LaRouche Issues Statement
on Department of Justice Dirty Trick


Oct. 12, 1995--Lyndon LaRouche, candidate for the Democratic Party nomination for President, issued the following statement from Leesburg, Virginia today.

"The corruption within the U.S. Department of Justice seems to be endless. Once again, a politically corrupt Department of Justice goes to bed with Katharine Graham's Washington Post, to run political dirty tricks against Democratic presidential candidate Lyndon LaRouche and his associates.

"The latest incident to surface centers around a U.S. Department of Justice letter, dated Oct. 4, 1995, to Washington, D.C. Mayor Marion Barry, from the DOJ's Office of Legislative Affairs. The letter is signed Nicholas M. Gess, identified as Director for Public Liaison and Intergovernmental Affairs.

"The letter represents itself as complaining that "employees of the District of Columbia have received the attached flyer with their paychecks." The flyer to which Director Gess refers proves to be one issued by friends of mine, announcing a musical concert to be given in the context of the "Million Man March." The evidence gathered in investigation of that claim by Director Gess shows that, barring a single alleged instance of hearsay evidence, the statement is false; the evidence is, that no such stuffing of paycheck envelopes of employees actually occurred.

"There is a strong indication that the DOJ allegation is not merely a mistake, but is a typical, politically motivated DOJ fraud upon the public. Most of the letter is devoted to Director Gess's presenting a strong DOJ political motive for circulating such a false allegation against the authors of the flier in question. As part of that argument, he lies outrightly. He states that "the allegations" of DOJ misconduct, "contained in the flyer are false." That statement by the DOJ is a lie.

"The matter of Director Gess's expressed concern is a hearing held on August 31 and September 1, 1995, in which a panel of elected officials heard evidence on misconduct by the Department of Justice in four cases: 1) The Demjanjuk case, in which the Federal Sixth Circuit found, in 1993, that the Department of Justice had perpetrated fraud upon the court, over a period of more than fourteen years; 2) The DOJ's continued support for a racialist targetting of elected African-American officials, a matter of official record; 3) The most massive case of fraud, the DOJ fraudulent prosecution of Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., et al. during a period of more than twenty years, and 4) The DOJ's gross misconduct in the case of false charges placed against Austria's President Kurt Waldheim. The facts referenced in the subject flyer are all true.

"There is a crucial issue of policy in this matter.

"After the 1992 revelations of the Sixth Circuit, on the massive fraud on the court by the DOJ, after it had been shown that the DOJ knew, since 1978, that John Demjanjuk was not the `Ivan the Terrible' the DOJ accused him of being, the DOJ still attempted to support its fraudulent case against Demjanjuk. Even when the Sixth Circuit ruled formally, in 1993, that the DOJ had perpetrated fraud on the court for more than eleven years, even fraudulent attempting to send Demanjuk to his death on charges which the DOJ had known to be false at that time, the DOJ still attempted to appeal the Sixth Circuit's freeing of Demjanjuk to the Supreme Court. The Court declined to consider the appeal; the Sixth Circuit decision stands, and Nicholas Gess's letter is a lie.

"The issue of policy so posed is this. The fact that the DOJ was caught red-handed in a massive fraud upon the court, in that case, should have compelled the DOJ to act at the highest level, to set a new standard of review for past and ongoing DOJ investigations and prosecutions, to purge the Department of those wicked past practices of the Criminal Division's permanent civil-service bureaucracy. To the present date, the Justice Department continues to refuse to clean up its act. Its behavior would be called, in the language of the Watergate era, `stonewalling,' or, one might prefer to say, `piling one cover-up on top of another.'"