'Minnesota Men' on Trial

[Valin]

The Weekly Standard:

Guilty, guilty, and guilty.

Scott W. Johnson

Jun 20, 2016

 

Minneapolis

 

When the first group of “Minnesota men" was charged with conspiring to join ISIS in April 2015, it made front pages across the country. By the time the case went to court last month, however, the national media were almost nowhere to be found. Having attended the three-week-long trial daily, I can confidently say reporters should have paid a visit before the jury returned guilty verdicts June 3 against the three conspirators who contested the charges against them. I had to take in the evidence with my own eyes and ears to understand the gravity of the case against the "Minnesota men," as media reports impassively referred to the Somali-American would-be terrorists. That evidence—overwhelming, devastating, shocking—was newsworthy. In his closing argument, one defense attorney professed that his client may have gotten into a situation over his head. But given the facts of the case—and the statements of those who protested that it went to trial at all—we might be in further over our heads than those convicted.

 

(Snip)

 

The heart of the case brought against the defendants was conspiracy: conspiracy to provide material support to a foreign terrorist organization (by joining ISIS) and conspiracy to commit murder overseas (by fighting for ISIS). The second of the two charges carries a penalty of imprisonment up to life. To support the charges, prosecutors called Yusuf, Warsame, and Bashir to testify to the conspiracy from the inside. Yusuf and Warsame had pleaded guilty and hoped to secure reductions in their sentences from Judge Michael Davis, who has yet to impose sentences (see "Judging the 'Minnesota Men,' " March 21, 2016). No charges have been brought against Bashir.

 

(Snip)

 

he convictions promptly returned by the jury vindicate the work of the FBI and the office of United States Attorney for Minnesota Andrew Luger. Following the verdicts June 3, they held a joint press conference. Responding to the defamation of law enforcement and criticism of the informant by members of the Somali community and their friends in the peace crowd during the trial, FBI Special Agent in Charge of the Minneapolis Division Richard Thornton commented with unusual bluntness: "I find it shameful that some so-called community leaders have tried to vilify the confidential human source in this case. There is something wrong when you blame the person who did the right thing and defend those who were clearly in the wrong." One may reasonably infer that the FBI is one institution of the executive branch President Obama has not yet corrupted. His administration has tried to muffle the Islamic component of the conflicts that confront the United States with its talk of "Countering Violent Extremism" and "Building Community Resilience." While this troubling trial held few consolations, the absence of mind-numbing euphemisms was one.

[Valin]

[nickydog]

If you hadn't been bringing this to our attention, @Valin, I would have known nothing about it. Did your Mpls. Red Star Tribune closely follow these events with first page headlines?

[nickydog]

It is comforting that at the end of this article the writer concludes that "One may reasonably infer that the FBI is one institution of the executive branch President Obama has not yet corrupted" since it is the FBI that is investigating Hillary Clinton's private email server.

[Valin]

If you hadn't been bringing this to our attention, @Valin, I would have known nothing about it. Did your Mpls. Red Star Tribune closely follow these events with first page headlines?

 

 

Short Answer....Yes

[Valin]

Sharia in the Twin Cities?

 

 

[Valin]

Sentencing the “Minnesota men”
Scott Johnson
Nov 5 2016

Nine “Minnesota men” have pleaded guilty (six) or been convicted (three) in the big ISIS conspiracy case that was originally filed in Minnesota last year. “Minnesota men” is the preferred media descriptor of the Somali defendants in the case.

(Snip)

Judge Davis has scheduled the sentencing of all nine men over hearings scheduled over three days, November 14-16. I plan on attending and reporting what happens at the hearings.

 

This past Thursday the parties filed memoranda supporting proposed sentences as to each of the nine defendants. Stephen Montemayor covers the memoranda and the parties’ proposed sentences in the Star Tribune article “Shorter sentences sought for ISIL recruitment defendants.”

 

I have been particularly interested in the prosecution’s proposed sentences for the three men whose trial I attended. The government urges a 40-year sentence on Guled Omar and 30-year sentences on Mohamed Farah and Abdirahman Daud.

 

The government’s memoranda are long, detailed and powerful. In court and in the government’s memoranda, the Obama administration’s political correctness falls away. The euphemisms evanesce. Toward the end of the government’s memorandum on Omar one finds this:

 

(Snip)

 

I have tried to emphasize these points myself here and in the articles I wrote about the trial. I highly doubt that you will find these devastating observations quoted or explored in the Star Tribune or elsewhere. I want to take the liberty of bringing them to your attention and asking you to let them sink in this morning.