CAIRless footnotes in brief by unindicted co conspiritor

Power Line:

Charles Johnson has posted the amicus curiae brief filed by CAIR in the Holy Land Foundation trial. Submitted by Washington attorney William Moffitt, the 56-page brief supports CAIR's motion to strike the government's identification of CAIR and others as unindicted co-conspirators of the Holy Land Foundation. The brief is poorly written and poorly argued, though here I want to focus only on one theme of the brief that is of particular interest. Indeed, it is newsworthy. If the New York Times were as interested in the news as it is in serving as CAIR's public relations arm, it might have found room for this aspect of the brief in Neil McFarquhar's story on CAIR's motion.

CAIR's brief verges on hysteria in asserting that the government has harmed it by identifying it as an unindicted co-conspirator. It repeatedly asserts that the government's identification of CAIR has reduced its membership and donations. CAIR states at page 10:

[T]he mere publication of CAIR being named as an unindicted co-conspirator impresses upon the
typical member of the American public that CAIR is involved in criminal activity. This is pure
guilt by association.

The] negative reaction by the American public can be seen in the decline of membership
rates and donations resulting from the government’s publicizing of CAIR as an unindicted coconspirator.

In an omitted footnote supporting this this proposition, CAIR cites Audrey Hudson's June 11, 2007 Washington Times story on CAIR's membership decline, which we wrote about here. At page 19 of the brief, CAIR states:

With CAIR, the formal and public co-conspirator accusation has already resulted in a precipitous decline in their donations and, therefore, their ability to effectively advocate on the part of Muslim-Americans.

...

At the time of the publication of Hudson's story, CAIR vociferously disputed its accuracy. In a June 12 press release CAIR asserted:

CAIR today accused a right-wing Washington, D.C., newspaper of "agenda-driven reporting" for falsely suggesting there has been a drop in its grassroots support. According to CAIR, an article in today's Washington Times newspaper misrepresented figures on its tax filings to falsely indicate a drop in membership.

On the one hand, CAIR's brief in the Holy Land Foundation trial confirms Hudson's story. Indeed, it cites Hudson's story to support its argument. CAIR's brief also shows CAIR's contemporaneous statement disputing the accuracy of Hudson's story to be false. CAIR freely lies to suit its convenience.

On the other hand, however, CAIR's amicus brief lies when it suggests that Hudson's story supports its argument in the Holy Land Foundation case. The government named CAIR as an unindicted co-conspirator of the Holy Land Foundation this year during the first week of June. Hudson's Washington Times story was based on data covering the period 2000-20006, before CAIR was named as an unindicted co-conspirator. CAIR's citation of Hudson's story in support of the argument made in its brief is another lie of convenience.

...

In summary, CAIR falsely claims that the decline in its membership that took place prior to it being named as an unindicted co-conspirator was caused by the designation. The filing of such a dishonest brief shows contempt for the court and it should be dealt with accordingly. Their prior inconsistent statements should also be used to challenge their credibility. CAIR is making the mistake of digging a deeper hole for the organization that has already been losing credibility as a Muslim civil rights organization. It is also counter productive to its stated purpose.