The Truth about 'the Wall'

The Washington Post ^ | April 18, 2004 | Jamie S. Gorelick

[Piranha]

The commission investigating the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, has a critical dual mission to fulfill -- to help our nation understand how the worst assault on our homeland since Pearl Harbor could have occurred and to outline reforms to prevent new acts of terrorism.

***************SNIP*****************

At last week's hearing, Attorney General John Ashcroft, facing criticism, asserted that "the single greatest structural cause for September 11 was the wall that segregated criminal investigators and intelligence agents" and that I built that wall through a March 1995 memo. This is simply not true.

First, I did not invent the "wall," which is not a wall but a set of procedures implementing a 1978 statute (the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA) and federal court decisions interpreting it. In a nutshell, that law, as the courts read it, said intelligence investigators could conduct electronic surveillance in the United States against foreign targets under a more lenient standard than is required in ordinary criminal cases, but only if the "primary purpose" of the surveillance were foreign intelligence rather than a criminal prosecution.

**************SNIP****************

...the memo I wrote in March 1995 ... permits freer coordination between intelligence and criminal investigators than was subsequently permitted by the 1995 guidelines or the 2001 Thompson memo. My memo directed agents on both sides to share information -- and, in particular, directed one agent to work on both the criminal and intelligence investigations -- to ensure the flow of information "over the wall."

***************SNIP***************

The Patriot Act...says that electronic surveillance can be conducted in the United States against foreign threats as long as a "significant purpose" -- rather than the "primary purpose" -- is to obtain foreign intelligence.

************SNIP*************

I intend -- with my brethren on the commission -- to finish the job.

[ovrtaxt]

This panel of political pimps of the election industry

That's poetry, and well said.

[An.American.Expatriate]

By unredacted, I refered to the fact that the "Protected Identity" of SCARPA would not normally have been left in!!

The only redactions I saw had to do with the FBI Agent's name (I may have missed some though . . . )

Once again, I do not dismiss the claims outright, I just don't trust the source (yet). It has peaked my interest, and I will continue to look for other related info. Feel free to PING me to anything you may feel is relevant!!

[mabelkitty]

If she resigns, all the dirty Clinton deeds go unreported - again.

The stench is spreading to other Commissioners - Ben-Veniste got in on Friday.

Hillary is running - Gorelick will be gone before the end of the week. If we drag all this dirt and continue to make issue of this, it will drip, drip, through July.

[Just mythoughts]

"I tend to agree with An.American.Expatriate; unless there are any solid evidence that Gorlick wrote the memo for other reasons than she stated then one should take her on her words. In a way that's interesting and damning enough."


"An.American.Expatriate" may well be correct, I however, have no reason to believe what she stated and considering the method of operation of the Clintons have doubts about anything done for their "said" reasons.

Gorelick was a willing tool, the manner of her behavior during these "public show trials" is what I base my opinion upon, certainly not what she says to explain herself.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[Piranha]

I, at least, am not going to flame you for your analysis. I agree with everything that you wrote, even your point that without evidence you will not jump to the conclusion that she wrote the Wall memorandum for obfuscatory purposes.

[Piranha]

That does not mean, however, that we should ignore the POSSIBILITY that she was responding to a Clinton mandate to avoid looking into foreign involvement with OKC in order to resuscitate his Presidency by blaming the Right Wing in this country for the bombing.

[Piranha]

I agree with you as well. One of the reasons why Gorelick has to resign and then testify in front of the Commission is that we have to find out why she wrote that memo in March 1995. We need a context.

[Piranha]

When did Gorelick lie to judges in Federal Court?

[Piranha]

Actually, she does not give an explanation for why she wrote the Memorandum when she did. This is what she says:

Fourth, the memo I wrote in March 1995 -- which concerns information-sharing in two particular cases, including the original World Trade Center bombing -- permits freer coordination between intelligence and criminal investigators than was subsequently permitted by the 1995 guidelines or the 2001 Thompson memo. The purpose of my memo was to resolve a problem presented to me: facilitating investigations on both the intelligence side and criminal side at the same time. My memo directed agents on both sides to share information -- and, in particular, directed one agent to work on both the criminal and intelligence investigations -- to ensure the flow of information "over the wall." We set up special procedures because of the extraordinary circumstances and the necessity to prevent a court from throwing out any conviction in those cases.

In my opinion, it is imperative that she testify as to the reasons why the memo was written when it was, and why it said what it did.

[RobbyS]

As a nonlawyer, I must say that lawyers always interpret statuteand case law in a way dictated by their personal experience and views. Consequently their inrepretations always favor the interests of her colleagues and clients. In a world where politics and law are inextricable, her clients include herself and the other members of the Clinton Admnistration. Maybe, just maybe the way the FBI functioned under her control--and she more than Reno was a player--made it impossible to find a mideast connection with Oklahoma City.

[Piranha]

Gorelick was put on the Committee for one reason: To protect the Clintons. That per a Clinton staffer quote that appeared in the American Standard (IIRC).

Who knows whether this ex-Clinton staffer is telling the truth or speculating, and whether his/her speculation is reasonable. For all we know, it could be Dick Morris.

[Piranha]

Isn't it interesting that the Washington Post gives Gorelick this "prime spot" in its Sunday "Outlook" section to give her side of the story -- without any questioning, without any follow-up, without any challenges, without putting her under oath. Not exactly "fair and balanced" now, is it?

It's not fair and balanced, but Gorelick's article is an Op-Ed piece (i.e., a guest editorial), not a news column. I don't object to the Post using its opinion pages to provide a contriversial figure with a forum. All papers -- left and right -- do this, in my opinion.

[Piranha]

The truth of the "wall" is that the Left is STILL complaining about the US PATRIOT Act taking it down.

And yet Gorelick uses it in her defense without acknowledging that fact. Just another example of her intellectual dishonesty.

[An.American.Expatriate]

Thanks for your non-flaming - it's tough to try to present a background without sounding like I'm definding Gorelick.

For those looking for a context, try this thread . . .

IC21: The Intelligence Community in the 21st Century Staff Study Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence House of Representatives One Hundred Fourth Congress

[Spotsy]

Your tag: A vote for JF'nK is a vote for Peace in our Time!

How do you see Kerry establishing "Peace in our Time?"

[CT]

Dear 911 Commission:

We have been watching your hearings, and were struck by the clear conflict of interest surrounding Commissioner Gorelick. She obviously understands this, as she has now taken actions to try and justify or explain her enforcement of the 'wall' between intelligence and law enforcement by writing an editorial in the Washington Post.

It would seem apparent to anyone that a commision with such a heavy task should be free of conflict. Commissioner Gorelick may not fully understand this, or may have something to hide. Thus her placement on the commision raises some very serious questions and concerns on our part.

It is our view that Commissioner Gorelick should be a part of these proceedings. Not as a commisioner, but as a witness.

Sincerely,
(12 concerned indivduals)

[TenthAmendmentChampion]

the memo I wrote in March 1995 ... permits freer coordination between intelligence and criminal investigators than was subsequently permitted by the 1995 guidelines or the 2001 Thompson memo. My memo directed agents on both sides to share information -- and, in particular, directed one agent to work on both the criminal and intelligence investigations -- to ensure the flow of information "over the wall."

A few days ago wasn't she saying this was a memo she "did not write and did not sign"?? That seems like a blatant, bald-faced lie. That alone should give the "commission" reason to dismiss her and then call her as a witness. As soon as possible!

[Chad Fairbanks]

Welcome to the machine...

Oh, and Gorelicker? The Weather's here, wish you were beautiful!

[Chad Fairbanks]

If she wrote the wall it was at the behest of the Clintons. The question is why did the Clintons want this?

Because the Clintons wanted something bad to happen before he left office so he could declare a state of emergency, cancel the elections indefinitely, and stay in office longer - He and Hillary absolutely LOVED being in the White House, and I don't think they wanted to leave...

This is just a guess, though.