Whistleblower Lawyer & Attorney : National Whistleblower Legal Defense and Education Fund : Whistlebower Protection, Fraud Claims : Washington DC

Yesterday, January 30, 2008, in a Senate Judiciary Committee DOJ Oversight hearing, Senator Charles Grassley (above, right) had some tough questions for Attorney General Michael Mukasey. Notably, Senator Grassley, a longtime critic of FBI policies and actions against whistleblowers, asked the AG about Special Agent Bassem Youssef, who has exposed serious misconduct in the war on terror.


In his full written questions, Senator Grassley, citing an October 2007 letter to Mukasey sent by Mr. Youssef's attorney, Stephen Kohn, says:

"Special Agent Youssef, through his counsel, provided my office with a
copy of a ten page letter (dated October 11, 2007) filed with your
office detailing threats to our nation's security caused by the failure
of the FBI to hire and promote subject matter experts within the FBI's
counterterrorism division. The examples set forth in that letter are
extremely troubling.  [Mr. Chairman, I ask that the letter be placed in
the record.]

What action has your office taken to investigate the issues and concerns
raised in Mr. Youssef's October 11, 2007 letter?

Do you plan to seek an independent review of Youssef's allegations about how lack of expertise among FBI managers is hindering its
counterterrorism efforts?  Why or why not?"

He goes on to ask Mr. Mukasey about the abuses related to National Security Letters program, of which Mr. Youssef has firsthand knowledge, and has been a vocal critic.


You can read all of Senator's Grassley's tough questions for Attorney General Mukasey after the jump...


Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

By: Jane Turner

I find that the most amazing part of being an FBI whistleblower is watching while FBI managers who are directly involved in misconduct, malfeasance, obstruction, or criminal activity--which whistleblowers bring to light--are rewarded, promoted, and/or given bonuses. The Director of the FBI did not even have the common courtesy to exile the guilty parties to Butte, Montana or Minot, North Dakota. He allows them to continue to be elevated into the highest ranks of the FBI, receiving all the benefits that those lofty positions bring.


For instance, the Zacarias Moussoui debacle, where managers in the FBI would not allow FBI agents to get a search warrant for Moussoui's personal possessions, even though evidence presented was compelling. It is a long and tortured story, one that might have ended in FBI agents possibly stopping the attacks of 9/11 if managers at FBI Headquarters had not been guilty of "obstructionism, criminal negligence and careerism" (SA Harry Samit, FBI, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Alexandria Division 3/9/2006).


Senator Charles Grassley (R) and others have pointed out that no one in the FBI management team has been fired or punished for 9/11, and in fact, several have been promoted. Later, I will name not only those individuals involved in 9/11 who were negligent, but also name those in my case who were involved in that obstructionism, criminal negligence and careerism, and were subsequently promoted. One of the FBI managers in my case who was involved in misconduct, was also involved in the Moussoui investigation.


It is indeed a small world when one is a FBI Whistleblower.

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

This week, President Bush signed the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (HR. 4986). Section 846 of this bill is a provision designed to protect employees of defense contractors when they report fraud to Congress, an Inspector General, the Government Accountability Office, or a Department of Defense employee charged with overseeing contracts.


The Bush administration has consistently opposed whistleblower rights for employees of the federal government and its contractors. Veto threats have been issued against the whistleblower protection legislation that has been proposed by the Congress (click here for the latest on those bills). The administration claims that protecting whistleblowers could harm national security, but the truth is the exact opposite: strong whistleblower laws can help keep this country safe and secure, as well as save us billions of dollars in wasted revenue.


In this case, the President had no choice but to sign the Defense Authorization bill into law, but then he went out of his way to express sharp disapproval of the whistleblower provisions in his signing statement. This statement (below), goes against the spirit of the law, and gives the president justification to ignore a congressional mandate.

“Provisions of the Act, including sections 841, 846, 1079, and 1222, purport to impose requirements that could inhibit the President's ability to carry out his constitutional obligations to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, to protect national security, to supervise the executive branch, and to execute his authority as Commander in Chief. The executive branch shall construe such provisions in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President.”

In short, the new law is a victory worthy of great praise, but the President’s brash treatment of legislation designed to protect honest employees is deplorable.


See the full text of HR. 4986, sec. 846 after the jump...


Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

By: Jane Turner

The world of federal whistleblowers is a very small one. I have met Sibel Edmonds, and others who qualified for the whistleblower title. Colleen Rowley was in two of the same FBI offices that I was assigned. Fred Whitehurst (of the FBI Laboratory fame) spent hours on the phone helping me through the emotional tornado that hits each and every whistleblower. There were whistleblowers I have met in other federal agencies. What amazes me is that there are any whistleblowers at all. Every whistleblower counsels almost anyone who reaches out to them for advice, that the road of a whistleblower is exceedingly difficult, and filled with terrible events. Intimidation, reprisal, being ostracised, loss of friends, and the destruction of a career are typical. Loved ones leave you, and friends are tired of hearing over and over again of the misjustice that was perpetrated against you. The low number of federal whistleblowers demonstrates the world in which we live. A world that is terribly hostile to those who speak truth to those in power.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

By: Jane Turner

It is interesting that people think the whistleblowing ordeal is over once a whistleblower has been exonerated. It is never over. A whistleblower’s career is shattered, and the tag of "troublemaker", "unpatriotic", "snitch" or "whistleblower" follows you forever. Why? Because the organization that you blow the whistle on (in my case, the FBI), never forgets what they see as a betrayal. It is never about what is wrong or right, justice or injustice, but simply that the whistleblower is not following the party line. The organization itself cannot feel anger and betrayal, but those leading the bureaucratic department certainly can, and they do. A whistleblower threatens the internal machinery of an organization, which many times have been set up to benefit the individuals who are running the organization. That was certainly the case at the Minneapolis FBI Office. Managers collected big bonuses and big salaries by inflating the number and quality of cases in Indian Country (The Native American tribal lands, which I worked for years). They also used false and misleading data from Indian Country so they could get bigger titles, and more money. I loved the FBI, and tried to make it better. I wish I could have said the same about the managers I blew the whistle on. More on that later.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Whistleblower Protection Blog is proud to present an ongoing series of blog posts by FBI whistleblower Jane Turner. Ms. Turner was a highly respected FBI Agent for 25 years. She worked the "indian country" of South Dakota and specialized in child-crimes, investigating the most heinous offenses imaginable. Despite near-impossible circumstances, Ms. Turner obtained confessions and convictions from countless criminal sociopaths. She was forced from the position she loved after reporting widespread discrimination and mismanagement in these cases. Then, she was forced from the FBI after reporting that some of her fellow agents had, during the 9/11 investigation, stolen items from Ground Zero - items belonging to the victims and their families.

After a decade of fighting, Ms. Turner was finally vindicated when a Minnesota jury returned a verdict in her favor, determining that, yes, she had been the subject of retaliation by her FBI managers after she raised concerns of discrimination and mismanagement in her office.  

These blog posts, which are accessible by clicking "Jane Turner's Blog" on the left column, will be about Ms. Turner's experiences as a whistleblower.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Blog Post #1:

By: Jane Turner

Ever since I was a little kid growing up in Rapid City, South Dakota, I wanted to be an FBI Agent. Not once in those early days, up to and including now (as a fifty six year old), did I ever aspire to be an FBI Whistleblower. I really do not think that anyone grows up desiring to be a Whistleblower. The path is too difficult, too dangerous, and not rewarding (either financially or spiritually). People become whistleblowers because the critical truth they speak is being denied, covered up, or trivialized by those with power and/or authority. In my case, the truth I revealed, that sex abuse cases in Indian Country were being dismissed as car accidents by FBI Agents who did not want to work them, was seen by FBI managers as questioning the legitimacy of all FBI investigations. Having the FBI training that qualified me as an Advanced Police Instructor, and Psychological Profiler; and certified to teach local, state, and federal law enforcement officials nationwide about the psychology of sexual offenders; and how to work crimes against children investigations, forced me to remain in the battle and try to speak truth to those in FBI power.   

As I write this blog, I will provide information regarding my struggle, hoping to help others. I will also speak for those still on the job at the FBI, who have been muzzled, smeared, and threatened with termination if they do not stop their battle to bring injustice, or truth to light. The path of a whistleblower is a lonely one, and a journey that no one else can take for you. This blog will address my journey.

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

Briefs were filed yesterday in the Supreme Court case Allison Engine Co., Inc. v. United States ex rel. Sanders (Docket no. 07-214). This case will decide whether corporations and individuals who receive government contracts are legally required by the False Claims Act to "present" their claim for payment to a government agency, or if they can evade liability under the FCA by routing these claims through a surrogate, such as a subcontractor.

The Petitioners' and Respondents' briefs were filed yesterday, as well as Amicus briefs, including for the Respondents Amicus Curiae briefs from Senator Grassley and Taxpayers Against Fraud. (Thanks to TAF for these briefs).

View the National Whistleblower Press Release on this issue here

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks (1)

This February 5th is being called "Tsunami Tuesday" as many of the big states line up for primary elections to nominate candidates for President.


Ordinarily we would be urging those of you who are politically active to take advantage of this forum. We’d tell you to call, write or hire a plane to fly a banner. Just do anything to get attention for the False Claims Act during the campaign. We are a little disappointed nobody has asked the candidates to support the False Claims Act Corrections Act at any of the seemingly endless series of snooze inducing debates. What’s one question about fighting fraud mixed in with the You-Tube chatter?


Despite this void there has been a major positive event to highlight before February 5th.


Two of the biggest states at stake on February 5, California, and Illinois, have had their own False Claims Acts for many years. New York just got on board last year. Now, perhaps sensing a tsunami of support for fighting fraud, New Jersey has joined the group. By a unanimous vote in its Senate, The Garden State enacted its own False Claims Act just in time for Feb 5th.


Were the legislators and Governor afraid not to have a False Claims Act on the books when the national press arrived to cover a presidential campaign? Probably not. Probably, the New Jersey Legislature just knew a good thing when they saw one. Now, in addition to the billions collected through the Federal FCA, whistleblowers will be able to fight fraud at the local level.


The political implications of more states enacting these laws should not be dismissed. First of all the False Claims Act is popular. Fighting fraud is the safe place to be if you are voting in any legislature. We need to remind the Congress of that simple fact early and often to push for improvements to the law. Second, the laws enacted at the state level will increase popularity for all the False Claims Acts. It can be hard to get attention for a federal case involving merely millions as opposed to billions of dollars, but at the state level smart politicians/attorneys can make a nice career out of saving their state a few million dollars and fighting fraud. That’s fine with me.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Early this morning, Stephen Kohn gave a 10 minute interview which provided some insight into the case of FBI counterterrorism whistleblower Bassem Youssef. For those of you who don't live in the DC area or who (like me) were not awake early enough to catch this interview, you can listen to it by clicking here.

Click here for more information and media coverage on the continuing retaliation against Mr. Youssef.

Sign up for our RSS feeds today, and get the latest whistleblower news.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Last month we reported on a key Whistleblower/Civil Rights tax case that was filed with the Supreme Court by attorneys working with the National Whistleblower Center. See Whistleblowers Blog (December 13, 2007). The case is Murphy v. IRS, No. 07-802 (Supreme Court), and the principal issue is whether the IRS can tax as income plaintiffs' court awards for non-physical compensatory damages, such as make whole awards for emotional distress and loss of reputation.


Since the petition for a writ of certiorari was filed on December 13, 2007, the Solicitor General has requested and received an extension of the time for the government to file a response to Ms. Murphy's cert petition. A copy of the Solicitor General's request is available here, and a copy of the order granting the request is here.


**Also, a brief update on the status of the case was reported in today's Wall Street Journal.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Here are links to some of the blog posts and websites that covered FBI Whistleblower Bassem Youssef's discussion at the American Library Association conference, where he discussed the Bureau's counterterrorism shortcomings.

Here is a look at some blog posts:

Huffington Post:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/14/fbi-agent-criticizes-coun_n_81355.html

Wonkette:
http://wonkette.com/344491/the-fbi-agent-and-the-naughty-librarians

The Raw Story
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Whistleblower_effectively_gagged_by_FBI_0110.html

Some others:

• http://blog.americancongressfortruth.com/2008/01/13/arab-american-fbi-agent-faults-counterterrorism-work/
• http://www.atlargely.com/2008/01/bassem-youssef.html
• http://prairieweather.typepad.com/big_blue_stem/2008/01/fbi-warrantless.html
• http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/archives/cat_coverupdeceptions.html#076481
• http://freegovinfo.info/node/1564
• http://womenslens.blogspot.com/2008/01/egyptian-fbi-agent-speaks-out.html
• http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6522302.html?desc=topstory

And some traditional media sources:

• http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?parm1=1&docID=hsnews-000002654526
• http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-01-12-fbi-whistleblower_N.htm
• http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/11/AR2008011103665.html
• http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18028499
• http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hyFyyiD5i9Yl4A0-s47omtQcMCcAD8U4L3T00
• http://www.registerguard.com/csp/cms/sites/dt.cms.support.viewStory.cls?cid=48127&sid=6&fid=1
• http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120018357493386451.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
• http://www.timesleader.com/news/ap?articleID=336347

 

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks (1)

On December 28th, I blogged about FBI Counterterrorism whistleblower Bassem Youssef, and his intention to speak at the American Library Association conference this Saturday, January 12. Since that time, Mr. Youssef has been informed by his managers that he should be very careful about what he says regarding the Bureau's deficiencies and missteps in the War on Terror.

According to a letter sent to the Executive Director of the ALA's Washington Office by Mr. Youssef's attorney Stephen Kohn, The FBI has sent a "clear warning" to Mr. Youssef regarding the content of his speech, and further, has instructed Mr. Youssef to follow strict censorship rules -- rules which he is not allowed to share with anyone outside of the Bureau. Due to threats from FBI managers and these secret censorship requirements, he is now unable to give a speech at the conference. Rather than give a prepared speech, Mr. Youssef will only be available to answer questions from the audience.

The National Whistleblower Center has issued an action alert, calling for supporters to email the Attorney General and demand that he end the senseless retalition and censorship of Mr. Youssef.

Mr. Youssef is scheduled to discuss this issue in an interview with NPR, airing tonight. Check back, I will post more information as it becomes available.

UPDATE: NPR is airing the Youssef story tonight on "All Things Considered." It will be available online at 7pm. (listen here) 

**This issue was also covered in today's Wall Street Journal and on the Raw Story blog.
    (To view the entire WSJ piece, access it through a Google News search)

 

• Print
• Comments (3)
• Trackbacks (1)

Yesterday, Minneapolis Chief U.S. District Judge James Rosenbaum ordered the FBI to pay over $1 million to former FBI Agent Jane Turner and her attorneys. Combine that amount with the $360,000 that Turner was awarded by a jury in February 2007, it brings her total court award, to nearly $1.4 Million. The judge's ruling yesterday dealt yet another solid blow to the FBI, which had filed an objection to Ms. Turner's request for reimbursement of her attorneys fees.

Special Agent Turner was a highly regarded child crime agent working in the "Indian Country" of North Dakota for thirteen years. She experienced harsh retaliation from her managers after blowing the whistle on sex discrimination within the FBI, as well as negligence in child abuse investigations. In January 2007, a Minneapolis jury awarded Turner over $500,000 for retaliation and backpay - which by law was reduced to $360,000.

**Tad Vezner of the Pioneer Press has a good article on this issue linked here**


The FBI initially appealed the jury verdict, but the Solicitor General of the United States intervened and forced the FBI to drop their appeal.  


Stephen Kohn, Ms. Turner's attorney and President of the National Whistleblower Center, called the Turner decision "vindication for an irrational attempt by the FBI to destroy one of its highly decorated veteran agents after she exposed highly discriminatory practices by her management."


In addition to disclosing discrimination, Ms. Turner also reported widespread theft by FBI agents at the 9/11 crimescene. A subsequent DOJ investigation found that scores of employees had stolen items belonging to the victims, including a crystal Tiffany globe and bloodstained clothing.


"FBI management at the highest levels must be held accountable for their crude attempt to cover up official misconduct. What the Bureau did to Jane Turner is unnaceptable in modern law enforcement." Added Kohn.

**North Dakota TV station KFYR has video on the Turner issue here

**Dan Browning of the Minneapolis Star-Tribune has written numerous articles on the Turner case, and has more on the Judge's decision here (Free Subscription Required)

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

President Bush has signed into law the first legislation in more than a decade to strengthen the Freedom of Information Act. The Open Government Act of 2007, signed by Bush on New Years eve, contains several important changes and improvements to the Freedom of Information Act.


The new law establishes enforceable deadlines for agencies to process FOIA requests; extends FOIA's reach to certain records maintained by government contractors; establishes an ombudsman to resolve disputes; creates a FOIA tracking system; restores provisions for recovery of attorneys fees by FOIA litigants who successfully prevail in court, including cases where there is a voluntary or unilateral change in the government's position after filing of the lawsuit, so long as the FOIA requester's claim is not insubstantial; and requires that any award of attorneys fees be paid out of an agency's budget and not the Treasury Department's judgment fund.


Legislative improvements to FOIA were long overdue and the Open Government Act of 2007 is intended to speed up citizen access to government information. The Freedom of Information Act is an essential tool to assist whistleblowers, journalists, citizens and watchdog groups discover what their government is up to and provide outside oversight of government activities.


A copy of the Open Government Act of 2007 is linked here

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks