Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

AIPAC prosecution dealt major blow

Expand Messages
  • World View
    Prosecution of AIPAC staffers dealt major blow By Ron Kampeas · February 24, 2009 http://jta.org/news/article/2009/02/24/1003248/two-blows-for-aipac-
    Message 1 of 1 , Feb 28, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Prosecution of AIPAC staffers dealt major blow
      By Ron Kampeas ·
      February 24, 2009

      WASHINGTON (JTA) -- The prosecution in the case against two former
      AIPAC staffers lost two key battles in recent days, raising hopes
      among the defense that the ex-officials of the pro-Israel lobby
      ultimately will be acquitted of all charges.

      In decisions five days apart, judges quashed government efforts to
      block the rights of Steve Rosen, the American Israel Public Affairs
      Committee's former foreign policy chief, and Keith Weissman, its
      former Iran analyst, to submit certain material or witnesses for
      evidence. The rulings, along with the scolding language of the
      judges' decisions, suggests the courts view the government as having
      overreached in its prosecution of the pair for passing on classified

      On Feb. 19, T.S. Ellis III, the federal judge trying the case in
      Alexandria, Va., decided to allow defense testimony by William
      Leonard, the official who until a year ago was the ultimate
      government authority on what information to classify.

      Then, on Tuesday, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va.,
      issued a ruling that upheld orders by Ellis that the prosecution must
      prove that the information Rosen and Weissman allegedly relayed to
      journalists, Israeli diplomats and colleagues was "closely held" by
      the United States and potentially damaging to U.S. interests, and was
      relayed in bad faith.

      This would meet the standards for the burden of proof set by the 1917
      espionage law under which Rosen and Weissman are being tried.

      The Ellis ruling "set a very high threshold for the prosecution to
      not only demonstrate a particular set of facts, but also to prove
      intent on the part of the defendant," explained Steven Aftergood, the
      director of the Secrecy Project at the Federation of American
      Scientists, which seeks to protect First Amendment rights.

      "That is a difficult and possibly impossible task," Aftergood
      said. "The prosecution is left with its all-but-insurmountable burden
      of proof."

      In what some are calling a rebuke of the government, the three-judge
      appeals court panel called "improper" the government's effort to
      overturn Ellis' 2006 decision.

      "The government's attempt to piggyback a pretrial review of the
      court's interpretation is improper at this juncture," the panel said.

      In classified information cases like these, pretrial prosecution
      appeals are meant only to address questions of what classified
      evidence is admissible, the appeals court noted. The government
      already had attempted to broaden its narrow grounds for appeal, and
      last summer the appeals court rejected that bid.

      "Our dismissal of that appeal constitutes the law of the case, and we
      will not revisit it," the appeals court panel said this week.

      Some observers close to the defendants say these decisions over the
      last week give the Obama administration an opportunity to reconsider
      whether to go ahead with the case, which has proven controversial.

      For their part, lawyers for Rosen and Weissman were elated.

      "This is a tremendous victory for the defendants," said Baruch Weiss,
      who represents Weissman.

      "The ruling of the 4th Circuit is just the latest confirmation that
      this is a misdirected case brought under a misdirected theory where
      the government continues to be reminded that they are wrong," said
      Abbe Lowell, the attorney for Rosen. "Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman
      are anxious to now use all of the various court rulings to move ahead
      and finally try this case to prove their innocence."

      If the case ever goes to trial, which is scheduled for April 21.

      In pretrial hearings, prosecutors have suggested that Ellis'
      restrictions create a high barrier to overcome in a trial that has
      been delayed multiple times over four years.

      Peter Carr, a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's Office in eastern
      Virginia, told JTA after this week's ruling that "We are reviewing
      the decision and will respond accordingly."

      The decision by Ellis to allow Leonard to testify also contained
      reproachful language. The government had argued that because Leonard
      had consulted for about an hour with prosecutors in 2006, he was
      barred from testifying for the defense under laws that restrict
      government employees involved in a case from testifying against the
      United States.

      Prosecutors had threatened to jail Leonard for up to a year if he
      testified, but Ellis rejected their request to ban his testimony.
      Ellis questioned whether prosecutors sought Leonard's removal because
      his theories about government overclassification, which Leonard made
      plain in his 2006 meeting with them, would assist the defense.

      "That Leonard might disagree with the government is no reason to
      allow the government to invoke" the relevant statute "to prevent
      Leonard from serving as a defense expert," Ellis wrote.

      This week's ruling provides a potential opening for the Obama
      administration, which has been eager to undo some of the secrecy
      provisions instituted by President Bush, to drop the case.

      Despite the Bush administration's closeness to the pro-Israel
      community, its fingerprints were all over the case, which was of a
      piece with the administration's efforts to restore executive powers
      and expand secrecy.

      The case was brought in 2005 by Paul McNulty, a U.S. attorney who
      later was named deputy attorney general. Before then, McNulty was
      best known for his work to impeach President Clinton and during the
      2000 electoral recount in Florida.

      The decision not to revisit Ellis' rulings buries at last all
      arguments by prosecutors that the 1917 espionage statute did not
      require proof of bad faith and that its baseline was that the release
      of the information might help a foreign government, not necessarily
      that it would harm the United States.

      The section of the law that criminalized the receipt and distribution
      of national defense information by civilians has barely been tested
      in the courts.

      The appeals court ruling Tuesday contained other victories for the

      It upheld Ellis' allowance of an "Israeli briefing document" --
      apparently relevant because it shows that U.S. officials were
      relaying to Israeli counterparts information almost identical to that
      referred to in the original indictment. The briefing document also
      allowed an FBI report that may help show that information allegedly
      discussed by Weissman in a conversation about the 1996 bombing of a
      housing complex for U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia was broadly known.

      Ellis' ruling also allows a number of National Security Presidential
      Directives on Iran.

      FBI agents raided AIPAC's offices in August 2004. Rosen and Weissman
      were indicted a year later.


      AIPAC doubles earnings
      February 12, 2009

      WASHINGTON (JTA) -- AIPAC's fund-raising nearly doubled in four
      years.Tax records show that the American Israel Public Affairs
      Committeeraised $46.9 million in 2004, including $15.1 million for
      itsaffiliate, the American Israel Education Foundation, a charitable
      groupthat funds campus activities, seminars and missions to Israel
      bystudents, government officials and lawmakers.By 2007, AIPAC showed
      $86 million in income, including $35.1 for the foundation.

      Contributions to AIPAC began soaring after the eruption of thesecond
      Intifada in 2000 and the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in 2001.In recent
      years, the lobby has raised funds for a new headquartersin downtown
      Washington, opened a year ago, and for expanded campus activities.


      Our dual-citizenship Congress:
      Lotsa pork for Israelis, no pork for California?
      By Jane Stillwater

      I turned on the television last night and listened to the local
      news anchor tell me, "The State of California is currently facing
      bankruptcy." I live in California. This is not good news. Plus
      California's jobs are drying up, homes are being foreclosed on,
      stores are going out of business, schools are laying off teachers,
      banks are eliminating branches. The eighth-largest economy in the
      world is about to tank. Boy could we use some financial help from
      the feds.

      But will we get it?

      Probably not.

      No pork for California, not even a bailout.

      But Congress still continues to enthusiastically pour billions
      of our taxpayers' dollars into the Israeli economy each year. What's
      with that? Do our Congressional representatives hold dual
      citizenship with the United States and Israel or what? When are they
      going to stop voting pork for Israel and start voting bailout money
      for CA?

      Are we Californians going to have to start firing Qassam rockets
      at Washington to get their attention or what?



      To subscribe to this group, send an email to:


      Need some good karma? Appreciate the service?
      Please consider donating to WVNS today.
      Email ummyakoub@... for instructions.

      To leave this list, send an email to:
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.