The lawyer for imprisoned leaker Stephen Kim has asked the Department of Justice to immediately release him from jail, accusing the government of a “profound double standard” in its treatment of leakers following a comparatively lenient plea deal for former Gen. David Petraeus.
Petraeus avoided prison time for disclosing a trove of classified information to his lover and lying to the FBI about it. Kim, meanwhile, was sentenced to 13 months in prison for violating the Espionage Act by talking to a Fox News reporter about a single classified report on North Korea. Kim pleaded guilty after a five-year legal battle that depleted his finances and sent him to the brink of suicide. Petraeus, in the wake of his plea arrangement, is expected to continue his lucrative career working for an investment bank and giving speeches.
Kim’s lawyer, Abbe Lowell, noted in a scathing letter to the DOJ that Petraeus, in his plea deal, admitted leaking a range of highly sensitive material “at least as serious and damaging to national security as anything involved in Mr. Kim’s case” to Paula Broadwell, his lover and authorized biographer. Petraeus also acknowledged that when he was director of the CIA he lied to the FBI about leaking to Broadwell, as well as about keeping classified information at his home.
Yet while Kim, a former State Department official, was prosecuted under a draconian law against leaking — even though he merely discussed a single document that a government official later described in court filings as a “nothing burger” — Petraeus was allowed to plead guilty to a misdemeanor offense of mishandling classified information, and he was not charged at all for the felony of lying to the FBI. Under the deal, he is expected to be placed on probation for two years and pay a fine of $40,000.
“The decision to permit General Petraeus to plead guilty to a misdemeanor demonstrates more clearly than ever the profound double standard that applies when prosecuting so-called ‘leakers’ and those accused of disclosing classified information for their own purposes,” Lowell wrote in his two-page letter, which was dated March 6, just three days after the Petraeus plea deal was announced. “As we said at the time of Mr. Kim’s sentencing, lower-level employees like Mr. Kim are prosecuted under the Espionage Act because they are easy targets and lack the resources and political connections to fight back. High-level officials (such as General Petraeus and, earlier, Leon Panetta), leak classified information to forward their own agendas (or to impress their mistresses) with virtual impunity.”
Lowell was referring to former CIA director Leon Panetta, who was not punished even though, according to a report by the Defense Department’s inspector general, he leaked the name of the SEAL commando who led the raid that killed Osama bin Laden. Other senior officials who have avoided jail time for offenses related to classified information include former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, who was “admonished but not charged” for keeping classified information at his house; John Deutch, the former CIA director who resigned and lost his security clearance but was not charged for storing classified documents on a home computer; former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, who was allowed to plead guilty to a misdemeanor after he surreptitiously removed classified documents from the National Archives, and former Gen. James Cartwright, who reportedly has been investigated as the source for a New York Times story on Stuxnet but has not been charged. Scooter Libby, who was Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff, was convicted in 2007 of obstructing an investigation into the leak of a CIA agent’s name, but his sentence was later commuted by President George W. Bush.
The imbalance of justice — high-level officials lightly punished while lower-level officials go to jail (such as John Kiriakou) or face years of career-ruining prosecution (such as Thomas Drake) — was emphasized by Stephen Kim’s sister, Yuri, in a statement to The Intercept. “Our family and our friends think it is just terribly unfair and not right that Stephen was given less consideration and different treatment for doing no more, and even less than General Petraeus,” she stated. “The general got the right result, but so should have Stephen. Stephen’s lawyers tried to get the Justice Department to address this disparity but they would not do so. We want others to know this.”
Although it seems unlikely that Lowell’s letter will lead to Kim’s immediate release, it makes an argument that will probably be at the heart of the sentencing of Jeffrey Sterling, a former mid-level CIA official who earlier this year was convicted of violating the Espionage Act by leaking classified information to a Times reporter. Sterling, due to be sentenced in April, faces a maximum penalty of decades behind bars. His lawyer is likely to cite the Petraeus deal in an effort to avert a prison sentence, because Sterling’s actions, like Kim’s, are similar to Petraeus’s and, if anything, perhaps less serious. If the government wishes to be consistent with the Petraeus deal, Sterling would, the argument goes, not serve any jail time.
Kim, meanwhile, has been incarcerated at a federal prison in Cumberland, Maryland since July.
“It is too late for us to undo the plea and seek the misdemeanor that Mr. Kim should have been offered,” Lowell wrote. “However, some justice and fairness can occur, even at this late date, by our at least joining to end his incarceration now.”
Previous Intercept stories on the Stephen Kim case:
Stephen Kim Spoke To A Reporter. Now He’s In Jail. This Is His Story.
The Surrender (a short documentary by Stephen Maing)
Petraeus Plea Deal Reveals Two-Tier Justice System for Leaks
Photo: Cliff Owen/AP
Petraeus gave his biographer the classified information to make money when he sells his biography. The others gave classified information to inform the public of government wrongdoing. Truly, this unfairness says it all about who we really are.
I appreciate your comments, thank you. In the future, entire governments will be run by super computers and software that has pure logical computational abilities and will be free of the flaws of human beings. We will have a president that is a software package running on a super computer – and it will make all necessary calculations, as will legislators, lawyers, congressional candidates etc will all be software – perfectly understood and well developed software with intelligence surpassing any human.
The world will be a much fairer place, we need to invent our way out of our political problem – humans are too flawed.
And who will write the code for our benevolent, magnificent, robot overlords?
More judicial double standards. Rediculous! This is another example for why people cannot trust the government to be an even-handed arbiter of the law. With Petraeus plea deal, Kim case should definitely be thrown out.
There is a lot of difference between the two. During Obama’s first election, both he and John McCain tried their best to link their own patriotism to that of Dave and thereby gain some mileage with the voters. Now it’s payback time. What has Kim done to deserve the same kind of payback?
It is not a “double standard” because it is an aspect of a merit system.
The more someone (Petraeus) participates in slaughtering innocent people for corporate profits,
The more they are rewarded.
Mr. Kim obviously didn’t have enough blood on his hands.
The PRESS loves them some PRETRAUS. The press has worked hard to build the long legs for David’s pedestal. He is nothing more than a Lance Armstrong who kills. Can you imagine how many people have died as a result of his horn-ball ego? Yet if the press comes down on him, then they must admit they have been wrong ALL ALONG about his BS surge and his BS macho chatter.
Just another old Republican who uses his power to get chicks.
The government when it comes to national security is pretty clearly detached from the basic fabric of society at this point.
There is, however, the insurmountable “or what?” problem. If the Petraeus deal doesn’t result in early release for Kim and/or reasonable sentencing for Jeffrey Sterling, an aroused citizenry is going to take to the streets over illegitimate government?
The U.S. is Incarceration Nation, but whatever point equals critical mass prompting revolt has not yet been reached. Perhaps the heretofore conservative Mr. Kim, when released, can try to lead us to such an eventuality.
“If the Petraeus deal doesn’t result in early release for Kim and/or reasonable sentencing for Jeffrey Sterling, an aroused citizenry is going to take to the streets over illegitimate government?”
Great point!
I don’t see anything on the horizon to actually reach critical mass as far as an outraged citienry demanding change. There has been more outrage over some idiotic college kids racist chant than there ever will be over a police state.
We are seeing more demonstrations worldwide and here domestically, yet I agree we aren’t there yet. Here’s the thing though. Once a cancer starts growing it rarely goes into spontaneous remission, which means our rogue government and those worldwide cannot stop themselves therefore ensuring their inevitable overreach which will eventually galvanize the masses. Let’s hope we still have a liveable planet when that happens.
According to Newsweek Petraeus is currently advising the Obama administration. What a contrast between him and Kim on so many levels.
See: http://www.newsweek.com/petraeus-advising-white-house-isis-313885
Thanks for the link. Definitely worth reading.
Nah, I’m not schizoid, I just play one on GCHQ’s dashboard. Bless you, GCHQ, for you have sinned…That’s right, I’m rocking your favorite tune!! “She’s crazy, I tell you…” Nah, just dumping off loads of the shite you feed our brains, exquisite bums. Excuse me for repurposing it.
I am ashamed (and thus angry as hell since it’s not my shite) I can do nothing to influence the direction this ship of fools is hell bent to imitate…God, when will boys stop trying to out do their Fathers? I feel like I was born into a mob family, American, of course. So, Joe married a LaBruzzo to cement his neck ties with the Corleone families. That’s why Castellammare were so angry, Joe was breaking away from his own Sicilian family and making out like HE was Colombo planting flags everywhere he wanted from Canada to Mexico, Cuba to Marseilles; blow me, Joe. You fucking narco.
I don’t like bums, dirty rats. That”s why I cry…the world is swimming with the bums and rats, and I can’t enjoy the sweet things knowing what stinkers those bummers bee…but a godfather would tell me to enjoy what I have and not hand victory to my enemies by seeding my own tomato patch with assholes like Carmen! Blew up Frank’s crypt? Now that’s some sick shite…GCHQ. Get a clue…a time will come when your own godfather will have to do you, too. You went TOO far, no cigar for YOU!
The US is a democratic system and everyone has recourse to the same legal remedies. Anyone who finds themselves in legal trouble, should have their mistress drop hints about the information they could reveal, if pressed. This will generally result in a very civilized plea deal that is eminently satisfactory to all parties involved.
Of course, if you haven’t had the foresight to leak top secret information to your mistress, the outcome might be less pleasant.
No comment on dropping ‘hints about the information they could reveal’ but, speaking of Ms Mistress, … don’t hear much about her anymore, benitoe? Where is the ‘black book’? Did she give it back to …? Did she copy any of it? Is it legal (or at least kosher) she had the ‘black book’ in the first place? Was she comprimised by the FSB or China? etc., etc.?
~ aside: I took a gander at wikipedia’s page on how (& who) information is classified. It’s quite extensive meandering … http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classified_information_in_the_United_States … if you want to check it out.
*Briefly, it seems ‘the U.S. government’ appoints an individual with ‘classification authority’ …
I’m not too worried about Ms. Broadwell. According to the Charlotte Observer,
Since I don’t believe that Broadwell has any actual battlefield experience, I conclude that she studied those notebooks very, very carefully. This was wise on her part, as there will never be a shortage of oil companies seeking to improve their businesses based on best battlefield practices.
That is a very strange yet possibly revealing remark for Broadwell to make. How can one conflate best practices intended for an oil company with lessons learned on the battlefield? Seems like a funny way to run a business, or maybe it makes perfect sense.
” Is it legal (or at least kosher) she had the ‘black book’ in the first place?”
The whole affair stinks of being kosher. All those parties planned by Madam Broadwell, all the military pals of the General provided with party favors in skimpy outfits, plenty of alcohol, and you have the quintessential espionage operation.
What nation would do such a thing …
So, to be clear, this “individual” would need to have the highest security clearance level ever. Would his identity be classified, and if so, who classified that? Would it be his job to classify himself? The intelligence community(s) has been reported by some to be highly compartmentalized thus requiring an “individual” for every compartment so is there some sort of supreme “individual” classifying the classifiers? And if so, who classified him/her? This tortured reasoning has a point. When someone gets elected to Congress and subsequently lands on a committee where in the course of performing committee duties classified briefings are held divulging classified information to someone who previously was a mere citizen. Sounds like a secret club to me. So now this heretofore mere citizen is in possession of secrets to which we mere citizens are not privy. Yep, it’s an exclusive club. Regular citizens who work for say, Booz Allen Hamilton, apparently have, or maybe had, access to this classified info which makes this secret exclusive club quite large. Sometimes my musings stray into the absurd but there’s a point to be made in there somewhere. Just can’t quite nail it down though. It’s like seeing it but not being able to describe it. Oh well.
Darpa couldn’t set this up…InterSePT to the rescue!
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12511175
It’s gonna get worse before it gets better, I know the drill bit…Can we do stand up in lock down? I got a lot of material waste.
I liked the list of past leakers. . . . the list could stretch for pages…for example when someone in the Reagan administration leaked about the DEA operation in Central America, causing the death of informant Barry Seal.
i’ll tell you what the difference is:
kim either had no other ‘dirt’ on TPTB, and/or was not going to use it; petraeus had ‘dirt’ aplenty and threatened to use it…
i would bet dollars to donut holes, *that* is the difference…
Why are we ok with this? 2015 and we still live under what is no different to the impositions of a tyrant king, Obamas DOJ.
“I declare him to be an Outlaw, I declare him a Criminal”!
A Presentment By Federal Grand Jury 13-1 Of The Northern California District
We, the undersigned members of Federal Grand Jury 13-1 of The Federal District Of Northern California, exercise our Fifth Amendment right to make a Presentment of Charges made as a result of our investigations. April 14, 2014
Item 1: We find that President Barack Obama and CIA Director John O. Brennen should be charged with the Federal crime of Murder as a result of their illegal drone program which has executed four American citizens (one a sixteen year old boy) without due process, and murdered hundreds if not thousands of innocent civilians, many of them women and children. We find they should be indicted under 18 U.S.C. § 1111 with additional conspiracy charges. As argued by Francis Boyle, we also find that there is probable cause to indict Mr. Obama and Mr. Brennen under the Genocide law, 18 U.S. Code Chapter 50A, since the U.S. is a contracting party to the Genocide Convention. Our investigations have also found many others that may be complicit and should be investigated further for their roles in these egregious crimes: Former CIA Director Leon Panetta, General David Petraeus, Attorney General Eric Holder, National Security Agency Director Lt. Gen. Keith Alexander head the list.
Item 2: We find that George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice, and Colin Powell should be charged with Conspiracy to Defraud the United States, 18 U.S.C. Section 371, and indicted, for their actions, and participation in criminal activity, to mislead the American public and Congress in order to invade Iraq. The proposed and well-documented indictment is laid out in a book written by former AUSA, Elizabeth de la Vega (United States v. George W. Bush et al). The evidence has been presented and is compelling. All that needs to be done is to indict them and bring them to trial.
Item 3: We find that the relationships between Monsanto and various government branches and agencies certainly suggest that there has been criminal activity and a Conspiracy to Defraud the United States, and that employees of Monsanto have entered government positions to promote their corporate policies and products. Judiciary action has prevented us from investigating further at this time. That does not preclude the need for further investigation. Specifically, we would like to investigate why the DOJ dropped the anti-trust suit in 2012 that was brought against Monsanto in 2010 and the history of approvals for Monsanto products and policies.
Item 4: We find that the three constitutional branches of the US Government (Executive, Judiciary and Congressional) have colluded and possibly conspired to illegally strip the Federal Grand Jury of its Constitutional powers through codification, judicial interference and executive order. We ponder who could address this charge since the government is the accused, but feel it is our duty and obligation to present this matter to the People for their consideration. In particular, we find that Rule 6 of the Federal Rules Of Criminal Procedure is patently unconstitutional in that it strips the Federal Grand Jury of the historical and constitutional power of presentment, as written in the supreme law of the land, the US Constitution (Fifth Amendment). We have noted the DOJ’s “reluctance” to enforce the law when it comes to government officials and employees, and the Judiciary’s illegal meddling in our affairs. We tried to initate our own investigations as our Federal Grand Juror handbook states we can, but were told by the DOJ prosecutors and the judge that we could not. We have looked for the independence we were told we have, but could not find any instance where we have any independent ability to act. We have been precluded from initiating investigations and issuing subpoenas in order to acquire testimony and evidence to deliberate on. Felony jury tampering is a logical charge, but where would we find a federal prosecutor to file the charges? Despite strongly asserted claims that we are not just a “rubber stamp” for the DOJ, our experience has shown us that is exactly the corner that we have been painted into. If the People have any hope of reining in a government that is run by corporations and their large bank accounts, they must reclaim the Federal Grand Jury as the only constitutional method to address Federal excess. We consider how the federal government can expect the citizenry to obey the law, when they themselves cannot.
So say we.
Signed:
Juror #19
GJ-13-1 Of The Federal Northern California District
Note: I have been “excused”, on unknown and questionable grounds, from GJ-13-1 by an uncited, sealed order signed by a Federal District Judge, and barred by US Marshals from entering the jury room to fulfill my duties as an empaneled member of a Federal Grand Jury. Therefore I have been unable to get the signatures of the other grand jurors that would also sign this presentment. I have found nothing in my research regarding Federal Grand Jury function that quantifies the number of jurors that must sign a Presentment, only that twelve jurors must agree for a True Bill to be returned. I have not found any time limit on publishing a presentment, and conclude there is no cutoff point, similar to the open-ended secrecy clause that jurors must agree to, which is a lifetime charge. I served diligently until I was barred from participating on 4/10/14. I have had no recourse to independent legal counsel which I requested numerous times from our “handlers”. I myself cannot afford it nor should I have to. View the letter I was asked to write to the judge that seems to have precipitated his action. It gives a little background on my experience as a Federal Grand Juror and contains the questions I asked the judge, which he chose not to answer,
You’d probably have to go all the way back to Jimmy Carter to find an admin that wasn’t full of criminals. Notice the word full, as when politicians are involved criminality is sure to be there somewhere. It’s a sad thing to admit but realities have a way of knocking the idealism out of the idealists. When someone says “that’s just the way it is”, that’s an opportunity to declare “it doesn’t have to be” and setting a goal to change it. We can’t give up. I appreciate your comment and agree.