Keith interviewed investigative journalist Gerald Posner last night, who did a great job of shattering all of the inconsistencies and improbabilities in the FBI's official case against alleged anthrax killer Bruce Ivins.
The strongest evidence they have going for them is also their Achilles‘ heel and that he‘s psychological profile. That fact that he‘s very unstable, that he was someone who was an alcoholic, that he might wanted to have the vaccine continue to go along, but that‘s also the fact that he could have been set up as a cutout or puppet or used by a group of people who wanted the anthrax out there.
They also knew about his weak psychological profile. How was he employed with the most secret biological warfare lab in the United States with this type of background that we now hear about? That they should have known about from day one. The Defense Department should hang its head in shame.
For even more on this story, see Glenn Greenwald's extensive coverage:
Vital unresolved anthrax questions and ABC News
Additional key facts re: the anthrax investigation
Journalists, their lying sources, and the anthrax investigation
The FBI's emerging, leaking case against Ivins
The FBI's selective release of documents in the anthrax case
Full transcript below the fold:
OLBERMANN: A memorial service was held today for Dr. Ivins at Fort Detrick and Dr. Ivins‘ attorney in a statement reasserted his client‘s innocence.
Let‘s call in once again, investigative author, Gerald Posner, who wrote, “Why America Slept: The Failure to Prevent 9/11.”
Thanks again for your time, sir.
GERALD POSNER, INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST: Thanks, Keith. Good to be with you again.
OLBERMANN: The flask of anthrax with identical spores, ostensibly, their strongest piece of evidence. What do you make of this?
POSNER: That‘s what they make it sound like, but it‘s not. Let me tell you, the late public hears this, they think that‘s the evidence. Those are the spores that got people sick, sent out from the envelopes, not true. That was liquid anthrax in that flask.
Even if the FBI can tie to that flask, they can‘t explain how it was then made into this extremely sophisticated type of weapon with small milligram with electric charges to it, with polyglots on top of the coating, all to go deep inside the lungs, to spread to the air. This was weaponized, military anthrax. They cannot explain how from that glass flask in a liquid form into the form that was sent in the envelopes, that they don‘t have the evidence on it.
OLBERMANN: What, if anything that they presented today, is the strongest evidence? What do they got going for them?
POSNER: Well, they threw out this machine what they called the lyopholizer, they say that can make wet anthrax into dry anthrax, but I talked to six different microbiologist today and people involved formerly in weapons programs in the United States and in Russia, who say that the machine that the FBI talks about can‘t do that.
The strongest evidence they have going for them is also their Achilles‘ heel and that he‘s psychological profile. That fact that he‘s very unstable, that he was someone who was an alcoholic, that he might wanted to have the vaccine continue to go along, but that‘s also the fact that he could have been set up as a cutout or puppet (ph) or used by a group of people who wanted the anthrax out there.
They also knew about his weak psychological profile. How was he employed with the most secret biological warfare lab in the United States with this type of background that we now hear about? That they should have known about from day one. The Defense Department should hang its head in shame.
OLBERMANN: Right. Thirty-five years of murderous intent and nobody knew about it, and they let him in to the germ warfare lab. As to motive, they mentioned it but almost as if it were in passing? Is that a weak part of the case? Do they offer anything that made any sense?
POSNER: Well, I‘ll tell you. I thought it was a weak part of the case. I listened to a press conference today and then sort of at the end as though they felt they had to throw something out, they said, “Oh, by the way, let‘s give you the reasons to why we think he sent and went on this homicidal rage.”
And the motive they said was, “Well, he‘d helped developed a vaccine for anthrax, he probably wanted to continue to see that developed by killing people by having come up with an unknown way of this high military grade anthrax. We would keep the vaccine program going.”
That was pretty weak, and, you know, I thought they‘re just literally were fishing. They don‘t have a good motive, unfortunately, for them and their prosecution. But as you said in the lead into this, they don‘t need to because the primary suspect, the only suspect is dead. They‘re going to close this case.
OLBERMANN: But the declaration that he is the only, it‘s not just a question of proving a dead man did this, or was part of this, but the insistence is, he did by himself alone, mad scientist thing. Did they get anywhere near confirming that?
POSNER: No. As a matter of fact, that‘s my major problem with this. You know, if you look at it and you say, “He‘s involved, he‘s got a role in it, he‘s done something.” That‘s the evidence I‘m waiting to see that and they may nail that down. But I spoke to enough experts in the last few days, who have convinced, who know how this process works, that these spores that were sent out, were not the work of one lone scientist and that, I believe, is the case.
OLBERMANN: Investigative journalist and author, Gerald Posner, your help on this has been invaluable. Thank you, sir.
POSNER: Thank you, Keith.
