evidence. Neither blood nor semen matched that of the teenagers."

"Before the trial, the state court administrator departed from state policy of choosing judges by lottery and assigned a judge renowned for handing down tough sentences."

"The jury fought bitterly over the verdict in the first of two trials in 1990. One juror told the Daily News last week that he was no longer sure of their guilt.
The juror said his doubts began last winter when Reyes, a convicted rapist and murderer, stepped forward and said he committed the rape. "I was," Reyes said, "a monster." "A lot of us were bamboozled by the prosecution," said Bill Perkins, a city council member who lives at Schomburg Plaza and has fought to overturn the convictions. "There were dehumanizing descriptions and fraudulent confessions, and it made a community very cynical."

We won't be surprised if the DA gets his continuance, but we hope it's a short one. And check out Tom over at JustOneMinute who has been following the new developments in the case extensively.

Update: As expected, the hearing was continued and prosecutors were given until December 5 to finish their investigation.

A large anti-war rally is planned for Washington, D.C. this coming weekend. The protest will coincide with others in San Francisco, London and Tokyo.

The march starts at 11 a.m. Saturday at Constitution Gardens, adjacent to the Vietnam Veterans Memorial near Constitution Avenue and 21st Street NW. It concludes at the White House. Speakers include Jesse L. Jackson, Al Sharpton, former attorney general Ramsey Clark and others, including singer Patti Smith.

"The aim is to get attention. Some protesters are planning to take off their shirts to protest President Bush's taking "the shirts off our backs" to pay for the war."

"Protesters believe that the Bush administration has manufactured a rush to war without sufficient cause and that the nation's foreign relations strategy is being driven by imperialistic impulses that infringe on the rights of other people. They said that a war on Iraq would hurt the Iraqi people more than it would hurt the Iraqi president."

While other rallies have been held around the country protesting the war, none have come close to matching one in London held Sept. 28 which drew 200,000 people. The organizers of the Washington march hope to match that number.

More than 250 buses will be arriving with protesters, about half from campuses around the country. One student activist said, "When you flood the streets in masses, you can't ignore the message. You have to see that people don't want this war."

Another sad story today, this time about a detainee the Chicago Tribune calls the forgotten prisoner.

"Although he has never been charged with a crime and there is no evidence he is involved in terrorism, Mukkaram Ali, 26, has been imprisoned for more than a year and remains in jail today--thanks in no small part to the wishes of terror suspect Zacarias Moussaoui."

For nine months Ali, a college student at the University of Oklahoma who overstayed his visa, was held due to prosecutors designating him a "material witness" in the Moussaoui case. They dropped their request but then Moussaoui named Ali as a defense witness in one of his uncounseled, handwritten pleadings. Apparently Ali allowed a friend of his and Moussaoui to stay at his apartment in Norman, OK for a few weeks in the summer of 2001 while Ali was out of town. Ali and Moussaui were only casual acquaintances.

As a result of Moussaoui's request, the Judge has ordered Ali be kept in prison until his testimony in the case, which is not set for trial now until June 30, 2003.
Ali is probably the only person being held as a material witness for a terror defendant.

"The material witness law allows the government to jail someone if prosecutors believe that person has important information about a criminal investigation. The government's use of the law is controversial, given that it has allowed prosecutors to jail people, such as Ali, in high-security prisons without charges and in near-total secrecy."

The Government has never threatened to charge Ali with a crime and they have not presented any evidence that he has terrorist ties. His attorneys say they may seek to have his testimony presented by videotape and may move for his release.

We think they should seek both. Here is the text of the material witness statute:

"If it appears from an affidavit filed by a party that the testimony of a person is material in a criminal proceeding, and if it is shown that it may become impracticable to secure the presence of the person by subpoena, a judicial officer may order the arrest of the person and treat the person in accordance with the provisions of section 3142 of this title. No material witness may be detained because of inability to comply with any condition of release if the testimony of such witness can adequately be secured by deposition, and if further detention is not necessary to prevent a failure of justice. Release of a material witness may be delayed for a reasonable period of time until the deposition of the witness can be taken pursuant to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure."

We haven't read anything about why it would be impractical to secure Ali's appearance by subpoena. Or why a videotaped deposition wouldn't be sufficient. By the time Moussaoui's trial comes around, Ali will have been imprisoned for 1 year an 9 months without having committed a crime. His only misdeed appears to be overstaying his student visa. Assuming the information in the Tribune in accurate and complete, this is simply unfair.

We think the Justice Department should file a motion asking the Court to direct Moussaoui to take Ali's testimony by video deposition now (with the Government present to cross-examine Ali) if Moussaoui or his standby counsel won't request it, and then either release or deport Ali or do whatever it is that they would otherwise do once his presence for trial is no longer at issue.

From today's Los Angeles Times comes welcome news, that the military is easing up on its War on Drugs.

"Citing the need to redirect resources to the war on terrorism, the Pentagon has quietly decided to scale back its effort to combat international drug trafficking, a central element of the national "war on drugs" for 14 years."

The program now costs $1 billion a year. Plans are not final on how to make the cuts but under discussion are a reduction in the use of special ops forces on counter-narcotics missions and a scaling back on using the military to train anti-drug police and soldiers here and overseas. Also on the drawing board is making the intelligence-gathering equipment used in drug investigations available for use in the fight against terrorism.

The Pentagon is concerned that there will be congressional opposition to scaling down the military's involvement in the drug war. Apparently, its very popular on the Hill. We couldn't figure out why until we read further down in the article:

"Congress ordered a reluctant Pentagon to enter the drug war in 1988, when surging cocaine traffic from South America sparked a sense of crisis in the U.S. and set off calls for stronger measures to fight drugs."

Administration officials, including Rumsfeld have been saying for some time that the military is better used elswhere and that civilian agencies could better work on drug issues. Pentagon counter-drug chief Andre Hollis said the program has expanded to 179 separate subprograms, a number he calls "surreal."

As for how much money is spent and where, here's what the Times says:

"The Pentagon spent about $1 billion on drug-related operations in fiscal 2002, out of a total federal counter-narcotics outlay of $19 billion. The Pentagon has a bigger anti-drug budget than the Coast Guard, Customs Service or the Immigration and Naturalization Service, and accounts for a significant share of federal money spent to fight drugs abroad."

"In its drug interdiction role, the military acts as the lead U.S. agency for gathering intelligence on drug trafficking, and uses an array of aircraft, ships, radar and other eavesdropping tools."

While the military cannot engage directly in drug raids, its troops provide technical assistance with communications and intelligence.

"Highly skilled special operations troops and other military personnel also train foreign police and soldiers, as well as U.S. law enforcement personnel. They teach everything from basic infantry skills to languages, first aid, boat handling, swimming and horsemanship."

Most of the Pentagon's activities are in the Andes, Central America and the Caribbean, but they are active in Mexico and Southeast Asia as well, particularly in Thailand.

We think it is a good idea for the Pentagon to scale back and ultimately get out of the drug war. It's a good time to write your elected officials in Congress and let them know you approve of the reductions. Maybe if Congress knows their constituents are in favor of the Pentagon redirecting its considerable assets to the War on Terror, they will be more likely to go along without a big fuss.

The Denver Post in an editorial today strongly backs Tom Strickland for U.S. Senate, see Strickland For a New Century.

"Colorado's U.S. Senate race carries profound national importance this year. Its outcome will influence not only the composition of the U.S. Supreme Court, but also the philosophical orientation of our government at home and abroad. The Denver Post strongly urges voters to elect Democrat Tom Strickland to join Republican Ben Nighthorse Campbell in representing Colorado's central values - moderation, a commitment to progress and reverence for our natural surroundings - in Washington."

"We believe Strickland offers the leadership our state and our country need in this young century. While he is not a professional politician, he has prepared for leadership as Colorado's top federal prosecutor, as a lawyer with a significant business-oriented practice and, most importantly, as a private citizen who has conscientiously and consistently worked to improve the quality of life for all Coloradans."

The Post endorsed Allard over Strickland the last time around. Here's what they say about that:

"The Post's endorsement of incumbent Republican Wayne Allard in 1996 urged him "to seek compromise and moderation to keep the country moving." We've been deeply disappointed on both counts. Allard has chosen strict party-line voting rather than the Colorado-style moderation we sought - and the country, far from moving forward, is in a serious economic downturn. Traditionally, The Post has continued to stand by incumbents we have supported in the past. Our endorsement is, quite frankly, theirs to lose. To our sorrow, Sen. Allard, by failing to show any instinct for centrism, conciliation or independence, has lost our support. Indeed, on almost every major issue, challenger Strickland's positions and ideas are markedly more attuned to Colorado than those of his opponent."

We hope you will read the whole editorial, quote it on your blogs and get the message out.

Please, donate to Strickland's campaign so they can make their final media blitz. This really could be the race that keeps the Democrats in control of the Senate--and right wing judicial activists off the Supreme Court. And let us know or let them know via email to mthielen@stricklandforcolorado.com that we prompted your donation so we can go to the Don Henley benefit Oct. 27 (see our explanatory post here. Small amounts are fine, and we've made good progress since we started asking, but we still need some more contributions to be able to attend. We're looking for at least half of the requested donation and we will, with their approval, match up to the other half.

As for why we are such supporters of Strickland, go here.

Allard's dismal voting record on children's issues is here. Remember, this is a junior senator who has not distinguished himself in Congress and has voted the Republican party line on 98% of his votes. And as the Post makes clear:

"On the matter of women's reproductive rights: Strickland is clearly and strongly pro-choice, mirroring the views of a majority of Coloradans, while Allard supports a federal constitutional amendment that would essentially pre-empt a woman's choice."

The Post editorial makes another good point we haven't thought to raise before:

"Worse, by promising he will not seek a third term if re-elected this fall, Allard has marginalized even the miniscule political clout he has accumulated. In the Senate, committee assignments are based on seniority. By announcing he isn't interested in gaining more seniority, Allard has taken himself out of contention for choice committee assignments because the GOP leadership, understandably, will want to use plum posts to develop future leadership, not waste them on lawmakers who won't be around in a few years."

Again, please make a donation, and tell them TalkLeft sent you!

Liberal Oasis is on top of the "Why Iraq and not Korea" question.

Saddam Hussein has pardoned all political prisoners in Iraq.

"Iraq began freeing political prisoners under an unprecedented amnesty by President Saddam Hussein Sunday in a move seen as an attempt to rally Iraqis behind his leadership against a possible U.S. attack."

"The amnesty, following Saddam's 100 percent victory in an uncontested election last week, was extended to Arab prisoners, including Kuwaitis, as well as most inmates held for criminal convictions, officials said."

"Relatives, some carrying large pictures of Saddam, flocked to jails in and around the capital to await the release of loved ones. "With our blood and souls we redeem you Saddam," prisoners chanted as they were freed. Overjoyed detainees danced and sang songs praising Saddam."