Update: The three-judge panel is still deliberating over the $20 million Rosen v. AIPAC et al defamation suit.
AIPAC Fights Former Executive's $20 Million Defamation Suit by Grant F. Smith The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs March-April 2012 Full report at: http://tinyurl.com/wrmea-aipac
During Feb. 14, 2012 oral arguments before a three-judge panel in the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, attorney David Shapiro argued passionately that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) has a long history of obtaining and using classified U.S. government information. The fiery Shapiro clashed with AIPAC's legal team, headed by employment and labor law expert Thomas McCalley. The $20 million question before the judges was whether AIPAC defamed its former top lobbyist, Steven J. Rosen, after it fired him in 2005--but before Rosen, along with his colleague Keith Weissman, was indicted by the Department of Justice under the Espionage Act. AIPAC repeatedly told establishment media outlets that Rosen's "behavior did not comport with standards that AIPAC expects of its employees."
A lower court judge threw out Rosen's defamation suit in February of last year, ruling that the objective truth of the AIPAC statement was "not provably false--and not defamatory as a matter of law." This was wrong, argued Shapiro, since AIPAC "knew everything" Rosen did while lobbying the executive branch and had no standards about classified information.
Shapiro presented tantalizing glimpses into the still-murky circumstances surrounding Rosen's dismissal. In 2004 Rosen and Weissman passed what they thought was classified information to Washington Post reporter Glenn Kessler. It was all a sting. The pair were wiretapped by the FBI, which played select audio clips to AIPAC counsel Nathan Lewin. Lewin--who subsequently said he did not think Rosen had committed a crime--regretfully advised AIPAC to fire Rosen.
The Appeals Court judges repeatedly challenged Shapiro that employers have a right to dismiss employees who have been arrested or indicted. How could it possibly be defamatory to say that Rosen's actions didn't comport with AIPAC standards? Shapiro fired back, asserting it was defamatory because "AIPAC has no standards--any standards." Shapiro then listed reasons why, under Justice Department "Thompson Memorandum" corporate prosecution guidelines, AIPAC really fired and publicly chastised its employees: "They were investigating AIPAC, too." Shapiro reminded judges that AIPAC's offices had been raided twice by the FBI. AIPAC chose to fire and put Rosen "in a zone of danger," with a possible 20-year prison term, "to save itself." Serial insinuations about Rosen dispersed the massive cloud of suspicion gathering over AIPAC itself...
...Unlike Rosen, concerned Americans had no standing to appeal the Justice Department's 2009 order to drop Espionage Act prosecutions, or power to redirect indictments toward the main perpetrator.
More at: http://tinyurl.com/wrmea-aipac Key court filings at the Israel Lobby Archive: http://www.IRmep.org/ila/rosen
Comments