January, 07 2015, 03:45pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; or David Zupan, (541) 484-9167
Prosecution of CIA Whistleblower Sterling
WASHINGTON
ORMAN SOLOMON, solomonprogressive at gmail.com, @xposefacts
Solomon is with ExposeFacts.org, which will be providing daily in-depth coverage of the trail of CIA whistleblower Jeffrey Sterling, with a team of journalists in the courtroom throughout the trial in U.S. District Court in Alexandria, Va. On Monday, New York Times reporter James Risen testified at a pre-trial hearing.
Solomon just wrote the piece "Why Jeffrey Sterling Deserves Support as a CIA Whistleblower," which states: "The trial of former CIA officer Jeffrey Sterling, set to begin in mid-January, is shaping up as a major battle in the U.S. government's siege against whistleblowing. With its use of the Espionage Act to intimidate and prosecute people for leaks in 'national security' realms, the Obama administration is determined to keep hiding important facts that the public has a vital right to know.
"After fleeting coverage of Sterling's indictment four years ago, news media have done little to illuminate his case -- while occasionally reporting on the refusal of New York Times reporter James Risen to testify about whether Sterling was a source for his 2006 book State of War.
"Risen's unwavering stand for the confidentiality of sources is admirable. At the same time, Sterling -- who faces 10 felony counts that include seven under the Espionage Act -- is no less deserving of support.
"The relentless prosecution of Sterling targets potential whistleblowers with a key implicit message: Do not reveal any 'national security' secrets that make the U.S. government look seriously incompetent, vicious, mendacious or dangerous. Don't even think about it. ...
"With so much at stake, the new petition 'Blowing the Whistle on Government Recklessness Is a Public Service, Not a Crime' has gained more than 30,000 signers in recent weeks, urging the government to drop all charges against Sterling. The initial sponsors include ExposeFacts, the Freedom of the Press Foundation, the Government Accountability Project, The Nation, The Progressive / Center for Media and Democracy, Reporters Without Borders and RootsAction.org." Solomon is executive director of the Institute for Public Accuracy and co-founder of RootsAction. See the petition here.
ExposeFacts is a project of IPA.
MARCY WHEELER, emptywheel at gmail.com, @emptywheel
Wheeler writes widely about the legal aspects of the "war on terror" and its effects on civil liberties. She is the "Right to Know" journalist for ExposeFacts and blogs at emptywheel.net. She just wrote the piece "The Jeffrey Sterling Trial: A Preview," which states: "The allegations consist of three charges (1-3) for which the government will have to prove this material was 'defense information.' They consist of four charges (4-7) for which the government will have to prove the information Sterling allegedly leaked had been protected by the CIA and that Sterling knew and intended the leak of it to hurt the U.S. They consist of two picayune charges (8 and 9) dealing with the distribution of Risen's book. And they consist of one charge (10) premised on Sterling destroying an email that referenced past discussions about Iran, but which itself contained no classified information.
"The government has a great deal of what thus far appears to be circumstantial evidence -- notably, lots of email and phone calls between the two -- showing that Sterling spoke to Risen, and spoke to Risen about Iran's nuclear abilities. The focus of the case will be on whether those communications offer enough evidence that Sterling is the person who provided Risen the most sensitive information that appeared in the chapter of his book. Given the course of Monday's dry run of Risen's testimony, Sterling's lawyers will surely emphasize that Risen has discussed 'sources,' plural, and the government had previously represented to Judge Leonie Brinkema that they themselves believed they could not prove Sterling's guilt unless Risen named his sources. That is, Sterling's team will now try to use the government's decision not to press Risen for testimony to attack their case. But the government only has to prove that Sterling leaked this stuff, not that he was the primary or only person to have leaked this stuff.
"In addition, the government will call a series of witnesses -- including his former colleagues at the CIA, congressional staffers, and possibly even Sterling's former civil attorney Mark Zaid -- to lay out how Sterling responded negatively to his Equal Opportunity challenges between 2002 and 2003. They'll do so to establish what they claim to be Sterling's motive: to retaliate because CIA had successfully denied Sterling any compensation for what he claims was unequal treatment because he is African American. ...
"The government may also call Condoleezza Rice, who -- as National Security Adviser -- successfully convinced the Times not to publish a Risen story on Operation Merlin in 2003 because it was too sensitive; the government maintains this would prove that the information was closely held national security information. The government had wanted to introduce the talking points she used to make that case, but Judge Brinkema ruled the government could only do so if they called Rice as a witness."
For background, see article by Norman Solomon and Marcy Wheeler in The Nation, "The Government War Against Reporter James Risen" -- which quotes Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg: "Sterling's ordeal comes from a strategy to frighten potential whistleblowers, whether he was the source of this leak or not. The aim is to punish troublemakers with harassment, threats, indictments, years in court and likely prison -- even if they've only gone through official channels to register accusations about their superiors and agency. That is, by the way, a practical warning to would-be whistleblowers who would prefer to 'follow the rules.' But in any case, whoever were the actual sources to the press of information about criminal violations of the Fourth Amendment, in the NSA case, or of reckless incompetence, in the CIA case, they did a great public service."
A nationwide consortium, the Institute for Public Accuracy (IPA) represents an unprecedented effort to bring other voices to the mass-media table often dominated by a few major think tanks. IPA works to broaden public discourse in mainstream media, while building communication with alternative media outlets and grassroots activists.
LATEST NEWS
Florida Republicans Ripped for Advancing Show-Me-Your-Papers Voter ID Bill
"This wave of anti-voter legislation is advancing amid ongoing abuses of power that pose unprecedented threats to American democracy," said the ACLU of Florida's executive director.
Feb 25, 2026
With 251 days until the US general election, Florida Republicans on Wednesday passed a show-me-your-papers bill that opponents warn could prevent thousands of eligible state voters from registering if they don't have a valid birth certificate or passport, or their documents don't reflect a name change.
"Midterm elections are coming later this year—and they're a crucial test of our democracy," ACLU of Florida executive director Bacardi Jackson said in a Wednesday statement. "Moments like this bring new voters into the process and give communities the power to hold leaders accountable—exactly what a healthy democracy demands. But right now, some lawmakers are pushing an anti-voter bill that could shut thousands of eligible people out of our elections and discourage the enrollment of new eligible voters."
The Florida House of Representatives on Wednesday voted 83-31 on HB 991, sponsored by Rep. Jenna Persons-Mulicka (R-78).
"The Florida House version of the bill would only go into effect in January 2027. But under a similar bill set for consideration in the Florida Senate, the new rules would take effect this July, before the November midterm elections," Democracy Docket detailed. "A House committee already gave preliminary approval to the bill earlier this month."
Jackson highlighted that "many eligible voters don't have ready access to an unexpired passport or an original or certified copy of their birth certificate because of logistical and financial barriers. More than 8 million Floridians do not have a valid passport, and because many women legally change their name upon marriage, more than 4.7 million women in Florida do not have a birth certificate reflecting their current legal name—documents this bill would require."
"At the same time, this proposal would eliminate current, valid forms of ID proving eligibility at the polls, including student IDs, retirement center IDs, and public assistance IDs," she warned. "Taken together, these changes are not neutral or harmless—they would fall hardest on low-income voters, students, seniors, women, and Black and brown Floridians."
The ACLU leader also argued that "context matters. This wave of anti-voter legislation is advancing amid ongoing abuses of power that pose unprecedented threats to American democracy." She specifically pointed to the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) America Act that the GOP-controlled US House of Representatives passed earlier this month.
"We're seeing parallel efforts nationally to make it harder for eligible voters to cast their ballots—including the SAVE Act being debated in Congress right now—and Florida is leading the way down this authoritarian path," she said. The federal bill is less likely to get through the US Senate, whose filibuster rule requires the GOP to get some Democratic support to advance most legislation.
"What makes this even more galling is that lawmakers don't have to do any of this at all—they are choosing to," said Jackson. "They could enact reforms making it easier for eligible Floridians to vote and have their voices be heard, like the Harry T. and Harriette V. Moore Florida Voting Rights Act, HB 1419/SB 1598. Instead, they are fast-tracking legislation that would make voting harder for eligible Floridians and silence communities that deserve to be heard."
"We will not stand by while politicians in power seek to entrench their power at the expense of the people's rights," she vowed. "We will keep organizing and fighting to reclaim and defend our democracy—because every eligible Floridian deserves to vote."
Meanwhile, at the federal level, Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) plans to hold a vote on the SAVE America Act this week. President Donald Trump used his State of the Union address on Tuesday night to increase pressure on Congress to send the bill to his desk.
"I'm asking you to approve the SAVE America Act to stop illegal aliens and others who are unpermitted persons from voting in our sacred American elections—that cheating is rampant in our elections," Trump said. "It's very simple: All voters must show voter ID. All voters must show proof of citizenship in order to vote. And no more crooked mail-in ballots except for illness, disability, military, or travel. None."
Experts have long countered such GOP claims by emphasizing that, as the Brennan Center for Justice put it in a pair of blog posts, "noncitizen voting is already illegal" and "extensive research reveals that fraud is very rare."
Michelle Kanter Cohen, policy director and senior counsel for the national voting rights group Fair Elections Center, told Democracy Docket on Wednesday that Florida's voter suppression bill "would do a lot of the same things," as the SAVE America Act, "in terms of preventing American citizens from voting who don't have access to documentary proof of citizenship documents."
"The last thing someone who is on a path to citizenship would want to do is to jeopardize their naturalization by voting illegally," Kanter Cohen said. "And so people don't do that. That's not something that's happening because it has such dire consequences."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Despicable': Vance, Oz Announce Freeze on Some Medicaid Funding for Minnesota
"The Constitution clearly gives Congress the power to spend taxpayer funds, and no law allows the president to halt if he feels some US states aren’t being 'good stewards' of the money," said one critic.
Feb 25, 2026
US Vice President JD Vance said Wednesday that the Trump administration will pause some Medicaid funding for Minnesota over fraud concerns—without offering any guarantees that the suspension will not adversely impact the more than 1 million Minnesotans who depend upon the key healthcare program.
"We're announcing today that we have decided to temporarily halt certain amounts of Medicaid funding that is going to the state of Minnesota in order to ensure that the state of Minnesota takes its obligations seriously to be good stewards of the American people's tax money," Vance said at a White House press conference with Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Administrator Mehmet Oz.
"Now what is this gonna mean?" Vance continued. "What this means is that, first of all, the providers on the ground in Minnesota have actually already been paid... What we're doing is we are stopping the federal payments that will go to the state government until the state government takes it obligations seriously to stop the fraud that's being perpetrated."
They already targeted SNAP in Minnesota. They’ve killed two Minnesotans and injured or kidnapped hundreds more. Now they’re stealing their Medicaid. They’re going to deny people healthcare because of a YouTube video about a Somali daycare scam that wasn’t even true.
[image or embed]
— Kelly (@broadwaybabyto.bsky.social) February 25, 2026 at 3:05 PM
Oz demanded that Democratic Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz determine "who these providers are; make sure they're not already in trouble for doing bad stuff, and then reevaluate all the current providers to make sure they're supposed to be able to provide these services."
Responding to Oz's remarks, Gaia Leadership Project founder Elizabeth Cronise McLaughlin said on Bluesky, "So Minnesota is supposed to review every appointment by a Medicaid recipient with every doctor to get funds already lawfully allocated to the state?"
Asked by a reporter how he intends to ensure that the funding pause "doesn't impact the people who are enrolled in Medicaid," Vance said he is "worried about the justice of it all."
"I think it's offensive that American taxpayers pay into these programs and they're defrauded... and it's really sad that American children who need these services are unable to get them, because they're going to fraudsters," Vance replied.
"Look, we're certainly gonna make sure that our anti-fraud efforts go after the fraudsters and not after anybody who actually benefits from these services," he continued. "But I actually think the question is a little off, in a way, because the problem is not going after the fraud, the problem is that these programs are being defrauded to begin with."
"Our social safety net will disappear unless we take fraud more seriously," added the vice president, whose boss, President Donald Trump, last year signed into law the biggest cuts to Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, in the nation's history as part of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.
Medicaid is the primary healthcare safety net for lower-income Americans, with nearly 70 million people enrolled nationwide at the end of last year.
While federal prosecutors are investigating Minnesota’s Medicaid system—specifically, 14 high-risk service programs such as housing support and personal-care services—on suspicion of billions of dollars in fraudulent billings since 2018, and dozens of people have been convicted of stealing public money through the state’s social services system, critics noted that Congress, not the president, has the power of the purse.
Some observers noted that Trump has already targeted Minnesota—which voted against him all three times he ran for president—with his deadly crackdown on undocumented immigrants and their defenders and racist attacks on Somali immigrants, including Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.).
The Medicaid freeze follows the Trump administration's $10 billion cut in federal childcare funding to five Democrat-led states, including Minnesota, last month—a move that opponents argue punishes working families who committed no fraud.
University of Illinois professor Nicholas Grossman called the Medicaid pause "taxation without representation."
"The Constitution clearly gives Congress the power to spend taxpayer funds, and no law allows the president to halt if he feels some US states aren’t being 'good stewards' of the money," he said on Bluesky. "In case there’s any confusion on this, the Impoundment Control Act forbids it."
"The people of Minnesota vote for representatives to Congress," Grossman added. "Minnesota representatives and senators were in DC, representing their constituents, when Congress passed laws using proper procedure that allocated Medicaid funding. The president breaking those laws violates the fundamental compact of the republic."
Oz on Wednesday also announced "a six-month national moratorium blocking all new enrollments for durable medical equipment—prosthesis, orthotics—supplies across the board" in the name of fighting fraud. The move targets suppliers, not individual Medicaid beneficiaries.
This from Oz, a promoter of privatized Medicare Advantage programs, which are notorious for overcharging taxpayers and denying patients necessary care. The CMS under Oz increased federal funding for Medicare Advantage plans by more than $25 billion for 2026.
As Common Dreams recently reported, United Health Group (UHG), one of the country's largest for-profit health insurance companies, has been the leading beneficiary of a long-running Medicare Advantage fraud scheme that the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission—an independent, nonpartisan legislative branch agency—warned could cost US taxpayers $1.2 trillion over the next decade.
Some critics said that if Trump really cared about fraud, he'd go after companies like UHG—and stop pardoning so many convicted criminals who committed billions of dollars worth of fraud.
"These guys are despicable," Michigan State University professor Brendan Cantwell said Wednesday in response to Vance and Oz's announcement.
Robert Weissman, co-president of the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, said in a statement Wednesday that “Medicaid fraud is a serious problem that requires cracking down on fraudsters—not patients."
Weissman continued:
This administration’s anti-fraud rhetoric is itself a fraud. In fact, the administration has gutted anti-fraud government agencies and programs and let fraudsters off the hook. It has issued record-breaking pardons to fraudsters; sought to eliminate the most important anti-consumer fraud agency, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau; eviscerated the corps of inspectors general whose job is to root out waste, fraud, and abuses; and dropped dozens of fraud and fraud-related investigations against large corporations.
“The Trump administration suspension of Medicaid funding in Minnesota is a bad-faith, punitive, and shameful measure that will punish people in Minnesota as part of the same deceptive story that the Trump administration has told to justify the outrageous [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] invasion of the state," Weissman added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Former Brazilian Political Officials Found Guilty of Plotting Murder of Marielle Franco
"What the killers did not expect is that her legacy would become greater than all of this," said Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Carmen Lúcia.
Feb 25, 2026
A five-judge panel on Brazil's Supreme Court on Wednesday voted unanimously to convict former Congressman Chiquinho Brazão and his brother, politician Domingos Brazão, of ordering the 2018 murder of Rio de Janeiro City Councilwoman Marielle Franco and her driver, Anderson Gomes.
As reported by Reuters, the court sentenced the Brazão brothers to each serve 76 years in prison for plotting to assassinate the 38-year-old Franco because they feared she and her allies in the Socialism and Liberty Party would be an impediment to their illegal scheme that involved taking public lands to develop private real estate projects.
Justice Alexandre de Moraes, who oversaw the trial of the brothers, said that the two men did not think they would be held accountable for killing Franco because she was a Black woman who represented a poor neighborhood in Rio.
"Inside the misogynistic, prejudiced minds of those who ordered and carried out the crime, who would care about that?" Moraes said. “They did not expect such wide repercussions."
Justice Carmen Lúcia also said that the Brazão brothers seemed to believe that they would be allowed to get away with murder.
"What the killers did not expect," said Lúcia, "is that her legacy would become greater than all of this."
The court also sentenced former Rio de Janeiro Police Chief Rivaldo Barbosa to an 18-year prison sentence for obstructing the investigation into Franco's murder.
Franco's widow, current Rio City Councilwoman Mônica Benício, told Payday Report that the court's conviction of the plotters was a landmark decision for Brazilian democracy.
"For the country, this is an opportunity to demonstrate its capacity to break with the selective penal system that protects criminal structures and their political ties," Benício said. "We must learn a lesson from what the assassination of Marielle and Anderson reveals about Brazil: the obscure connections between crime, politics, and the police."
Anielle Franco, a sister of Marielle Franco who currently serves as Brazil's Minister of Racial Equality, hailed the verdict as "justice" in a social media post, vowing that "our fight continues for all victims of violence."
Agnes Callamard, secretary general of Amnesty International, said that justice for Franco and Gomes was "a long time coming," and added that "their killings are emblematic of the broader and highly alarming trend of lethal violence and structural racism against human rights defenders in Brazil."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


