Archive

Posts Tagged ‘state secrets privilege’

Another Court Jester For The King. Elena Kagan And The Imperial Continuum.

While Republicans may talk about their misgivings about Obama’s Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan and her “progressive” views and the vapid religious right insinuates she may be a lesbian (to stir up their bigots), the real questions and issues surrounding Kagan’s views come from “real” progressives or liberals. In fact, it might be that she fits just fine in the imperial Bush/Cheney view and legacy that the executive branch is above or beyond the law, Constitutional restaints, as well as any international laws or treaties ratified by the U.S.. Many liberals, Constitutional scholars, and civil libertarians are viewing her more with skepticism and disappointment since she is replacing Justice Stevens who stood up firmly for the Bill of Rights, Constitutional separation of powers, habeas corpus, and due process under the rule of law. This is especially true since she agreed with Bush/Cheney concepts (unAmerican by nature and legal tradition) concerning indefinite detention during her confirmation hearings as Solictor General. Add in her inexperience and lack of legal writings during the time many of our constitutional and legal precepts were shredded during the previous administration has many worried.

Many misgivings by those concerned with the constitution, legal precedents, and the rule of law show that the possibility for a prolonged era of imperial presidencies may indeed lie ahead. There is this from Tony Mauro writing in the National Law Journal titled “Supreme Court Watchers Wonder: How Conservative Is Kagan?“,

Until then, the drumbeat of Kagan criticism may get louder as scrutiny of her brief record as solicitor general intensifies. Advocates for human rights and other liberal causes who are upset at the Obama administration for continuing Bush-era policies may take their frustration out on Kagan.

“From the perspective of those who have been advocating change from Bush policies, she has been a disappointment,” said Tina Foster of the International Justice Network, who argued against Kagan’s deputy Neal Katyal over detention policies in an appeal in January.

“She would spell very bad news” if she became a Supreme Court justice, said Vince Warren, executive director of the Center for Constitutional Rights, which has long challenged Bush and now Obama detention policies. “We don’t see any basis to assume she does not embrace the Bush view of executive power.”

At the Electronic Frontier Foundation, senior staff attorney Kevin Bankston called the Obama administration’s stance on state secrets and national security wiretapping “a grave disappointment, particularly for those who took Obama’s promises seriously.” Bankston cautioned he is not certain how involved Kagan herself has been in the positions the department has taken on these issues.

And even Kagan’s own deputy Neal Kumar Katyal writing in the Yale Law Review titled “Internal Separation of Powers: Checking Today’s Most Dangerous Branch From Within” says

Elena Kagan’s recent defense of presidential administration concentrated on domestic policy, but her ideas suggest a criticism of the above proposals. She claims that presidential administration energizes a moribund bureaucracy:

“The need for an injection of energy and leadership becomes apparent, lest an inert bureaucracy encased in an inert political system grind inflexibly, in the face of new opportunities and challenges, toward (at best) irrelevance or (at worst) real harm. . . . This conclusion, of course, would be less sound to the extent that the political and administrative systems fail to impose adequate limits on the President’s exercise of administrative power. Then, the balance between friction and energy would tip toward the opposite extreme— away from the too broad curtailment of regulatory initiative to the too facile assertion of unilateral power. One reason not to fear this outcome relates to the President’s accountability to the public . . . .105”

But this view of the presidency, at least in the realm of foreign affairs, is as far from a description of contemporary reality as are Madison’s views, reprinted in the first paragraph of this Essay. Consider such claims in light of the facts that: (1) there is little public accountability when decisions are secret; (2) agency officials have been excluded from providing input on answers to key legal questions; (3) no neutral subordinate decision-maker exists; and (4) the administration has itself asserted that the brunt of these questions are beyond the purview of the courts altogether.

Michael Tomasky writing for the UK’s The Guardian titled “Elena Kagan” writes

One example: when she was being confirmed by the Senate for her current post, solicitor general, she defended the right of indefinite detention of terrorism suspects.

I think these things should be taken seriously. It follows a certain logic that she probably wouldn’t feel as free as John Paul Stevens did to offer striking dissents on such matters. Stevens was in his eighties and beyond caring what anybody thought of him. Kagan will want to be a force on the court, meaning (I’m just guessing here, but it makes sense if you read that Times profile) that she might want to be more of a conciliator, more of a power-player among the court’s nonet rather its thundering dissenting voice on these questions.

And finally there is this from the Heritage Foundation, a leading edge organization in the anti-democracy movement in the United States, from February 18th, 2009 in a piece on their blog titled “On Detainee Treatment, Sanity Still Prevailing at the White House

Last week we congratulated the Obama Administration for choosing the security of the American people over the bumper sticker slogans of the far left. Today, the New York Times details the Obama Administration’s continued prudence on some key national security issues:

During her confirmation hearing last week, Elena Kagan, the nominee for solicitor general, said that someone suspected of helping finance Al Qaeda should be subject to battlefield law — indefinite detention without a trial — even if he were captured in a place like the Philippines rather than in a physical battle zone.

Ms. Kagan’s support for an elastic interpretation of the “battlefield” amplified remarks that Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. made at his own confirmation hearing. And it dovetailed with a core Bush position. Civil liberties groups argue that people captured away from combat zones should go to prison only after trials.

In the shift from the 20th century to the 21st century, we have seen the United States go from world leader and its push as a nation of the rule of law at the Nuremberg Trials (thereby creating the Nuremburg Principles, the framework of current international law) to today’s international beligerent and the international barbaric disgrace of Guantanamo Bay, the prison at Bagram, and Abu Ghraib Prison. We have seen the state secrets privilege abused in denying victims of illegal torture their day in court, and to cover up high crimes of state as revealed in the case of Sibel Edmonds. Many of us sons and daughters of World War II veterans realize what separated us from the barbarian was the rule of law (not to create laws to subvert the rule of law). It is within this context many of us oppose Elena Kagan for the Supreme Court. How much further can we slip from freedom’s gaze?

Moon Water And Sibel Edmonds

October 30, 2009 3 comments

It seems spying for foreign governments, interests, and think tanks keeps on going unabated without the needed oversight investigations into Sibel Edmonds’s claims. On Tuesday, October 20th, moon scientist Stewart Nozette appeared in court after being arrested in an FBI sting and being charged with attempting to sell secrets to Israel. For background purposes, Nozette spent six years at a secretive defense technology agency and helped developed technology that discovered water on the moon. He was a member of the White House’s National Space Council under George H.W. Bush and also worked at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory which, according to the UK’s The Times, was the nerve center of US nuclear weapons research during the period of 1990-1999. He also worked as a private consultant for Israel Aerospace Industries, a company owned by the Israeli government. Wiretaps revealed his expectation that he would be approached by saying,

“I don’t get recruited by Mossad every day. I knew this day would come. I just had a feeling.”

Since he knew the day would come, doesn’t that indicate an ongoing problem?

On Wednesday, October 21st, Military.com published a piece on the Sibel Edmonds case titled, “Ex-FBI Translator Claims Spying at Dod” by Bryant Jordan. It delved into the deposition given on August 8th by Sibel in the Schmidt v. Krikorian case and concerned the testimony whereby Pentagon personnel helped in passing national defense secrets to foreign agents. Two fixtures in the 1990’s espionage scheme were two individuals, who when George W. Bush took office, ended up in the Pentagon. One of those individuals was Douglas Feith who became head of the “Office of Special Plans” which would later be dubbed “The Lie Factory” due to its purpose to create false intelligence if needed to launch an unprovoked attack and invasion on Iraq. The other individual was Richard Perle who later became chairman of the Defense Advisory Board. In May 2006, Philip Giraldi wrote an article on Sibel’s case which included the following:

“Doug Feith’s International Advisors Inc, a registered agent for Turkey in 1989-1994, netted $600,000 per year from Turkey, with Richard Perle taking $48,000 annually as a consultant”.

Both Feith and Perle were instrumental in writing “A Clean Break: A New Strategy For Securing The Rhealm”. This was a report from the neoconservative movement during the Clinton years proposing new policy for Israel and was given to then Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in July 1996. The recommendations were as follows:

A repudiation of the concept of “Land for Peace” which was the basis for the Oslo Accords.
Armed incursions into Palestinian areas under the concept or rubric of “right of hot pursuit”.
Armed incursions into Lebanon and possible air strikes against Syria and Iran.
The removal of Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq.
A repudiation of the tenets of Labor Zionism (Israel’s socialist foundations) and a change to economic liberalism.

If your memory serves you correctly, you will recognize that much of this is what happened after Bush took office. Of course to carry out spying in the 1990’s required inside people in government, and later when these people became part of government, to help get things rolling.

“They were 100 percent directly involved”, Edmonds told Military.com. They were not in the Pentagon (in the late 1990’s) but they had their people inside the Pentagon.” One of those people, she said, was Larry Franklin, an Air Force officer assigned to the Office of Special Plans…

Larry Franklin was indicted and pleaded guilty for passing secrets to Israel in the AIPAC spy case. He was investigated by the FBI, just like the operations Sibel was exposed to as a translator or contract linguist, just like the moon scientist sting revealed this month.

The Military.com article touched on other people of interest in the Edmonds case as well. This included those Sibel reported to the FBI within the agency’s translation unit which she had found suspicious and troubling such as people both in elected and unelected positions in government that have been involved as revealed in Sibel’s Rogues Gallery. And of course a key figure is Marc Grossman, then secretary of state for political affairs. A quote from Edmonds from her deposition and Military.com revealed,

“certain people from Pentagon would send a list of individuals with access to sensitive data, whether weapons technology or nuclear technology, and this information would include all their sexual preferences, how much they owed on their homes, if they have gambling issues, and [Grossman] would provide it to these foreign operatives, and those foreign operatives would go and hook those Pentagon people”.

And concerning Grossman, he would have all the connections being a former Ambassador to Turkey to be a key facilitator. In writing on the Plame outing affair, Christopher Deliso wrote concerning Grossman,

“Although Grossman “has not been as high profile in the press” FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds cryptically told me the other day, “don’t overlook him – he is very important.”

She was not speaking about the Plame affair, though Grossman did indeed have a key role there, as we will see. According to her, Grossman was one of three officials – the other two, she says, are Richard Perle and Douglas Feith – who had been watched by both Valerie Plame’s Brewster Jennings & Associates CIA team, and by the major FBI investigation of organized crime and governmental corruption on which she herself was working until being terminated in April 2002.

“Interestingly enough, at the same time Feith and Perle were greasing Turkish palms and Grossman was presiding over in Ankara, the CIA’s Brewster-Jennings network and Valerie Plame were focusing on nuclear proliferation in Turkey. This scrutiny led them to trace private citizens in America as well as lobby groups like the American-Turkish Council – which is precisely where Plame met future husband Joseph Wilson, while “on duty” at a 1997 reception held by then-Turkish ambassador to the U.S. Nuzhet Kandemir.”

And of course, the American-Turkish Council was a player at the center of what Sibel Edmonds found and reported to her superiors at the FBI. As has been revealed in her testimony and in the Military.com article,

But not long after she joined the bureau another Turkish translator came on board – Malec Can Dickerson. And in December 2001 Dickerson and her husband, Douglas, then an Air Force major, tried to recruit her to join American Turkish Council — an organization that was actually being monitored by the FBI. Also, according to Edmonds, Douglas Dickerson had previously worked with Grossman in Turkey and, though assigned to the Defense Intelligence Agency, was working for Feith’s OSP and also as a coordinator with the State Department on the Turkey Republics in Central Asia.

Despite Sibel’s claims again being backed up by former FBI Counterintelligence and Counterespionage Manager John Cole as well as the OIG report claiming her accusations had basis in fact, the replies to the article by those implicated were predictable. Perle called her a “nutcase” with a vendetta. Feith replied that claims about him were “wildly false and bizarre”. Robert Tyler, co-president of the Cohen Group (where Grossman is now vice chairman) responded for Grossman by saying the claims were untrue. They have probably come to expect nothing coming of this due to Congressional reluctance. This in spite of the fact people from all political stripes and civil libertarians have backed Edmonds’ request for public testimony and inquiry. Progressives have been the most inclined to do so in the past, even when Waxman reneged on his promise to hold hearings on her matter. But lately, some progressives cooled over the flap with Rep. Schakowsy concerning Turkish agent blackmail issues. But they should ask themselves if Rep. Schakowsky had anything to hide, especially in her response accusing Edmonds of being the same as “birthers” and “teabaggers”, especially since they have not been gagged by the DOJ in the past. Blogger Mizgin has given some reasons why people might want some answers in her piece, “From Sursuluk and Chicago to Ergenekon” at The Boiling Frogs Post. Some of the reasons given are as follows:

In spite of the congresswoman’s claims that she has not been involved with the Turks, we know that in 2001, which is included in the time frame of wiretaps that Sibel Edmonds translated, Mehmet Celebi, of Hillary Clinton fame, donated $350 to Jan Schakowsky. Celebi was a fundraiser for another Chicago politician, Rahm Emanuel. Later, Celebi became a bundler for Hillary Clinton, raising $100,000 for her presidential campaign. She finally had to dump Celebi because of his role as producer of the Turkish film “Kurtlar Vadisi Irak“. …

While Celebi was moving and shaking for the Democratic Party in Chicago, Schakowsky’s husband, Robert Creamer, a political consultant, was under investigation for bank fraud. The investigation was ongoing in 1998, which was well within the timeframe of the FBI wiretaps from Chicago that Sibel Edmonds translated. It may very well be that Turkish agents targeted Schakowsky in order to obtain favors from her husband. As Sibel stated in The American Conservative interview:

They needed Schakowsky and her husband Robert Creamer to perform certain illegal operational facilitations for them in Illinois.

For Jan Schakowsky to deny any relationship would be utter foolishness, of course, because she’s been very much involved lately with the Fethullah Gulen movement through the Chicago-based Niagara Foundation, whose honorary president is none other than Hocaefendi himself. This year Schakowsky wrote a Letter of Recognition for the Niagara Foundations 2009 “Peace and Dialogue Awards”. And Schakowsky did the same in 2008 and in 2007.

As was pointed out in the “Kill The Messenger” documentary, a lot of secret activity of US government agencies and outside interests dealt with major issues that effect the security of this nation such as the nuclear black market, terrorism, and the narcotics trade. Just this week, it has been revealed that Hamid Karzai’s brother was on the CIA’s payroll and activities involved paramilitary groups and the opium trade (which begins in Afghanistan and winds its way to Turkey for final production stages). When coupled with yet another spy arrest in the person of the moon scientist, it’s time for answers. Moon water and Sibel Edmonds type answers. So what does moon water have to do with Sibel Edmonds, espionage, and FBI stings? Nothing and that is the point. Why would a moon scientist expect and want to participate in it?

Sibel Edmonds Issues a Response To Rep. Schakowsky Following Her Denials In Regards to Edmonds’s Claims In The American Conservative Magazine. Schakowsky’s Office Responds In Communication To The Brad Blog.

September 25, 2009 Leave a comment

The explosive interview article in The American Conservative Magazine sparked a vehement denial of Sibel Edmonds’s account by Congresswoman Schakowsky’s office concerning Turkish agents attempts to blackmail the Congresswoman with a lesbian affair. The background of the episode can found at The Brad Blog . Here follows Sibel’s formal response and after, Rep. Schakowsky’s office response to The Brad Blog.

Inviting Ms. Schakowsky to Join…….

Dear Congresswoman Schakowsky:

It is an age-old tactic, when one cannot refute statements with facts, to attempt to discredit the witness. Rather than exchanging accusations, let me just go on record with facts and detailed citations.

When I became aware of incriminating evidence against high-level U.S. officials—elected and appointed—I filed under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and fought for five years in court. I bore tremendous cost, financially and emotionally, to make this data public. Here is the court case identification: C.A. No. 1:02CV01294 (ESH).

Few citizens have gone this far in a FOIA case to make covered-up information available to the public. No one gains financially from fighting this kind of thing in court, and I am no exception. You have called me a fantasist, but would a fabricator pay as dearly as I did to have her claims investigated?

I fought another court case to expose government criminality through key witnesses and documents. As in the FOIA case, I bore tremendous costs and was again blocked by the invocation of the State Secrets Privilege and National Security. The court case identification is Civ.No.1:02CV01448(JR)).

No other citizen has twice had the State Secrets Privilege invoked. But why would the government, with the support of congressional representatives, go to such lengths to quash, gag, and classify the files and operations in question if they were “fantasy, lies, and nonexistent” as you say?

I complied with the whistleblowing rule and took my case to the Office of the Inspector General and provided all of the information they allowed me to. They interviewed dozens of witnesses and reviewed hundreds of pages of documents in their investigation of my credibility and the validity of my case. Here is the link to their confirmation that I and my case have merit: DOJ-IG Report. Here is the redacted report that shows how our government censored more than 90% of this report to the public: Redacted DOJ-IG Report. Very few national security whistleblowers have been granted this level of validation and vindication. The Justice Department’s own Office of the Inspector General disagrees with your characterization of me and my case.

Several senior members of Congress—from both sides of the aisle–have also investigated and publicly confirmed my credibility and the grave nature of my disclosures. This is what Senator Leahy had to say: Leahy Statement. This is what Congresswoman Maloney said: Rep. Maloney Statement. Here are the assessments of Senator Lautenberg–Sen. Lautenberg Statement—and Senator Grassley–Sen. Grassley Statement. By attacking my credibility, you are also attacking your colleagues, including many on your side of the aisle. Are you accusing these senators and representatives of being fantasists too?

You have been described as a “true blue” civil libertarian, so it will surely interest you to know that the ACLU has declared me “the most gagged” person in the history of this great nation. Are you also attacking the ACLU and calling their characterization of this case a fantasy?

I have testified under oath, and my public biography will provide you with information about my educational background, financial background, and family life. I am fully aware of the consequences of perjury, and as you can see, I would have a lot to lose were that the case. I am sure you are familiar with my sworn testimony, but you can review it here.

I’ve done more than my share through the courts, IG offices, Congress, and media. I don’t have your power. You sit on the House Intelligence Committee, and you are one of the members of the majority party in Congress.

Here is what you can do: Call for an investigation and a hearing before your committee on this long covered-up case. Subpoena the files and call the witnesses. Bring in retired Special Agent Gilbert Graham and have him testify on the official report and complaint he filed with the DOJ inspector general in 2002 regarding the FBI counterespionage investigations involving Turkey and Israel in which targeted US representatives were illegally wiretapped. This is not fiction. Here is the official and signed public version: SA Gilbert Graham Report.

Also bring in former FBI Counterintelligence Operations Manager & Espionage Investigator John M. Cole and have him testify under oath regarding espionage cases involving State Department officials, Pentagon officials, and Congressional members. Here is a preview of some of the information disclosed and confirmed by Agent Cole: Interview and Radio Interview.

Also bring in the sworn testimonies of current FBI special agents in the Chicago and DC field offices who dutifully and patriotically led the counterintelligence operations on Turkey and corrupt US officials, only to see their investigations blocked and covered-up. Their names are public.

Order the Justice Department to release the two main Counterintelligence Operations Files on Turkey and “US persons of interest”—one from FBI Chicago Field Office-1996-2002, the other from FBI DC Field Office-1996-2001. These will help bring out the facts regarding your story too. I have documentation supporting the existence of these files.

Recall that I did not accuse you of any criminal or espionage-related activity.

The last time I saw a similar attack on my credibility was when Dennis Hastert issued a non-denial denial to information contained in a previous magazine article. He later gave up his seat, registered himself (under FARA) as an agent for the government of Turkey, and went on to collect $35,000 per month as a foreign agent. I certainly hope you are not planning to follow his footsteps by giving up your seat and officially registering with a foreign government. It would be far better if you used your position to bring out the facts. I will be delighted to assist you.

Sibel Edmonds

Schakowsky Response:

It is extraordinary how quickly Ms. Edmonds’ story has evolved in just two short months. What’s more is that this blog [ed note: We checked for clarity, and he’s specifically referring to The BRAD BLOG as a whole. See our response below.] entirely ignores the fact that the allegations she made about Congresswoman Schakowsky have been shown to be untrue on their face.

In Ms. Edmonds’ sworn deposition on August 8, 2009 in Washington, DC, she states as a fact, under oath that the imagined tryst occurred between the fictional spy and Congresswoman Schakowsky “in her townhouse actually in this area.”

The rest you can read at The Brad Blog
It seems her office is not only dismissing Sibel Edmonds’s claims and accounts she has fought for so long in being able to tell what she ran into while working at the F.B.I. due to government interference but the response also seems to attempt to impugn The Brad Blog which seems unfortunate. The Brad Blog has been completely fair in all of this. But if you read the account, The Brad Blog responded. Also, Sibel emailed The Brad Blog in response to this which can also be seen at The Brad Blog whereby she says, “I am not going to engage in this silly back and forth game. They have my letter. It is very clear. Not only me, but the majority of the Americans would like to see her action in congress.”. And so it seems, her office will not be any help in leading to any investigations of any of the serious issues at hand.

Scott Horton Interviews Philip Giraldi and Joe Lauria About The Mainstream Media’s Refusal To Investigate Sibel Edmonds’s Allegations

September 23, 2009 Leave a comment

Philip Giraldi who interviewed Sibel Edmonds in the recent issue release of The American Conservative article titled, “Who’s Afraid of Sibel Edmonds?” and Joe Lauria who wrote a series on the Edmonds case for the London Times in 2008 were interviewed on radio (you can hear it at the link) by Scott Horton. They discuss the corruption and the working relationships between the American-Turkish Council, AIPAC, and U.S. government officials and former officials Douglas Feith and Richard Perle as well as the mainstream media’s refusal to investigate the Edmonds allegations.

Sibel Edmonds Gives Interview With Philip Giraldi

September 22, 2009 Leave a comment

Who’s Afraid of Sibel Edmonds? An interview with Philip Giraldi in The American Conservative Magazine is out today and is available online. For those following her case, you are well aware she was able to finally testify under oath by deposition without interference from the F.B.I. or DOJ recently in the Schmidt v. Krikorian Case. This interview follows her long journey to get to this point. It has been a long hard road since Ashcroft made her the most gagged person in the United States.

Some highlights are as follows:

SIBEL EDMONDS: During my work with the FBI, one of the major operational files that I was transcribing and translating started in late 1996 and continued until 2002, when I left the Bureau. Because the FBI had had no Turkish translators, these files were archived, but were considered to be very important operations. As part of the background, I was briefed about why these operations had been initiated and who the targets were.

snip

Grossman became a person of interest early on in the investigative file while he was the U.S. ambassador to Turkey [1994-97], when he became personally involved with operatives both from the Turkish government and from suspected criminal groups. He also had suspicious contact with a number of official and non-official Israelis. Grossman was removed from Turkey short of tour during a scandal referred to as “Susurluk” by the media. It involved a number of high-level criminals as well as senior army and intelligence officers with whom he had been in contact.

snip

Grossman and Dickerson had to leave the country because a big investigation had started in Turkey. Special prosecutors were appointed, and the case was headlined in England, Germany, Italy, and in some of the Balkan countries because the criminal groups were found to be active in all those places. A leading figure in the scandal, Mehmet Eymür, led a major paramilitary group for the Turkish intelligence service. To keep him from testifying, Eymür was sent by the Turkish government to the United States, where he worked for eight months as head of intelligence at the Turkish Embassy in Washington. He later became a U.S. citizen and now lives in McLean, Virginia. The central figure in this scandal was Abdullah Catli. In 1989, while “most wanted” by Interpol, he came to the U.S., was granted residency, and settled in Chicago, where he continued to conduct his operations until 1996.

Read it.

I will have more commentary later.

The Sibel Edmonds Deposition Videos and Transcripts Have Been Released

August 24, 2009 2 comments

The much anticipated video of Sibel Edmonds’s deposition in the Schmidt v Krikorian case has been released. The transcript can be found here.
You can also watch them here in my video list.

F.B.I. Whistleblower Sibel Edmonds Gives Deposition In Ohio Election Fraud Case: Testimony Could Reverberate Through The DC Beltway

Sibel Edmonds was subpoened in the case of Schmidt v Krikorian and gave her sworn testimony Saturday at the National Whistleblowers Center at 3238 P St. NW, Washington DC. The significance of her testimony is huge given her status of being the most gagged person in the United States and the implications for many past and present in US government agencies and Congress. Leading up to the deposition, drama unfolded as it looked as if challenges from the FBI and the Department of Justice might once again silence her with the usual invocation of the “state secrets privilege”. The event was live blogged by Brad Friedman of Bradblog .

Krikorian’s press release stated the things he wanted provided in Sibel’s deposition. Krikorian told Bradblog that his legal team intended to determine answers to questions concerning whether “The Government of Turkey had illegally infiltrated and influenced various U.S. government institutions and officials, including the Department of State, the Department of Defense, and individual members of the United States Congress” according to Bradblog. During a break in the testimony, Brad Friedman said Edmonds told him by phone that she had been asked, and has answered, questions on Dan Burton (R-IN), Dennis Hastert (R-IL) (who is now a lobbyist for Turkey), and Stephen Solarz (D-NY), as well as other questions on those high-ranking officials and lobbyists in her “State Secrets Gallery.” . Krikorian told Bradblog “From my opinion, if I’m some of the current members of Congress, I’d be very very worried about the information that’s going to come out of this. There are current members of Congress that she has implicated in bribery, espionage. It’s not good. It’s crazy, it’s absolutely crazy. For people in power situations in the United States, who know about this information, if they don’t take action against it, in my opinion, it’s negligence.” According to Bradblog, [Other people implicated included] Livingston (R-TX), Hastert (R-IL), Dick Gephardt (D-MO), other non-Congressional members, people like Brent Scowcroft, other appointed members of the U.S. government.” According to Bradblog, Krikorian went on to say “Did not have very flattering things to say about former U.S. House Speaker Dennis Hastert. … Actually, I stopped taking notes because I was o fascinated by what she was saying. … She talked about the Rand Corp., Brewster-Jennings, nuclear secrets…” Also, the testimony included Turkish American groups such as ATC, ATAA, TACA, how some tried to recruit Edmonds and also how the OIG report exonerated her regarding her discoveries as an FBI translator and her subsequent dismissal by the FBI. According to Bradblog, Edmonds said “I told them how [third-ranking State Dept. official in the Bush Admin and former Ambassador to Turkey] Marc Grossman disclosed” that Brewster Jennings was a CIA front company to the target of an FBI investigation”. Bruce Fein as counsel for Rep. Jean Schmidt R (OH) when questioned after the deposition said Krikorian “can say anything he wants can say whatever he wants about the Armenian Genocide, but what he’s not allowed to do is state lies. We don’t want to close anybody’s mouth when it comes to taking about the Armenian Genocide…What we’re trying to do is promote freedom of speech. Some versions are trying to harass individuals who are trying to dispute history.”

For Sibel Edmonds and all of us that have followed her story over the years since Ashcroft invoked the “state secrets privilege”, this all has been a long time coming. For any of you who are unfamiliar with all this, I suggest you visit her website, her organization’s website, her blog, Luke Ryland’s blog, and of course Bradblog who did yeoman’s work on Saturday. I hope to have an interview with Sibel Edmonds possibly sometime in the fall and I will post it here.