Showing posts with label Whistle-blowers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Whistle-blowers. Show all posts

Friday, January 16, 2015

Jeffrey Sterling Trial

The true legacy of the Obama Administration is not known when leak investigation trials (and other national security trials) are not covered by the mainstream media.  While there are articles about the trial, video and audio are also very helpful in understanding what is happening in the case.

 Op-ed News
Since Tuesday and continuing for the coming three weeks, an amazing trial is happening in U.S. District Court at 401 Courthouse Square in Alexandria, Va. The trial is open to the public, and among the upcoming witnesses is Condoleezza Rice, but -- unlike the Chelsea Manning trial -- most of the seats at this somewhat similar event are empty.
continued
The CIA drew up plans for a key part of a nuclear bomb (what a CIA officer on Wednesday described in his testimony as "the crown jewels" of a nuclear weapons program), inserted flaws in the plans, and then had a Russian give those flawed plans to Iran.
During the trial on Wednesday morning, the prosecution's witnesses made clear both that aiding Iran in developing a part of a bomb would be illegal under U.S. export control laws, and that they were aware at the time that there was the possibility of what they were doing constituting just such aid.
The trial is being covered here at ExposeFacts. (Many nes articles are just reprints of these blog posts).

 Some of the case files are here at FAS, and Cryptome has exhibits, and Marcy Wheeler has some documents, like the CIA response.

 Over at POLITICO is Josh Gerstein's Under the Radar blog, see here and here and other articles as well.

 CourthouseNews is also covering the trial.

Ray McGovern wrote about MERLIN here and why the case is so important.
The federal government claims it is prosecuting former CIA officer Jeffrey Sterling for leaking information to a journalist about a risky covert operation in which the spy agency funneled flawed nuclear-bomb schematics to Iran. But the opening days of the trial suggest that the government may be using the case more to overcome its reputation for shoddy intelligence work.
continued
the real subtext of the Sterling case is how the politicization of the CIA’s analytical division over the past several decades has contributed to multiple intelligence failures, especially efforts to “prove” that targeted regimes in the Middle East were amassing weapons of mass destruction.
continued
the two issues – the bogus Iraq-WMD intelligence and the pressure to create another casus belli on Iran – are inextricably linked, as Risen himself explained in his affidavit submitted in connection with the Sterling case.
Risen wrote, “I believe I performed a vitally important public service by exposing the reckless and badly mismanaged nature of intelligence on Iran’s efforts to obtain weapons of mass destruction, so that the nation would not go to war once again based on flawed intelligence, as it had in Iraq.”
continued
The most definitive study of a post-Iraq “uncorroborated, contradicted, or even non-existent” nuclear weapons program, this time in Iran, is presented in Gareth Porter’s Manufactured Crisis published a year ago (and viewed as untouchable by reviewers in the fawning corporate media). Porter brings together the results of his many years of research into the issue, including numerous interviews with former insiders.
emphasis mine
He shows that the origins of the Iran nuclear “crisis” were not in an Iranian urge to obtain nuclear weapons but, rather, in a sustained effort by the United States and its allies to deny Iran its right, as guaranteed in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, to have any nuclear program at all.
Here is Iran's news agency PressTV's quick report.

The State Department said in its daily brief on Thursday that the trial isn't affecting continuing bilateral talks, because no one there seems to be following the trial.
QUESTION: We’re watching the Jeffrey Sterling trial on the – in that trial that’s going to come out about CIA Operation Merlin, where they were trying to give, essentially, incomplete nuclear weapon plans to Iran to kind of slow down their development of a nuclear weapon. Could the information coming out in this trial at all affect the ongoing talks between Kerry and Iran?
MS. HARF: Well, given I’m not familiar with the specifics of that trial, and I’m not sure our team that’s talking right now in Geneva is either, look --
QUESTION: It’s just kind of out in the public.
MS. HARF: We’re --
QUESTION: Anyone can pick it up, and I just (inaudible).
MS. HARF: Yeah. Well, so look, I’ll check with our folks. But broadly speaking, we are moving forward with these nuclear negotiations, with the P5+1, and with us, with our partners. Their teams are meeting right now with Wendy Sherman and the other negotiators for a couple days of bilateral talks, and then with the rest of the P5+1. That process is moving forward, and hopefully we can continue making progress. Obviously, there’s a lot of history here. We all are well aware of that. What we’re focused on now is what happens going forward.
While they seem not to be aware of the Jeffrey Sterling/James Risen trial, they are aware of the journalist that Iran has in prison, Jason Rezaian.
QUESTION: Can I go back to Iran?
MS. HARF: Yeah, and then I’m going to go to you. Yes, we can.
QUESTION: The case of Jason Rezaian.
MS. HARF: Yes.
QUESTION: Do you have any more information about what he’s been charged with? Have the Swiss been able to meet with him? Does he have a lawyer? What’s – what is his situation right now?
MS. HARF: Well, during the meetings yesterday, Secretary Kerry raised U.S. citizen Jason Rezaian’s case. They discussed the report stating that his case had been referred to a court. The Secretary reiterated our call for his immediate release, as well as for the immediate release of detained U.S. citizens, Saeed Abedini and Amir Hekmati, and of course, for the Iranian Government to work cooperatively with us in locating Robert Levinson, as we always do.
This is a discussion we have with them very frequently. I don’t have many more details than that. Of course, we continue to monitor the situation closely and are seeking further information about what might come out of this move to refer the case to the court. I know The Washington Post – one of their editors also said they hope this is a way the judicial process can be moved forward and Jason can be returned to his family. We certainly share that sentiment.
QUESTION: But you’re not aware of whether there have been any contacts between Jason and Swiss officials?
MS. HARF: I can check. I’m not aware of any, but I’m happy to check for you.

Reporters without Borders is relieved to see that James Risen will not be called to testify at the trial, and even The Intercept reports that DOJ is pulling back (a little bit) from its attacks on journalists and whistle-blowers, revising its media guidelines policy on gathering information from journalists.

 Many news outlets covered Condoleezza Rice's testimony where she said that publishing the story could have endangered Americans' lives, which made some of us laugh out loud at the irony of that statement.




Here is the Google News RSS feed for "Jeffrey Sterling" if you want to keep up with future articles.

 And now for the Youtube.

(YouTube)
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

Tuesday, December 16, 2014

James Risen not off the hook yet

James Risen is still not off the hook yet as the trial of CIA agent Jeffrey Sterling begins next week.
Earlier this week, the US district judge Leonie Brinkema ordered prosecutors to announce at a 16 December hearing whether they plan to call Risen as a witness.
In her one-page order, Brinkema also asked prosecutors to reveal “any conditions or limitations” they have worked out with Risen’s attorneys. She said the Justice Department has had more than six months to decide whether it would subpoena Risen to testify at the trial, which is scheduled to start on 12 January. 
Al Jazeera America
The Justice Department will not try to compel New York Times reporter James Risen to testify about his source at an upcoming trial of a former CIA officer accused of leaking classified information, according to a source familiar with the investigation who spoke on condition of anonymity.
The Guardian
The person briefed on the matter, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the decision had not yet been formally announced, said the Justice Department may still subpoena Risen to testify on other topics but would not compel him to divulge the identify of his source.
Or as TechDirt put it,
However, there was a bit of irony in all of this: the DOJ leaked this information to the press. Risen's lawyer told reporter Jana Winter that they hadn't received any official word when the stories started appearing in the press, and there hadn't been any official government filing. The NY Times reports the same thing. Instead, it was just reported in the press as "according to a person familiar with the decision."

In other words, it "leaked" from the DOJ.

Or, more specifically, it leaked from the DOJ that it wouldn't seek to put a reporter in jail for refusing to say who leaked other information to him, as it still looks to put that original leaker in jail.
as Kevin Gosztola explains
Despite comments from anonymous officials, the United States government has issued no formal offer to New York Times reporter James Risen to protect him from having to reveal any information about his confidential sources if he were to be subpoenaed and forced to testify in the trial of former CIA officer Jeffrey Sterling, according to his attorney.
Sterling is alleged to have given information to Risen on a classified program that the government claims was “intended to impede Iran’s efforts to acquire or develop nuclear weapons,” which Risen later published in his book, State of War. A trial is currently scheduled for January.
Risen’s attorney reacted to anonymous officials who leaked on December 12 that Attorney General Eric Holder would no longer force Risen to testify about the identity of his confidential sources:
NBC News Justice Correspondent Pete Williams obtained comment from a “Justice Department official,” who stated if the government subpoenaed Risen to force him to provide testimony, it would not be for testimony “about the identity of his source.” The government would have him “confirm that he had an agreement with a confidential source, and that he did write the book.”
The official added the government would “no longer seek what he’s most concerned about revealing.”
continued
Sterling faces a trial on ten felony counts, seven of which are under the Espionage Act. Much of the evidence in his case suggests he is another whistleblower who has fallen victim to President Barack Obama’s war on whistleblowers (even though his prosecution began before Obama was elected).
Marcy Wheeler and Norman Solomon reported for The Nation:
In early March 2003, Sterling met with two Senate Intelligence Committee staffers to report that Operation Merlin—the CIA’s ill-conceived and bungled effort in 2000 to use a former Russian scientist to pass flawed nuclear-weapons blueprints to Iran—may have helped Iran’s nuclear ambitions. The government concedes that Sterling went through proper channels when he “disclosed classified information” to committee staff. (In court documents, the prosecution has complained that Sterling was unfairly critical of that operation when he spoke to committee staffers.) 
Marcy Wheeler, who writes extensively on the Risen/Sterling case at ExposeFacts wrote that the government may try to ascertain more information about Risen's sources, since as Marcy writes that
Sterling’s lawyers know that — as ExposeFacts noted earlier this month — journalists of Risen’s caliber do not write entire book chapters based on a single source. Sterling’s lawyers would have every incentive to get Risen to testify about the range of sources he used for his book.
Setting Sterling’s lawyers up to ask Risen how many sources he spoke to for the chapter of State of War might be particularly useful for the government, given that Sterling will be able to introduce some information (the scope of which is not yet public, pending the declassification of a Brinkema order on the subject) about how witnesses against him, including his supervisor at the time, have mishandled classified information. That is, the government may well be in the position to ask Risen enough to allow Sterling to ask the journalist about his sources. This would let the government expose Risen’s reporting, but do so at the hands of the defendant and the judge who would then be protecting Sterling’s right to a fair trial.
Read Glenn Greenwald's interview with James Risen, or watch James Risen on Democracy Now! or listen to interview on Fresh Air.  Julianna Forlano also discussed Sterling case with Norman Solomon, and the Torture report with Michael Ratner.




Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)