JOHN KIRIAKOU: The Press Should Not Be Shielding FBI Malfeasance
November 27, 2019
The Washington Post and others just adhered to the Justice Department's own
policy of protecting their own while wrecking the lives of those who have
the guts to stand up to them.
By John Kiriakou
Special to Consortium News
The Washington Post and other media outlets last week reported that a former
FBI attorney allegedly altered a document related to the FBI's 2016
surveillance of Carter Page, a Trump campaign adviser. FBI Inspector
General Michael Horowitz apparently concluded that the conduct "did not
affect the overall validity of the surveillance application," which was made
with the secret FISA court.
Carter Page, target of the surveillance. (MSNBC, Wikimedia Commons)
The Post article, as well as articles in The New York Times, at CNN, and in
other outlets, downplayed the behavior as having had "no effect" on the
FBI's surveillance of Page, ignoring the fact that tampering with a federal
document is a felony. That's consistent with the Justice Department's own
policy of protecting their own while wrecking the lives of those who have
the guts to stand up to them.
Publishing Excuses
Look at The Washington Post's original account of the inspector general's
findings. The FBI attorney was just a "low-level employee" who has already
"been forced out of the Bureau." The altered document "did not affect the
overall validity of the surveillance application." The employee
"erroneously indicated he had documentation to back up a claim he had made
in discussions with the Justice Department about the factual basis for the
application. He then altered an email to back up that erroneous claim."
Let's straighten a few things outs.
First, the employee was not "low-level." Attorneys enter the FBI at the
GS-11 level. That's a starting salary of $69,581. On Day One of his
career, the attorney would actually be a mid-level employee. Furthermore,
"low-level employees" are not assigned to sensitive operations involving
counterintelligence against a major-party presidential campaign. Hand-picked
senior employees get that honor.
Second, even if the altered document didn't affect the FISA warrant
application, the statement is irrelevant. The attorney committed a felony,
plain and simple.
Third, the media says that the attorney "erroneously indicated" that he
could back up the document. But that, too, was a felony. It's called
"making a false statement" and it's punishable by up to five years in
prison.
To make matters worse, there is no indication from the Justice Department
that this attorney will be prosecuted. "He's already resigned," The
Washington Post tells us, as if that's supposed to make everything OK. Why
is the mainstream media shielding FBI malfeasance? For FBI crimes? Because
the victim is the Trump campaign, and we're not supposed to like the Trump
campaign. It's all about Russia, Russia, Russia, remember? If the evidence
doesn't show that, you just change the evidence.
FBI headquarters. (Wikimedia Commons)
Letter from Terry Albury
We shouldn't be surprised about this kind of behavior from the FBI or from
the Justice Department writ large. I received a letter this week from FBI
whistleblower Terry Albury. He's the courageous former FBI agent who blew
the whistle on systemic racism in the bureau. And he received four years in
prison for his trouble. Terry wrote to tell me about an experience that
he's having identical to my own, when I was in prison after blowing the
whistle on the CIA's torture program.
Terry has less than a year left on his sentence. He has watched over the
past year as dozens of prisoners around him have been sent from their
low-security prison to a minimum-security work camp. These are prisoners
who have committed violent crimes; prisoners who have attempted escape in
the past; and prisoners who are incarcerated because they are recidivists.
Here's what Terry wrote:
"On 11/13/2018, I self-surrendered to FCI Englewood in Littleton, CO. In
assigning me to a Low Security Prison (LSP), the Bureau of Prisons (BOP)
placed a Management Variable (MGTV) on my case to counteract my extremely
high security score of zero. Of the variables at their disposal, I was
deemed to be a 'Greater Security Threat.'
According to institutional policy:
When the BOP believes that an offender represents a greater security risk
than the assigned security level would suggest, it may apply this Management
Variable and place the inmate in an institution with a higher security
level. The BOP typically applies this MGTV to offenders with lengthy prior
arrest records but few convictions, nonviolent offenders who have a history
of poor adjustment under probation or community supervision, offenders with
a history of organized crime, offenders with significant foreign ties and/or
financial resources, and offenders who have had disciplinary problems during
prior incarceration. Inmates who receive this MGTV are placed one security
level higher than their score would otherwise require.
The facts of my case and background confirm that none of these parameters
apply. Furthermore, an analysis of the policy clearly demonstrates that I
should never have been placed (and continue to be held) in an LSP.
Over the past year, I've consistently complied with all institutional rules,
taken extensive BOP-sponsored educational courses, and earned the support of
my case manager, unit manager, and warden who followed BOP Policy and
authorized the removal of my erroneous MGTV and subsequent transfer to a
Minimum Security Prison (MSP) within 500 miles of my residence (in line with
Congressional guidance under the First Step Act).
In authorizing my 10/11/2019 transfer to an MSP and the removal of my MGTV,
Case Manager D. Taylor specifically cited "unit team discretion outlined in
PS P5100.08" which further states "when a management variable no longer
applies, institution staff will remove the variable(s) accordingly."
Program Statement 5270.09 is also clear in that "the Unit Team may recommend
a greater security transfer, using their professional judgment, and in
accordance with the policy on inmate security designation and custody
classification."
However, on 10/30/2019, I was informed that the DSCC's Designation and
Sentence Computation Center (DSCC) discounted, rejected, and overturned my
legally justified transfer and MGTV removal. Furthermore, they unilaterally
assigned a new MGTV to my case ("monitoring required") in spite of the fact
that all federal prisoners are subjected to comprehensive phone, e-mail, and
traditional mail monitoring at every prison around the country (minimum,
low, medium, and high).
To say that I'm being held to a different institutional standard would be an
understatement. Over the past year, I've watched prisoners transfer to MSPs
with nine security points, violent backgrounds, five or more years remaining
on their sentence, and histories of escape.
Yet somehow, a man with zero security points, a non-violent background, less
than a year remaining on his sentence, and someone authorized to
self-surrender, I was deemed to be ineligible for placement in an MSP. And
to exacerbate the issue, the entire executive staff of FCI Englewood
supported my transfer and no longer believed I warranted the misguided and
inappropriate MGTV of "greater security threat."
In an effort to resolve this issue, I've filed a series of administrative
grievances, which is on par with applying scotch tape to fill a leak in the
Hoover Dam. I have no confidence in the internal process which is why I am
pursuing all available external channels to voice my concerns."
The fix is in, not just with Terry Albury, but with the whole system. Want
to tell the press that the FBI is an inherently racist organization? Go
ahead. You'll get years in prison. Want to tamper with federal documents to
prove a political point? Don't worry. The press will cover for you and the
chances are that the Department of Justice won't even bother to prosecute.
Terry Albury will be home soon, where he'll continue the fight for
transparency and honesty in government. But the fight is a daunting one,
especially when the mainstream media is one of your enemies. It's a fight
we should all be happy to take on.
John Kiriakou is a former CIA counterterrorism officer and a former senior
investigator with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. John became the
sixth whistleblower indicted by the Obama administration under the Espionage
Act-a law designed to punish spies. He served 23 months in prison as a
result of his attempts to oppose the Bush administration's torture program.
