By Joseph
Farah
© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com
The Associated Press story covering the Supreme Court hearing on
requested release of Vincent Foster crime-scene photos read as follows:
"Five government investigations concluded that White House attorney
Vincent Foster's death in 1993 was a suicide."
Not true.
There haven't been five government investigations. In fact, there
hasn't been even one real government investigation. Instead, there have
been five cover-ups, all using the same tainted evidence and the same
tainted investigators.
Attorney Allan Favish believes the public may learn something from 10
unreleased police photos of Foster and has taken the issue all the way to
the Supreme Court.
I believe he's right.
Color me a "conspiracy theorist" if you wish. But I go where the facts
lead me. And the facts in the Foster case have never led to the conclusion
of suicide in Fort Marcy Park. No matter how many government rubber stamps
are placed on that theory, it will never hold water.
The Justice Department is fighting a lower-court order to release four
of the photos under the Freedom of Information Act. The law allows the
media and individuals to receive unclassified records the government would
not normally release. Its "personal privacy" exemption does not cover
surviving family members. Nevertheless, the government is still covering
its behind – not wishing the public to find out it was sold a bill of
goods a decade ago.
"I can think of no higher public interest than what's being argued
here," said Favish. "I think the government can no longer be trusted to
filter the raw evidence to the public in this case."
Favish said the government made numerous mistakes in its handling of
Foster's death, and he believes the withheld photos will help prove his
conspiracy theory.
Last week, a seemingly skeptical Supreme Court grilled Favish,
suggesting the public is no closer to finding out the truth about what
became of Bill Clinton's lawyer in 1993.
"There is a long-standing tradition of respect for the dead, for the
survivors," said Justice Stephen Breyer. "It is something so deep in human
nature."
In other words, it's not a matter of what the law actually says – but
there's this "tradition ..."
Justice David Souter said there is a fundamental "right to be left
alone." He indicated the Foster family's interest falls under the concept
of privacy, and that they should not have to be "assaulted by having these
photographs published."
The old right-to-privacy ... found nowhere in the Constitution.
Favish rightly pointed out it is up to Congress, not the courts, to
give surviving family members specific privacy rights.
Justice Anthony Kennedy disputed the suggestion that the Supreme Court
had endorsed the narrower definition of privacy in a 1989 decision
protecting the confidentiality of criminal "rap sheets." Noting that the
court in that case had said that traditional understandings of privacy
"encompass the individual's control of information concerning his or her
person," Kennedy told Favish that it was an "unfair reading" to equate
"encompasses" with "consists of."
In other words, it all depends on what the word "is" means.
Even the usually reliable Antonin Scalia seemed to cave to political
correctness on this issue. Scalia, who seemed to favor Favish's definition
of the scope of privacy under the Freedom of Information Act, nevertheless
was critical of the attorney's campaign to get the Foster death photos, at
one point calling him a "conspiracy theorist" about the case.
"You have relatives here who are going to be very much harmed," Scalia
said. "What is the interest on the other side? You've demonstrated some
footfaults in the investigations, a mistake here and there, but who cares?
Do you really think this is of significant moment for the country?"
Favish does. So do I. And no amount of name-calling by people who
refuse to look at the facts is going to change that.
Be sure to sign up for Joseph Farah's free
e-mail list solely designed as an organizing tool of his bid to
impeach the Supreme Court majority.
Joseph Farah's nationally
syndicated column originates at WorldNetDaily, where he serves as editor
and chief executive officer. If you would like to see the column in your
local newspaper, contact your local editor. Tell your paper the column is
available through Creators
Syndicate.
