Today Judge T.S. Ellis III offered a rare
second opportunity to the Rosen and Weissman defense team. They again made their
case that the indictment of the two former AIPAC lobbyists was "trampling on their
1st Amendment rights". Although
Judge Ellis established an August, 2006 trial date he continues to consider a motion to
dismiss charges altogether.
In a similar March 30, 2006 hearing[i],
the defense concentrated on portraying the 1917 Espionage Act as fundamentally flawed and
unconstitutional. The indictment charges Rosen
and Weissman with violating sections of the Act by having "unlawful possession"
of "information relating to the national defense." Written in 1917, and never
updated, the Espionage Act does not use the term "classified" when referring to
national defense information. The law's musty
antiquity offers the defendants abundant openings for attack.
The mainstream press has come to the aid of Rosen and Weissman by
promulgating the "slippery slope" argument. The Washington Post has argued
more than once that the charges leveled against two foreign lobbyists run amok could soon
be turned against investigative reporters.
"The case has drawn attention from
First Amendment lawyers because the judge, the prosecutors and the defense attorneys have
all noted that the two lobbyists, in receiving and disseminating classified information,
are doing what journalists, academics and experts at think tanks do every day."[ii]
(Walter Pincus, Lobbyists' Prosecutors Pointing to Spy Case, Washington Post)
The "everybody does it" defense, of course, is
pure nonsense. Prosecutorial discretion means that the press won't be a DOJ target
any time soon. But cracking down on think tanks and lobbies trafficking
classified information is another matter. Shutting down illicit conduits for
classified information might benefit the majority of Americans who live "outside the
beltway". The mainstream US press and certain
Middle East think tanks spend a great amount of time scouring the branches of
government for recruits willing to release highly sensitive classified information of high
interest that ultimately finds its way to Israel. This commonplace behavior should
be ended. Many think tanks, functioning as stealth lobbies, seek an unfair
advantage and influence through access to classified information. Taking away the motivation to seek and leverage
classified information would function as a kind of policy "regulation FD" only in this
case, small stakeholders in US policymaking, rather than small investors, won't be so
easily outmaneuvered by corrupt "inside traders" like AIPAC.
The Weissman Rosen defense has also sought to throw out the indictment on a number of
other technicalities, including allegations that no documents were passed, only verbal
information. The most novel defense claim,
asserted by attorney Abbe Lowell (who is also defending Jack Abramoff[iii]),
attacked the premise that facilitating the trafficking of classified national defense
information from the Pentagon to Israel via lobbyists, could be anything but beneficial to
the United States. In breaking the law, Rosen and Weissman are charged with passing
information that "could be used to the injury of the United States or to the
advantage of any foreign nation."
"There's a disjunctive, your Honor. The disjunctive says
'injure the United States or assist or benefit the advantage of a foreign country.' How can anybody apply that in a context in which
good foreign policy for the United States, that clearly is intended to help make the
United States' foreign policy better, may also have a derivative impact that makes it an
advantage to an ally of the United States, whose interest are exactly the same?[iv]"
Abbe Lowell (line 17 page 22)
This assertion by the defendants may prove to be the core weakness of
their upcoming criminal defense. If Judge Ellis does allow the case to move forward,
outside analysts critical of the Israel Lobby, from Mearsheimer and Walt to IRmep, will have the opportunity to educate the court through amicus briefs that Israeli and US
interests are often times diametrically opposed. There
is ample evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the documented subterfuges of
the Israel Lobby as personified by Weissman and Rosen not only endanger America, but have
eroded the principles of liberty and justice upon which the US was founded. The illicit overt and covert activities of an unregistered foreign agent
committed to misleading Americans through the myth that Israeli and US interests are
"exactly the same" can only be revealed and terminated through a high-profile
criminal trial.
Grant F. Smith is the author of the new book, Deadly
Dogma: How Neoconservatives Broke the Law to Deceive America, on sale at IRmep and leading
bookstores.
[i]
http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/rosen032406.html
[ii]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/10/AR2006041001423.html
[iii]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/04/AR2005080401129.html
[iv]
http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/rosen032406.html
|