Posted on 08/21/2005 1:04:32 PM PDT by ovrtaxt
One of the arguments at places like Think Progress and other sites which have made themselves the defenders of former Deputy AG Jamie Gorelick consists of pointing out that Gorelick didn't work at the DoD when she erected the "wall" separating intelligence and law enforcement operations. Therefore, they argue, she had no effect on the DIA's decision not to share information with the FBI. As I pointed out earlier, that argument fails for two reasons. The first is Gorelick's earlier assignment at the DoD as general counsel for ten months, during which one supposes she promulgated Bill Clinton's policies as the top attorney at Defense just as she did later at Justice. The second, and most obvious, is that as the number-two person at Justice, she still set policy for the FBI. Since sharing and cooperation require two parties to work together, her wall would have made any attempt to engage the FBI pointless.
Now William Tate at What's In The News points out another reason why the "wall" constrained Defense. Gorelick addressed her 1995 memo to several different people:
* Mary Jo White, US District Attorney, prosecuting the 1993 WTC bombing terrorists
* Louis Freeh, FBI Director
* Jo Ann Harris, Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division (DoJ)
* Richard Scruggs, Chief Counsel, Office of Intelligence Policy and Review
This last addressee makes the connection to the Department of Defense that the Gorelick defenders claim didn't exist. As Tate points out and as the OIPR website makes clear, the DoD looked to the OIPR for legal opinions on anything having to do with the legality of their operations, especially in regard to those involving domestic targets:
The Office of Intelligence Policy and Review, under the direction of the Counsel for Intelligence Policy, is responsible for advising the Attorney General on all matters relating to the national security activities of the United States. The Office prepares and files all applications for electronic surveillance and physical search under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, assists Government agencies by providing legal advice on matters of national security law and policy, and represents the Department of Justice on variety of interagency committees such as the National Counterintelligence Policy Board. The Office also comments on and coordinates other agencies' views regarding proposed legislation affecting intelligence matters.
The Office serves as adviser to the Attorney General and various client agencies, including the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Defense and State Departments, concerning questions of law, regulation, and guidelines as well as the legality of domestic and overseas intelligence operations.
The inclusion of Richard Scruggs, the lead counsel at the OIPR, intended to send the message that any advice given to the DoD, CIA, and State regarding the sharing of files had better fall in line with her new stated policy of going "beyond the law" to avoid any appearance of impropriety. Given that Gorelick held a high-profile position within Justice as a political appointee of Bill Clinton, this policy would rightly get attention as an official directive of the President's wishes. The one office that all of these intelligence agencies would consult in terms of sharing and coordination between themselves and law-enforcement operations would therefore have advised all agencies to follow the Gorelick Wall as a standard and as White House policy.
Given that kind of connection, it doesn't take much imagination to understand why all of these agencies became shy about even attempting to stretch the limits of the Gorelick policy.
The notion that Gorelick's memo had no effect outside the DoJ does not stand up to scrutiny at all, once the fact and intent of including Scruggs and the OIPR become known. This shows why Mary Jo White objected so strenuously to this memo and its implementation, and why she went out of her way to antagonize her bosses at the DoJ with a second and more heated memo predicting, correctly, that such a policy would leave America unprotected against the very people she had just successfully prosecuted.
It's bad enough that Gorelick erected that wall in 1995. It's ludicrous that four years after 9/11, people waste their time defending her and her participation in the 9/11 Commission as a panel member instead of a witness.
Addendum: Relating this to Able Danger, one can easily see why the Wall kept the DoD from pursuing an FBI investigation of the program's findings. The AD team would have asked for permission from DoD attorneys, as Col. Tony Shaffer has said was done three times, and all three times the attorneys denied the request. Either they already had great familiarity with Clinton's policies -- which probably was the case -- or they consulted with the OIPR and got the Gorelick policy from Scruggs and his team.
Scruggs, by the way, was no mere bystander in this issue. He pressed for stricter constraints on information sharing in 1994, after the prosecution of Aldrich Ames for espionage. He complained about the supposedly loose interpretations of FISA at the FBI and in the intel communities, and on his own began imposing his own "wall" even without direction to do so from Reno or Gorelick. This action gets Scruggs his only mention in the Commission report (page 78).
EXACTLY!!
ping
Yeah, that was the poison pill for sure. In fact, wasn't it Ashcroft who declassified it?
With luck, Sandy Burger's document theft may have been too little, too late.
I can, after all, why do you think the Lib's hate Karl Rove so much?
It "ain't" his looks!
Whenever it appears as though the Dem's are in the drivers seat, they always end up behind the political eight ball since Dubya has taken office.
God help us when she runs, she probably has all freepers FBI files. Lord knows everyone else will fall in line and forget what these traitors did to this country.
The party affiliation is a moot subject.
After all, Zell Miller is a Democrat and Olympia Snowe is a Republican...
Huh? If your assertion is true, there would have been no 911 Commission in the first place. This is due to the power of the internet, and to some very specific events which made such info available to us. I have yet to see the Admin go after ANY Clinton cronies complicit in crimes against the US. They are too interested in political snake charmer games. JMO.
Yea, perhaps all two of them that would be beneficial to the beast until she has them in hand to manipulate.
You have made my point!
On the back of Olympia with a firm grasp of a dagger?
who appointed her to the commission? (I'm not being sarcastic, I really cant remember/never have heard)
I don't know -- she's a RINO or a liberal Republican, I'm guessing. I really don't know anything about her -- just pulled that photo from her web site.
"Yes, Give me a makeover before my destiny is reached so I can be more becoming to the public".
Thanks for the post. Some good background here also and from the annals of FR itself: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1462440/posts
She's whatever gets her elected in the state of Maine.
Apparently she's a fine representative of the mindset of most Mainers.
After all, Zell Miller is a Democrat and Olympia Snowe is a Republican..."
Do you know what "list" Im referring to?
Toggle up...
GGorelick is a big shot attorney with a major Washington law firm. She is a member of the "old-boy"
network in that town and is widely
respected for her legal skills and as a "rain-maker" for her firm...they don't care about her politics. You'll notice how deferential Tom Kean was to her on the Commission.
The blood of the 3,000+ is on her hands, as well as others'.
Your reply has left me scratching my head as to what issue I have brought to you in my posting.
What are the names?
Party, shmarty.....
Liberal/Conservative is a better focus to hold nowadays in politics.
I would vote Democrat in a heart beat if I found them to be more focused on conservative issues in a sincere way.
In Minnesota however That has never been a contemplation on my part thought.
Here it is either American or anti American and almost to a 100% accuracy that is Republican or Democrat. (in that order)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.