Regarding the complaint submitted to the New York State Attorney
General's office, described at:
http://www.justicefor911.org/

What are the real factors governing whether or not this will actually
become a grand jury criminal investigation?

From what I've seen these are people with conspiracy theories and just
plain idiotic.  For example, they ask why didn't the president return
to Wash DC.  Well, that was a judgement call.  Nothing required him to
return immediately.  What's the use of asking this question?  They ask
why wasn't information the CIA had shared with the FBI.  The reasons
have been well documented; there was an order that prohibited it. 
There are a lot of generalities thrown about , like there was insider
trading, but no specifics on that and how that is relevant to 9/11, if
it even occurred.  With the 9/11 commission report I venture that
nothing will happen based on the "petition".

While I agree, most conspiracy theorists are irrational, I suspect
conspiracies abound, but anyone good at finding good evidence, will be
persuaded to lie, by fair means or foul. If they cam not be pursuaded:
Dead men tell no tales.    Neil

timespacette --

You may be interested in this linked page from the United States
Attorneys Manual that deals with grand juries.  Below the link, I have
reproduced a brief excerpt from the page that states the core function
of a grand jury.  The Manual seems to advise prosecutors to use the
broad power of grand juries prudently, in situations where specific
"targets" for possible criminal indictment can be identified.

Justice Department: U.S. Attoneys Manual: Section 9
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/11mcrm.htm#9-11.010


"9-11.101 Powers and Limitations of Grand Juries -- The Functions of a Grand Jury 

"While grand juries are sometimes described as performing accusatory
and investigatory functions, the grand jury's principal function is to
determine whether or not there is probable cause to believe that one
or more persons committed a certain Federal offense within the venue
of the district court. Thus, it has been said that a grand jury has
but two functions -- to indict or, in the alternative, to return a
'no-bill.' See Wright, Federal Practice and Procedure, Criminal
Section 110."


You might also want to peruse this linked transcript of a July 27,
2000 hearing of the House Judiciary Committee on the subject of
Constitutional Rights and the Grand Jury:

http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/judiciary/hju67333.000/hju67333_0.htm

markj-ga

Hello markj, thank you so much for taking a serious an unbiased stab
at this. One major problem I have is that I instantly become dyslexic
when I look at legalese ... but I have looked it over. I am very
interested to know something (and I realize I must rely on educated
guess/personal opinion) which is: given the powers that exist (NOW and
in the likely event that GWB's future appointees will rule in his
favor) in the levels of the judiciary world, does this action have any
chance at all of being pursued?

I guess I need a basic lesson in these supposed checks and balances
that should be in place, whether they actually are in place, whether
and why they may not work, etc.

I have posted this question at $5.00 but I would happily add a hefty
tip if the information was something I could assimilate.

thanks again,
ts-ga