vault backup: 2026-05-17 21:47:57

40 - EVENTS/INTELLIGENCE_SCANDALS/PROMIS Software Scandal.md

@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ Bason's non-reappointment in 1988, when his four-year term expired after he soug
 
 The Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations (PSI) examined the INSLAW matter in 1989 and found "no proof" that [[Lowell Jensen]] and [[Edwin Meese]] had conspired to ruin INSLAW or steal its product, and "no proof of any connection between [[Earl Brian]] or [[Hadron]] and the Department with regard to the INSLAW contract." The Senate report did find, however, that DOJ official Thomas Stanton had "improperly tried to get special handling for Inslaw's bankruptcy" and criticized the Department for placing Brewer, a former INSLAW employee, in charge of the implementation contract.[^3]
 
-The House Judiciary Committee, chaired by Representative [[Jack Brooks]], conducted a three-year investigation from 1989 to 1992. Its September 10, 1992 report (House Report 102-857) reached substantially more damaging conclusions. The committee found "strong evidence...that the Department of Justice 'acted willfully and fraudulently,' and 'took, converted and stole,' Inslaw's Enhanced PROMIS by 'trickery fraud and deceit.'"[^1] The report cited an admission from Deputy Attorney General [[Arnold Burns]], who told DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility investigators in 1986 that INSLAW's proprietary rights claim was "legitimate" and that the government "would probably lose the case in court on this issue" — yet DOJ continued litigating against INSLAW.[^1]
+The House Judiciary Committee, chaired by Representative [[Jack Brooks]], conducted a three-year investigation from 1989 to 1992. Its September 10, 1992 report (House Report 102-857) reached substantially more damaging conclusions. The committee found "strong evidence...that the Department of Justice 'acted willfully and fraudulently,' and 'took, converted and stole,' Inslaw's Enhanced PROMIS by 'trickery fraud and deceit.'"[^1] The report cited an admission from Deputy Attorney General [[Arnold Burns]], who told DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility investigators in 1986 that INSLAW's proprietary rights claim was "legitimate" and that the government "would probably lose the case in court on this issue" - yet DOJ continued litigating against INSLAW.[^1]
 
 The House Committee specifically examined the roles of [[Lowell Jensen]] and [[Edwin Meese]] in the affair. Jensen had developed DALITE (District Attorney's Automated Legal Information System), a competing case management software, while serving as Alameda County District Attorney; he was a member of the contract oversight committee at INSLAW's inception and later became Associate Attorney General and then Deputy Attorney General under Meese. The Committee found it "incredible that the Department, having made this determination [that INSLAW's proprietary rights claim was legitimate], would continue to pursue its litigation."[^1] Meese had served alongside [[Earl Brian]] in Governor [[Ronald Reagan|Reagan's]] California cabinet; Meese's wife purchased stock in a Brian-controlled company; Meese reportedly recused himself from PROMIS matters upon becoming Attorney General in February 1985, leaving Jensen to handle the issue.[^4]
 
@@ -48,13 +48,13 @@ INSLAW's expanded conspiracy theory held that Brian, a California businessman an
 
 Eight days after signing his affidavit, Riconosciuto was arrested on methamphetamine distribution charges, which he alleged were direct retaliation for his cooperation. He further claimed he and Brian had traveled to Iran in 1980 and paid $40 million to Iranian officials to delay the release of U.S. hostages until after Reagan's inauguration.[^4]
 
-The Bua Report characterized Riconosciuto as a "totally unreliable witness" whose PROMIS account was "a tale of total fiction woven against the background of accurate historical facts." The Special Counsel identified irreconcilable contradictions: Riconosciuto's affidavit stated his PROMIS modifications occurred from 1983 to 1984, while his trial testimony placed the work in late 1981 to early 1983 — a period when it was physically impossible for him to have received an enhanced version of PROMIS, as the software was not delivered under Modification 12 until April 20, 1983, more than a year after the implementation contract was even signed.[^2] Brian and Videnieks both categorically denied ever meeting Riconosciuto or each other, or visiting the Cabazon reservation. The Bua Report found "overwhelming" evidence of no connection between Brian and anything related to INSLAW.[^2]
+The Bua Report characterized Riconosciuto as a "totally unreliable witness" whose PROMIS account was "a tale of total fiction woven against the background of accurate historical facts." The Special Counsel identified irreconcilable contradictions: Riconosciuto's affidavit stated his PROMIS modifications occurred from 1983 to 1984, while his trial testimony placed the work in late 1981 to early 1983 - a period when it was physically impossible for him to have received an enhanced version of PROMIS, as the software was not delivered under Modification 12 until April 20, 1983, more than a year after the implementation contract was even signed.[^2] Brian and Videnieks both categorically denied ever meeting Riconosciuto or each other, or visiting the Cabazon reservation. The Bua Report found "overwhelming" evidence of no connection between Brian and anything related to INSLAW.[^2]
 
 [[Ari Ben-Menashe]], a self-described former Israeli military intelligence officer, submitted affidavits to the House Judiciary Committee in 1991 alleging Brian had sold enhanced PROMIS to Israeli intelligence and Singapore's armed forces. Ben-Menashe subsequently told Bua investigators he had "no knowledge of the transfer of Inslaw's proprietary software by Earl Brian or DOJ," admitted his prior statements were inaccurate, and acknowledged he had delayed clarifying his position because he was writing a book and "wanted to make sure that his affidavit was filed in court and came to the attention of the public."[^2] Multiple congressional investigations, including the October Surprise Task Force, found Ben-Menashe's testimony "totally lacking in credibility" and "demonstrably false from beginning to end."[^2]
 
 ### The Israeli Intelligence and Robert Maxwell Allegations
 
-A distinct body of allegations, separate from the Brian conspiracy theory, held that [[Rafael Eitan]], director of [[LAKAM]] (Israel's scientific intelligence bureau) and senior [[Mossad]] operative, acquired PROMIS through back-channel contacts and arranged for Israeli technicians to embed a surveillance backdoor before distributing the software internationally. Gordon Thomas's 1999 account in *Gideon's Spies* reported that Eitan assembled former LAKAM programmers who reconstructed PROMIS and inserted a "trapdoor" — a built-in chip enabling covert remote monitoring of databases queried by any user of the modified software.[^6]
+A distinct body of allegations, separate from the Brian conspiracy theory, held that [[Rafael Eitan]], director of [[LAKAM]] (Israel's scientific intelligence bureau) and senior [[Mossad]] operative, acquired PROMIS through back-channel contacts and arranged for Israeli technicians to embed a surveillance backdoor before distributing the software internationally. Gordon Thomas's 1999 account in *Gideon's Spies* reported that Eitan assembled former LAKAM programmers who reconstructed PROMIS and inserted a "trapdoor" - a built-in chip enabling covert remote monitoring of databases queried by any user of the modified software.[^6]
 
 British media proprietor [[Robert Maxwell]], who had maintained intelligence relationships with Mossad since his association with [[Yitzhak Shamir]] in the early 1960s, allegedly served as the primary commercial distributor for the modified software through his Israeli company [[Degem]] and a network of international holdings. According to accounts drawing on Israeli intelligence sources, Maxwell sold PROMIS-derived software to agencies in Britain, Australia, South Korea, Canada, Jordan, Poland, the Soviet Union, South Africa, and numerous other countries, with total sales alleged to exceed $500 million.[^5][^6] INSLAW alleged that Maxwell had contributed $600,000 from a joint U.S.-Israeli intelligence slush fund to have INSLAW's lead counsel dismissed, preventing the company from fully litigating its proprietary claims against the U.S. government.[^1]