Justice Has Returned to the Justice Department

May 1, 2009

The Obama Administration has decided to drop the charges against Steven Rosen and Keith Weissman, two former AIPAC officials who were to be tried under a rarely used section of the 1917 Espionage Act that makes it a crime for civilians to receive and disseminate secret information.

Recall that the information they were alleged to have received was that Iranian forces hostile to the United States and Israel were poised to kill Israelis, operating – apparently clandestinely, and most certainly with the knowledge of US forces,  in Iraq. They were allegedly told by a Defense Department official Lawrence Franklin, who was then cooperating with the government and has since pleaded guilty to security leaks,  that the Iranian threat was being down played by the US government determined to focus all attention on Iraq. He turned to them because of his concern that the US policy was misguided and that Iran was the real threat.

Rosen and Weissman attempted to ascertain the truth of the information they received, they checked with their colleagues within AIPAC,  security experts in and out of government and they went to the Israelis to inform them of the threat to Israeli operatives—as well they should.

Why was the case dropped?

The reasons are many.

Apparently the two lawyers representing Rosen and Weissman – separate lawyers, different law firms – prominent Washington attorneys Abbe Lowell and Baruch Weiss simply outperformed the government’s lawyers. They won victory after victory with regard to the evidence that could be presented, the witnesses that could be called and the burden of proof that the government would have to offer. After multiple appeals the government was required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the two knew that the information they received was secret and that they knowingly acted against the interests of the United States. This was virtually an impossible threshold for the Government to prove.

The simple fact of the leak by a government official to lobbyists could easily be construed by the recipients of such information that the leak was authorized and its transmission was in the best interests of the United States.

Certainly, the avowed concern of Franklin, Rosen and Weissman that US policy toward Iraq was overshadowing the more serious issue of the Iranian threat has been vindicated by history. So the focus on Iran was indeed in the interest of the United States, albeit not as perceived by the Bush administration and its supporters at that time

Nothing has more strengthened Iran than the US invasion of Iraq.

Secondly, the case was going to be a major embarrassment to the government. It would have exposed the way business was done in Washington. Among the witnesses to be called was former Secretary of State Condolezza Rice, herself a Rosen protégé at the Rand Corporation, who would have had to testify that indeed secret information was routinely shared with lobbyists and foreign policy experts in order to further US interests. It would have been interesting to see how the government would have made its case that the particular information allegedly transmitted to Rosen and Weiss violated the law. 

The case was a political non-starter. The press, lobbyists and other interested parties routinely traffic in such information. Success in Washington is, in no small part, determined by one’s access to such information, to know what will be in the news in the future and to be the bearer of secrets. From the press to the think tanks – excepting those who enjoyed seeing AIPAC in political trouble – all uniformly supported Rosen and Weissman and condemned the government for its excessive zeal in employing an arcane provision of the law that is most routinely ignored.

There are several questions for the Jewish community, most especially of AIPAC.

AIPAC did not immediately dismiss the two men, but initially used the charges against them as a fundraising opportunity.  But after legal advice presumably recommended that Rosen and Weissman be sacrificed to prevent an indictment against the organization itself, they were fired.  Then AIPAC was reluctant to pay their legal fees in a timely manner.. It tried to starve their lawyers into cutting a deal that would make AIPAC’s problem disappear.

The Israeli press criticized AIPAC for violating a cannon of Israeli ethics: Israelis don’t leave a man in the field, Israelis don’t cut and run. Nor should Jews.

AIPAC also made it difficult for others within the Jewish community to employ Rosen and Weissman. Thus, for more than five years from indictment to the dropping of charges, their lives were on hold, their financial survival imperiled. They were sidelined at the peak of their careers – sidelined and virtually silenced. Only belatedly, did some Jewish officials speak out in their defense.

Furthermore, time has only vindicated Rosen and Weissman’s insight that contrary to the group think of 2002, Iran was a greater threat, not only to Israel, but also to the United States, than Iraq.  Were AIPAC officials too close to the Bush Administration to see that reality or were they too desirous to supporting the case for war to focus attention on Iran as these two AIPAC officials saw as at least worthy of consideration?

It will be interesting as the great assemblage of the AIPAC faithful descend on Washington to see if AIPAC claims victory for the dropping of charges.

It will also be interesting to see the nature of the settlement that is worked out with Lowell and Weiss for their brilliant work and with Rosen and Weissman who lost five years of their life to charges that should not have been brought in the first place.

And let us remember what a privilege it is to have an Administration that is committed to justice, to the First Amendment right to petition one’s government and is willing to reexamine previous cases – including the case of former Senator Ted Stevens – in order to ensure that justice is done. Attorney General Holder and White House officials, who were likely to have had knowledge of such a significant decision, have done the right thing. They have shown that justice can be pursued.

But there is still one more matter for Attorney General Eric Holder to investigate. The same forces within the Justice Department that went after Rosen and Weissman must have leaked the information about the non-investigation into Congresswoman Jane Harman for allegedly having a conversation regarding Rosen and Weissman. Frustrated that these charges were going to be dropped, they did not want to go down without a fight and without once seeking to damage a patriotic American with accusations that could not be substantiated. Harman was never charged with a crime, never even investigated for a crime yet her name was bandied about as if she was. While Rosen and Weissman have been vindicated, there are still destructive forces within the Department.

Did you enjoy this article?
You'll love our roundtable.

Editor's Picks

Latest Articles

Courting the Antisemitic Vote

We’re accustomed to politicians courting the Black Vote, or the Jewish Vote, or the Youth Vote. But what about the Antisemitic Vote?

More news and opinions than at a
Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.

More news and opinions than at a Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.

More news and opinions than at a Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.