-Source- The American Dossier Editorial By John Katz
On July 26th we celebrated the 110th birthday of the FBI. Much like a marriage we have witnessed this organization and its role in Government at it best and at its worst. This editorial is written with respect and gratefulness to all who serve in the FBI.
It however is indeed an agency with legacy for both justice and unfortunately internal scandal.
The crime of Collusion is nothing new and well documented in history;considering the current political climate it is perhaps imperative to relook at a case of unfortunate collusion perpetrated by FBI Agent Robert Hannsen.
As profiled at History.com. Hanssen was proven to be one of the most damaging double agents in modern American history.
Robert Hanssen gave the Soviets, (and later the Russians,) classified material that revealed sensitive national security secrets. This included the identities of Soviets spying for the U.S., and specifics about America’s nuclear operations.
His double life began in 1979 and ended in 2001.Hanssen continued to rise through the FBI’s ranks. In 1999, while serving as the FBI liaison to the U.S. State Department, he advanced his double-agent career for the SVR, a post-Soviet, Russian intelligence service.
Hanssen’s downfall came in 2000 when the FBI, suspected there was a mole in its ranks.
They paid $7 million to an ex-KGB officer to procure information from SVR headquarters that helped identify Hanssen as the turncoat.
The FBI put Hanssen under surveillance in late 2000, and on February 18, 2001, he was arrested at a park in Vienna, Virginia he was arrested, Hanssen reportedly exclaimed, “What took you so long?”
Among his deceitful actions Hanssen carried espionage activities for the KGB. He gave the KGB the names of three Soviet officers collaborating with the CIA and FBI. The three spies were arrested and executed.Hanssen was only the third agent in FBI history charged with spying and justice was served. In order to avoid the death penalty,
Hanssen struck a deal with the government and agreed to cooperate. In July 2001, he pleaded guilty to 15 counts of espionage. The following May, he was sentenced to 15 consecutive life sentences behind bars with no possibility of parole.
George W. Bush had taken office in January 2001, and Robert Mueller was called to Washington DC to serve as acting deputy attorney general (DAG)—the person who effectively oversees the day-to-day working of Main Justice and the FBI.
Mueller had much respect on both sides of the aisle.
As reported in The Washingtonian and abridged below:
The FBI had been stumbling in 2001; management problems under Director Louis Freeh were bubbling to the surface, and morale was low. The capture of FBI agent Robert Hanssen for spying for the Russians had started the year off at a low point. Followed by report that the FBI had lost hundreds of weapons and laptop computers.
Just before Oklahoma City ,bomber Tim McVeigh was executed, it came out that the bureau hadn’t, as required, turned over thousands of files to the defense—a mistake forcing a delay in the execution
Louis Freeh announced he would step down as FBI director.
President Bush nominated Mueller. He stressed the new challenges for the FBI.
The challenges Mueller would inherit were on a scale no one had seen. Mueller looked like a new beginning—the tough law-enforcement professional with a record, forged in Vietnam, of doing well under fire and getting organizations on track.
So let us fast forward to March 12, 2004. FBI Director Robert Mueller and Deputy Attorney General James Comey had planned to resign. The only reason their letters hadn’t been submitted already was that the men, at the request of the attorney general’s chief of staff, were waiting until John Ashcroft had recuperated from gallbladder surgery to the point where he could resign as well.
So it seems this turn of events highlighted the character of these 2 men.
So why were he and Comey about to resign?
Here is some of the the back story….
The first three years after 9/11 were an uncertain time for Mueller and the FBI. The bureau’s existence seemed under threat from those who felt it had failed to prevent 9/11. At the same time that the 9/11 Commission was breathing down his neck, Mueller was handling the daily terrorism-threat briefings with the President and the drumbeat of al Qaeda.
Then, in the spring of 2004, came the greatest crisis of his time as FBI director since 9/11: the internal furor over the National Security Agency’s effort to put into place a mass domestic-wiretapping and data-collection program.
So this brings us back to March 12, 2004 when Mueller and Comey were going to resign.
The Washingtonian goes on to explain:
· In early 2004, the Justice Department was reviewing a two-year-old program the NSA had dubbed the Terrorist Surveillance Program.
· While details are still scarce about what exactly it entailed, the program is believed to have been a domestic-focused wiretapping-and-surveillance program unprecedented in scale and scope..
· The Justice Department under John Ashcroft told the White House that, upon review, it didn’t believe the program was legal and would refuse to certify it. This meant that the program—which the White House believed was a critical tool in the war on terror—would have to be aborted.
· Hours after that uncomfortable conversation, Ashcroft was rushed to George Washington University Hospital with a severe case of pancreatitis. Five days later, he had his gallbladder removed.
· Jim Comey, who had expressed doubts for months within Justice about the legality of the intelligence coming out of the NSA program in question, became acting attorney general.
As the March 11 deadline for recertification bore down, the crisis escalated. Members of Congress were told of the brewing trouble, and then–White House counsel Alberto Gonzales said he believed the program could continue without Justice’s okay—a move threatening the basic idea that within the nation’s executive branch, the Justice Department’s interpretation of the law was paramount.
Largely unknown outside the government, Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel is supposed to be the government’s chief lawyer, so the idea that the White House would disregard an OLC opinion was a major challenge to the government’s normal way of doing business.
Comey and Mueller, both career prosecutors and products of the Justice Department’s way of thinking, found themselves drawn together into the situation.
The exact extent of the program remains classified, and sources familiar with the incident, while refusing to discuss operational details, say only that Mueller played an outsize role because of his reputation within Justice as a straight arrow.The next day after Ashcroft was hospitalized; terrorists struck Madrid—exploding bombs on trains sending the Homeland Security into high alert. At the same time, Mueller, Comey, and most of the senior leadership of Justice and the FBI were preparing to resign when a call came from Ashcroft’s chief of staff with a plea: The Attorney General isn’t well enough to join you in resigning yet, and he can’t be left hanging alone; hold on until Monday, when he can join you.
That delay, which gave both sides of the battle enough time to resolve their differences, was the only thing that stopped what would have been one of the most explosive Washington confrontations in recent memory: There would have been huge political implications if Justice and FBI leadership had resigned en masse in the middle of a presidential campaign to protest an unconstitutional policy.
So here we are in 2018.
In closing let’s look at what is going on in regards to the issue of collusion and unconstitutional policy.This week we have engrossed in drama over the FISA warrant for Carter Page. Its merit was placed the merit of the Steele Dossier. Many refer to this as a proven misleading partisan creation.
So why is all of this relevant?
It has no proven Constitutional legality.
As reported Fox News on Wednesday, a group of 11 House Republicans introduced five articles of impeachment against Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, accusing him of intentionally withholding documents and information from Congress, failing to comply with congressional subpoenas and abuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).
Also highlighted by Fox News as stated by Alan Dershowitz there is much short sightedness in pursuing impeachment “by trying to impeach Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, House Republicans are actually bolstering the left's argument for impeaching President Trump.,
"The Case against Impeaching Trump." He said evidence of specific crimes must be present in order to move forward with impeachment, whether it's Rosenstein or Trump.”
He emphasized that the process cannot be based on political differences.
Our Forefathers saw impeachment as a last resort tool in regards to High crimes and misdemeanors. As his character has been portrayed as one of high ethics and respect for our Constitution, the question remains whether Robert Mueller will see it that way.
Comments