Lobbyists' Lawyers Say Rice Leaked Information
By Richard B. Schmitt
The Los Angeles Times
Saturday 22 April 2006
The secretary of State and three other officials are to be subpoenaed. The defense says they told secrets to employees of a pro-Israel group.
Alexandria - Lawyers for two lobbyists accused of conspiring to obtain secret defense information said Friday that they intended to prove that senior administration officials, including Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, provided the lobbyists with some of the sensitive information.
Ratcheting up their defense against espionage charges, the lawyers, representing former employees of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, got tentative clearance from US District Judge T.S. Ellis III to subpoena Rice and three other officials in the case.
It was unclear whether Rice and the other officials would agree to be questioned or to testify. Ellis put off trial of the closely watched case, previously set to begin May 23, until Aug. 7.
The escalating legal battle could redefine the way information is circulated in Washington. The charges are part of a Justice Department crackdown on leaks of classified information that officials say hurt national security. Some interest groups and media organizations say the case could chill their rights under the 1st Amendment.
At a hearing Friday, Abbe Lowell, the lawyer for former AIPAC employee Steven J. Rosen, said the testimony of Rice and the other officials was necessary to show that they also had disclosed sensitive information and that some of the disclosures at the crux of the indictments might have been authorized.
Each of the officials "has real-life dealings with the defendants in this case. They'll explain what they told Dr. Rosen in detail," Lowell said. "Day One É Rice tells him certain information. Day Two É [someone else named in the indictment] tells him the same thing" or similar information.
Ellis approved subpoenas for David Satterfield, deputy chief of the US mission to Iraq; William J. Burns, US ambassador to Russia; and retired Marine Gen. Anthony C. Zinni, in addition to Rice.
Prosecutors disputed the allegation that Rice had improperly leaked information, and opposed the subpoenas. Rice "never gave national defense information" to Rosen, Assistant US Atty. Kevin DiGregory told Ellis.
Rosen and former AIPAC employee Keith Weissman are charged with collaborating with former Pentagon analyst Lawrence A. Franklin to collect secret defense information about the Middle East.
Franklin was sentenced Jan. 20 to more than 12 years in prison for giving classified information to Rosen, Weissman and an Israeli diplomat.
Ellis also approved a defense subpoena for Franklin.
The indictment alleges a conspiracy dating to 1999, including meetings with two other government officials at which secret information was disclosed. Those officials are not charged in the case. Though they are not identified in the indictment, one of them is reported to be Satterfield.
According to prosecutors, Rosen and Weissman assiduously acquired information about a range of secrets, including a sensitive analysis of US policy in Iran. AIPAC fired them last year, saying they acted contrary to the best interests of the organization.
Lowell did not say in court what information Rice and the other officials might have provided, and declined to elaborate afterward.
"This is not a stunt," he said, leaving the courthouse.
The charges were brought under the 1917 Espionage Act, which has been used mostly to prosecute government employees accused of betraying the nation's secrets. Ellis has called the case unprecedented and is considering a motion by the defense to dismiss the indictment on grounds that the espionage law is unconstitutional. Such a move would obviate a trial.
Lowell argued Friday that the law infringed on the 1st Amendment rights of lobbyists to petition the government. He said the government's interpretation of the World War I-era statute would clear the way for prosecutions of journalists who obtained classified information in the course of their reporting.
DiGregory said that Rosen and Weissman had knowingly broken the law and that the case was about stealing rather than speech. Prosecutors recently submitted to Ellis a classified exhibit "demonstrating the willfulness of the defendants' criminal conduct in this case," according to a court filing.
Spokesman Denies Rice Leaked Defense
Info
By Matthew Barakat
The Associated Press
Saturday 22 April 2006
Alexandria - Condoleezza Rice's spokesman on Saturday branded as "utterly false" a lawyer's claim the secretary of state leaked national defense information to a pro-Israel lobbyist charged with receiving and disclosing such information.
The assertion came as a federal judge granted a defense request to issue subpoenas for Rice and three other government officials in the trial of Steven Rosen and Keith Weissman, the former lobbyists with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee charged in the case.
"The claims by these defense lawyers are utterly false," Rice's spokesman, Sean McCormack, told The Associated Press.
"The secretary is the most careful person in the handling of classified information and she absolutely did not convey classified information to either of these individuals," McCormack said.
Prosecutors also disputed the claim.
Defense lawyers want a judge to dismiss the charges because the lawyers believe the case seeks to criminalize the type of backchannel exchanges among government officials, lobbyists and the press that are common in Washington.
During Friday's hearing, US District Judge T.S. Ellis III said he is considering dismissing the entire case because the law used to prosecute Rosen and Weissman may be unconstitutionally vague and broad and may infringe on freedom of speech.
Rosen's lawyer, Abbe Lowell, said the testimony of Rice and others is needed to show that some top government officials approved of disclosing sensitive information to the defendants and that the leaks may have been authorized.
But Assistant US Attorney Kevin DiGregory said Rice "never gave national defense information to Mr. Rosen."
The issuance of subpoenas does not automatically require Rice or anybody else to testify or give a deposition. A recipient can seek to quash the subpoena.
The judge also granted subpoenas for David Satterfield, deputy chief of the US mission to Iraq; William Burns, US ambassador to Russia and retired Marine Gen. Anthony Zinni.
"Each of these individuals have real-life dealings with the defendants in this case. They'll explain what they told Dr. Rosen in detail," Lowell said. "On day one, Secretary of State Rice tells him certain info and on day two one of the conspirators tells him the same thing or something less volatile."
The indictment against Rosen and Weissman alleges that three government officials leaked sensitive and sometimes classified national defense information to the two lobbyists, who subsequently revealed what they learned to the press and to an Israeli government official.
One of the three government officials is former Pentagon official Lawrence A. Franklin. He pleaded guilty to providing classified defense information to Rosen and Weissman and was sentenced to more than 12 years in prison.
Franklin has said he was concerned that the United States was insufficiently concerned about the threat posed by Iran and hoped that leaking information might eventually provoke the National Security Council to take a different course of action.
The indictment against Rosen, of Silver Spring, Md., and Weissman, of Bethesda, Md., alleges that they conspired to obtain classified government reports on issues relevant to US policy, including the al-Qaida terror network; the bombing of the Khobar Towers dormitory in Saudi Arabia, which killed 19 US Air Force personnel; and US policy in Iran.
Lowell said it is impossible for Rosen and Weissman to determine what is sensitive national defense information when they are receiving the information from government officials who presumably understand national security law and therefore would not improperly disclose national defense information.
The World War I-era law has never been used to
prosecute lobbyists before.