Partisanship Aside, Trump Had Reason to Fire Michael Atkinson, Say Two
Former CIA Whistleblowers
May 18, 2020
The inspector general violated the law by protecting the "Ukraine
whistleblower" and proved to be the enemy of real whistleblowers, say John
Kiriakou and Pedro Israel Orta.
By John Kiriakou and Pedro Israel Orta
Special to Consortium News
President Donald Trump, with some partisan fanfare, fired Intelligence
Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson last month, saying that he had
"no confidence" in him. Progressives howled that Atkinson should have been
left to do what he was hired to do.
Atkinson said under oath in January 2018 during his confirmation hearing
that he would protect intelligence-community whistleblowers, specifically
saying that he would "encourage, operate, and enforce a program for
authorized disclosures by whistleblowers within the IC that validates moral
courage without compromising national security and without retaliation." But
that's not what happened.
Former Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats swearing in Michael
Atkinson as inspector general of the intelligence community, May 2018.
(Office of the DNI)
Atkinson proved to be the enemy of real whistleblowers.
Atkinson was quick to defend the "Ukraine whistleblower" who per the
Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel was not a whistleblower at
all, as defined by the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act
(ICWPA).
At the same time, Atkinson failed to enforce the same whistleblower reprisal
protections for those inside the intelligence community who had reported
wrongdoing under the ICWPA. Trump correctly fired Atkinson for serious
integrity, efficiency, and effectiveness issues in failing to protect
intelligence-community whistleblowers and covering up whistleblower
reprisals.
Failures to protect intelligence-community whistleblowers have serious
national security implications. Foreign assets, employees and contractors
working for the intelligence community can have their lives turned upside
down if they blow the whistle on waste, fraud, abuse, or illegality and are
not protected.
One outstanding and unresolved intelligence-community whistleblower reprisal
case is John Reidy from the CIA. Reidy disclosed serious deficiencies in
classified CIA programs. The CIA chose to attack Reidy and cover up their
own mistakes, which reportedly led to dozens of foreign intelligence assets
being arrested and executed. Reidy's reprisal case remains unresolved with
Atkinson failing to assist.
Please Donate to CNs' 25th
Anniversary Spring Fund Drive
Atkinson refused to assist yet another CIA whistleblower, James Pars, as was
widely reported. The Pars case may have been a thorny issue for Atkinson
because of the nature of the allegations. Pars had served in the Inspector
General's office along with the very IGs who later acted against him.
But Pars had properly reported through authorized channels serious
allegations of wrongdoing with the interim leaders at the Office of the
Intelligence Community Inspector General. The CIA and intelligence community
response was to silence Pars by refusing assistance, taking more reprisals,
not properly investigating the original reprisals, and finally terminating
Pars.
Moreover, Atkinson failed to assist Daniel Meyer, the former executive
director of whistleblowing for the Office of the Intelligence Community
Inspector General. Pars made disclosures to the then-director of national
intelligence and his principal deputy about the Office of the Intelligence
Community Inspector General's abuses and reprisals against Meyers. Even
though these senior officials acknowledged the issues, Meyers was fired.
Again, Atkinson failed to assist.
To date, the Reidy, Pars and Meyers reprisal cases remain open. There is no
doubt that Atkinson inherited a mess, but instead of helping, he chose to
cover up and not to take actions to correct these wrongs.
Atkinson's actions constituted very serious failures to uphold the
integrity, efficiency and effectiveness of intelligence-community
whistleblower protections. Atkinson chose instead to violate the law by
protecting the "Ukraine whistleblower" which did not meet the ICWPA
reporting requirements and failed to fall under the authority of the
director of national intelligence or the intelligence community inspector
general. Trump had every right to fire Atkinson for cause.
Congress must uphold the rule of law by providing Reidy, Pars and Meyers
with the relief the whistleblower protection law mandates. It is time for
Congress and the Office of theIntelligence Community Inspector General to
protect the real intelligence-community whistleblowers first by enforcing
the lawful reprisal-protection standards.
Second, the Office of the Intelligence Community Inspector General must
cease initiating sham investigations covering up institutional failures and
reprisals.
Third, Reidy, Pars and Meyers deserve immediate remedies and corrective
action. Until these actions are taken and are made standard operating
procedure, whistleblowers in the intelligence community will keep their
mouths shut. And we're all worse off for that.