Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Elections Panel Hears Schmidt Complaint

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Elections Panel Hears Schmidt Complaint

    ELECTIONS PANEL HEARS SCHMIDT COMPLAINT
    Stephen Major

    The Associated Press
    Sept 9 2009

    COLUMBUS - The Turkish government covertly funneled campaign money
    to an Ohio congresswoman in return for her denials that the mass
    killings of Armenians during World War I constituted genocide, an
    Armenian American and his high-powered attorney argued at a state
    hearing Thursday, Sept. 3.

    U.S. Rep. Jean Schmidt, a Republican, wants the Ohio Elections
    Commission to find that David Krikorian violated election law when
    he said in campaign materials during the 2008 campaign that she had
    accepted "blood money" from the Turkish government in return for her
    genocide denial.

    After roughly seven hours of testimony Thursday, the commission ran
    out of time and will resume the hearing in October.

    The commission has the power to fine Krikorian, but the case could
    end up in the formal court system.

    Commission members repeatedly asked Krikorian's attorneys to show
    proof that Turkish interests had given $30,000 in campaign money to
    Schmidt through legal campaign committees and lobbyists. It's illegal
    for foreign governments to contribute to U.S. politicians.

    Los Angeles attorney Mark Geragos, whose past clients include the
    late pop star Michael Jackson and actress Winona Ryder, took up the
    case at Krikorian's invitation. Geragos is also an Armenian-American.

    The commission is first trying to establish whether it can be proved
    that the Turkish government, or government-sponsored political action
    committees, gave money to Schmidt. If the commission decides there is
    no proof, it must then determine whether Krikorian made the statements
    in a reckless disregard of the truth.

    Schmidt and Krikorian, who plans to challenge her again in 2010,
    were both questioned during Thursday's proceedings. Schmidt said she
    has not accepted money from the Turkish government, while Krikorian,
    based on his own research and other publications, said he believed
    Schmidt was taking Turkish government money through back channels in
    return for her genocide denials.

    "These statements are all false," said Schmidt attorney Donald
    Brey. "She never took money from Turkish government-sponsored political
    action committees."

    Krikorian believes his assertions are protected political speech,
    while Schmidt said he made a false campaign statement.

    "I felt that these contributions were sponsored by the Turkish
    government," Krikorian said. "I think it's freedom of speech."

    Geragos said he thought Krikorian had already proven that Schmidt had
    received money from Turkish interests, but that at the next hearing
    he would present evidence of a direct link.

    Krikorian said Turkish interests, which he said are trying to fend
    off a congressional resolution declaring the killings of Armenians
    in 1915 as genocide, were trying to reward Schmidt for her public
    position that she does not have enough information to make a decision.

    Schmidt's unwillingness to proclaim what many history scholars regard
    as fact is also shared by the U.S. government. The U.S. foreign policy
    establishment's careful positioning on the issue is driven by the
    importance of maintaining productive relations with a moderate ally
    in the Middle East.

    Turkey denies that the deaths an estimated 1.5 million Armenians
    constituted genocide, contending the toll has been inflated and that
    the casualties were victims of civil war. It says Turks also suffered
    losses in the hands of Armenian gangs.

    A portion of Congresswoman Jean Schmidt's video deposition was
    released to the media outlets on Thursday, Aug. 27. Schmidt was
    deposed concerning her complaint with the Ohio Election Commission.

    Here is part of that deposition:

    Q. Okay. I'm going to give you something that's been marked as Exhibit
    A. That is an article from a newspaper called The Daily - I'm sorry,
    "Today's Zaman." Do you know what that is? What is "Today's Zaman"?

    A. (Perusing document.)

    Q. Do you know what Today's Zaman is Mrs. Schmidt?

    A. May I please have time to read this, sir.

    Q. Oh, I'm sorry. Yes. Sure.

    (EXHIBIT A MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION)

    A. (Perusing document.)

    Q. Okay. Mrs. Schmidt, what is Today's Zaman?

    A. I believe it's a periodical in Turkey.

    Q. Okay. It's a - it's a newspaper in Turkey. That would be your
    understanding?

    A. Periodical, newspaper, something that is read by Turkey's citizens.

    Q. Okay. And on June the 4th of this year you - you were published
    in Today's Zaman in Turkey; is that correct?

    A. Yes.

    Q. You wrote an editorial?

    A. Yes.

    Q. And that was to coincide with President Obama's visit to that
    country; is that correct?

    A. Well, it coincided with his visit, yes.

    Q. That wasn't the purpose of it to coincide?

    A. No. It wasn't the purpose but it did coincide.

    Q. Did you write this editorial?

    A. Yes.

    Q. You did? These are your words?

    A. Yes.

    Q. Did anyone else help you to write it?

    A. I had it edited by my chief of staff.

    Q. And did any outside persons, such as Mr. Fein or anyone else,
    help to write this?

    A. No.

    Q. You had it edited, but the original draft came off of your word
    processor or pen; is that right?

    A. Well, I don't use a word processor.

    Q. Okay. So the original draft was a handwritten version from you?

    A. Actually, it was an oral version to my chief of staff.

    Q. You dictated this to him?

    A. The ideas of it, yes.

    Q. Okay. And in this you talk about the Armenian Genocide Resolution,
    right?

    A. Where are you putting this in here so I know what you're referring
    to.

    Q. Well, we could start with the bold headline that says: "US Congress
    should not debate the Armenian genocide resolution."

    A. Okay.

    Q. Were those your words or was that something the daily Zaman added?

    A. That I'm not sure of.

    Q. Okay. Now, in the - in the very last paragraph of that it says,
    "What happened in 1915 must never be forgotten." Do you see that?

    A. Yes.

    Q. What - what are you referring to that happened in 1915 that must
    never be forgotten? -

    A. Well, there obviously was an incident that happened in 1915.

    Q. And what was that incident?

    A. Well, there was something that went on in Turkey that involved
    Turks and Armenians.

    Q. Okay. And what is it that you remember about or that you know or
    have an understanding of about those events?

    A. Well, I don't remember them because I wasn't there.

    Q. Right.

    A. And I'm still trying to have a complete understanding of those
    events.

    Q. I understand that. But you told all the people of Turkey that we
    shouldn't forget these events. I'm asking you: What is it that we're
    supposed to remember?

    A. Well we shouldn't forget the past.

    Q. And what is it about the events of 1915 that we're supposed to
    remember.

    A. When I become a scholar of this, I'll let you know.

    Q. Okay. But when you wrote this on June the 4th of 2009, you had no
    understanding at all of what happened in Turkey in 1915; is that right?

    A. I said I had limited understanding.

    Q. Okay. And I've asked you four times this morning to tell us what
    that limited understanding is, and you've told me nothing.

    Q. Events happened. And what were those events?

    A. People got killed on both sides. How many people? I don't know.

    Q. And that's your total sum and substance of your understanding of
    that event?

    A. That's about the basic understanding, yes.

    The News Democrat contributed to this story.
Working...
X