The victim in an Air Force sexual assault case that has provoked a firestorm in Congress says she was “absolutely stunned” when she learned that a top general had erased the conviction of her alleged assailant and that the decision will undermine the Pentagon’s efforts to encourage women to report such attacks.

“It looks to me like he is protecting one of his own,” Kimberly Hanks, 49, told NBC News in an exclusive interview, about the decision of Air Force Lt. Gen. Craig Franklin, commander of the Third Air Force based in Ramstein, Germany, to overturn a jury’s verdict convicting a F-16 combat pilot of sexually assaulting her.

The message sent to other women who have been sexually assaulted, Hanks said, is “don’t bother” coming forward and reporting it. “It’s not worth it. Don’t bother.”

Hanks agreed to be named publicly for the first time and granted an hour-long interview that was arranged by Protect our Defenders, an advocacy group that has sought to call attention to the military sexual assault problem. In the interview, Hanks recounted her personal ordeal last year when, as a physician’s assistant assigned to a hospital at Aviano Air Base in Italy, she accused Lt. Col. James Wilkerson — an F-16 combat pilot who was an inspector general at the base — of sexually assaulting her in his home. Hanks spoke in Washington, D.C., on the eve of a Senate Armed Services subcommittee hearing on sexual assaults in the military that is expected to focus in part on her case.

Although she wrestled at first about what to do about what happened to her, she decided she needed to step forward and report it to Air Force authorities.  

“I didn’t know if I could live with myself not doing anything about it,” Hanks said. “I couldn’t live personally with the knowledge that I was assaulted sexually and let this man go about his business while I had to live with the shame and the guilt. … I couldn’t let this guy get away with it.”

Wilkerson’s lawyer, Frank Spinner, told NBC News that Hanks had “lied about multiple aspects of the case” and there was “no physical corroboration” of her claims that his client had assaulted her. But Hanks’ account of events got powerful support late Tuesday when Col. Don Christensen, the Air Force’s chief  prosecutor who personally tried her sexual assault case, described her in an interview with NBC News as “one of the most credible witnesses I’ve ever dealt with.” Christensen said he spent hours interviewing Hanks and found her entirely “truthful.” “She never changed her story. It was always 100 percent consistent,” he said.

Hanks recounted how, just after months after arriving at Aviano Air Base, she was socializing with friends one evening after a concert and wound up at the home of Wilkerson and his wife, neither of whom she had known. Because of the late hour, she said she accepted an invitation to spend the night in the couple’s guest bedroom and went to sleep.  

Later in the evening, “I had felt some discomfort. The lights came on which woke me up. And — I opened my eyes and Wilkerson was in bed with me with his hands down my pants,” Hanks said. She said his “face was six inches in mine.” (She declined to discuss further details, but prosecutor Christensen said Hanks testimony was that Wilkerson had fondled her breasts and inserted his hands into her vagina, providing the basis for his conviction on aggravated sexual assault.) Hanks said at that moment Wilkerson’s wife had entered the room. “And she told me to get the hell out of her house,” Hanks said. “I mean, I thank her. Because if she hadn’t come in, I don’t know what could have happened.”  

According to the Air Force Times, Wilkerson's wife, Beth, testified at trial and denied she found her husband in the bed with Hanks, saying she asked her to leave because she was talking on her cell phone and walking around the house making the wooden floors creak. 

The military jury believed Hanks’ account, convicted Wilkerson, stripped him of his rank  and sentenced him to a year in a military brig. Hanks said she thought her ordeal was over — only to learn two weeks ago that Gen. Franklin — who never attended the trial — had exercised his authority as “convening authority” of the court martial to reverse the conviction. Wilkerson was freed from the brig at Charleston, S.C., had his rank restored.

The case has caused an uproar on Capitol Hill, where members are demanding an investigation of Franklin’s action and pressing for legislation to strip a military commander’s authority to overturn jury verdicts. “The fact that one person can overturn a punishment determined by a judge or a jury, flies I the face of justice,” said Rep. Jackie Speier, a California Democrat and member of the House Armed Services Committee.

An Air Force spokesman said Gen. Franklin made his decision to overturn the verdict “only after his very lengthy, careful and thorough consideration” of the trial record and related materials submitted by all parties in the case. He concluded “that there was insufficient evidence to support a finding of guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Hanks said she is “frustrated” but has no regrets.

“I did the right thing,” she said. “I reported it. I told the truth.”     

More: Defying court's rules, anti-secrecy group posts tape of Manning statement 
Authorities in U.S., Jamaica team up to tackle persistent phone scam 

This story was originally published on Wed Mar 13, 2013 8:47 AM EDT

Jose Luis Magana / Reuters file

Army Pfc. Bradley Manning is escorted in handcuffs as he leaves the courthouse in Fort Meade, Maryland, on June 6.

Army Pfc. Bradley Manning released classified documents to WikiLeaks in an effort to "spark a domestic debate on the role of our military and foreign policy in general," according to a statement he will seek to read in a court hearing Thursday.

The lengthy statement, which Manning has already submitted to the judge presiding over his case at Fort Meade, Md., will be his first public account of his motivations for leaking hundreds of thousands of battlefield reports relating to U.S. operation in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as State Department diplomatic cables.

The statement appears intended to bolster the defense his lawyer plans to use at his court martial now slated for June -- that Manning was acting as a whistleblower intending to expose government misconduct.

Manning, a former Army intelligence analyst, is facing 22 criminal charges that include "aiding the enemy" and could result in a life sentence. He will seek to plead guilty to lesser charges -- such as unauthorized use of his government computer -- at the pre-trial hearing Thursday.

Prosecutors have objected to Manning's partial plea -- it is not the result of a plea bargain -- and made clear that they fully intend to bring him to trial.

See more investigative reports at The Isikoff Files

In reading his statement, Manning also "will speak to larger issues affecting his case" and will expand upon his guilty plea to establish that he acted from a “noble motive,” according to a news release Wednesday by the Bradley Manning Support Network. 

Although the group did not release the text of the statement, it cited an exchange in a hearing earlier his week in which prosecutors objected to Manning being allowed to read some portions of his statement -- including the passage in which he talks about his desire "to spark a domestic debate."

Prosecutors quoted some of the wording in Manning's statement during the hearing, saying the passage -- and another one relating to leaking information about corruption within the Iraqi Federal Police -- should not be allowed because it would be an admission by Manning to "uncharged misconduct." For example, admitting that he intended to provoke a public debate could expose Manning to an additional charge of intending to "discredit" the U.S. military, prosecutors argued. 

Manning's case has been shrouded in secrecy by the military. On Wednesday, the Pentagon released 84 pretrial documents, bowing to public records requests by news organizations, including NBC News. The documents are the first of about 500 that the Pentagon said it will release in response to the requests.

But in the documents released so far, the name of the presiding judge, Col. Denise Lind, has been redacted.  

More from Open Channel

• Deaths among beginning drivers on the increase
• Horse meat in the US? Unlikely, but tests are rare
• Feds say neo-Nazi with guns was tracking community leaders
• Expert: US in cyberwar arms race with China, Russia

Follow Open Channel from NBCNews.com on Twitter and Facebook 

Tony Gutierrez / AP file

Karl Rove's American Crossroads super PAC had big-money backers, but achieved minimal results, according to a study by the Sunlight Foundation.

Karl Rove was the political genius of the George W. Bush era -- the architect of the last Republican president's two electoral victories. But this week, he may have had the worst election night of anybody in American politics.

Not only did Rove insist on Fox News that Ohio was still winnable for Republican challenger Mitt Romney after all the TV networks had called it for President Barack Obama -- causing anchor Megyn Kelly to march down to the Fox "decision desk" mavens, who assured her on air that they were "99.9 percent" confident in their call -- but his trailblazing "independent" super PAC operation was virtually shut out on election night.

A study Wednesday by the Sunlight Foundation, which tracks political spending, concluded that Rove's super PAC, American Crossroads, had a success rate of just 1 percent on $103 million in attack ads -- one of the lowest "returns on investment" (ROIs) of any outside spending group in this year's elections.

Money can't buy happiness, or an election

American Crossroads spent heavily, not just on Romney, but on attack ads on behalf of GOP Senate candidates in eight states -- thanks to mega contributions from conservative donors like metals magnate Harold Simmons ($19.5 million), Texas homebuilder Bob Perry ($7.5 million) and Omni hotel chief Robert Rowling ($5 million.)

Decision 2012 on NBCNews.com: Senate election results

The super donors didn't get much for their money. Six of the eight GOP Senate candidates that American Crossroads spent money to try to elect – Tommy Thompson in Wisconsin, George Allen in Virginia, Josh Mandel in Ohio, Richard Mourdock in Indiana, Denny Rehberg in Montana and Todd Akin in Missouri – lost their races, along with Romney. The group did, on the other hand, help to elect Deb Fischer in Nebraska and Dean Heller in Nevada.

(The Sunlight Foundation calculation of "return on investment" was based on the percentage of money it spent on individual races-- and since Crossroads spent the most on the races it lost on, the group earned its low 1 percent "return on investment" or ROI. A sister group, Crossroads GPS, which operates out of the same offices as American Crossroads but does not disclose its donors, fared little better, netting a return on investment of only 13 percent, according to the Sunlight Foundation report.)

Some in his own party also were unimpressed by the performance of Rove's Crossroads operation. Donald Trump posted a message on Twitter saying: “Congrats to @KarlRove on blowing $400 million cycle. Every race @CrossroadsGPS ran ads in, the Republicans lost. What a waste of money.” 

Jonathan Collegio, a spokesman for American Crossroads, dismissed the Sunlight Foundation report.

"GOP super PACs helped keep the race close and winnable, despite Obama's massive financial advantage," he wrote in an email to NBC News. "On the Senate races, run the numbers. If you don't count the long-shot self-funders in CT and PA, Senate Democrats outraised their GOP opponents by $60 (million) this cycle – and that disparity is greater if you factor out GOP primary fundraising. The DSCC (Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee) outraised the NRSC (National Republican Senatorial Committee) by another $20 (million). Few have reported on this."

See which industries funneled the most cash into the presidential race

"You can’t have an accurate view of the role of super PACs without the context of how Democrats leveraged incumbency to outraise their opponents by literally hundreds of millions of dollars," he added.

The American Crossroads debacle was only the most dramatic example of the limits of big money in this election, according to the Sunlight Foundation report. About $1.3 billion was spent by outside groups overall -- about two-thirds on the Republican side -- and for the most part their returns were equally low. The Chamber of Commerce, for example, spent $31 million-and had a 5 percent return, according to the Sunlight study. The conservative American Future Fund spent $23.9 million and also realized a 5 percent return. The National Rifle Association spent $11 million, and got shut out.

"It may mean people really don't like big money in politics," says Kathy Kiely, the Sunlight Foundation analyst who co-authored the study. "Maybe they prefer it be spent on something else." 

Full election coverage on NBC Politics

Michael Isikoff is a national investigative correspondent for NBC News.

More from Open Channel:

• See which industries funneled the most money into presidential race
• Pulpit politics: Pastors endorse candidates, thumb noses at IRS
• Election's enigmatic biggest corporate donor has contributed $5.3 million
• Delphi retirees say Obama administration betrayed them
• Wind, flames, Our Fathers: the inside story of Breezy Point's terrible night
• Ex-Penn State President Graham Spanier charged in child sex abuse scandal
• Behind closed doors: GOP and Dems alike cloaked redistricting in secrecy
• Wisconsin objects to Romney training manual urging incognito poll watchers

Follow Open Channel from NBCNews.com on Twitter and Facebook

AFP, AP files

Gen. Hugh Shelton, left, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and ex-FBI Director Louis Freeh are among the top former U.S. government officials whose speaking fees have been subpoenaed.

Speaking firms representing ex-FBI Director Louis Freeh and former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Hugh Shelton have received federal subpoenas as part of an expanding investigation into the source of payments to former top government officials who have publicly advocated removing an Iranian dissident group from the State Department list of terrorist groups, three sources familiar with the investigation told NBC News.

The investigation, being conducted by the Treasury Department, is focused on whether the former officials may have received funding, directly or indirectly, from the People's Mujahedin of Iran, or MEK, thereby violating longstanding federal law barring financial dealings with terrorist groups. The sources, all of whom spoke on condition of anonymity, said that speaking fees given to the former officials total hundreds of thousands of dollars.

"This is about finding out where the money is coming from," an Obama administration official familiar with the probe said. "This has been a source of enormous concern for a long time now. You have to ask the question, whether this is a prima facie case of material support for terrorism."

Freeh and Shelton are among 40 former senior U.S. government officials who have participated in a public lobbying campaign – including appearing at overseas conferences and speaking at public rallies – aimed at persuading the U.S. government to remove the MEK from the terror list.

First-class flights
Many of the speakers have received fees of about $30,000 or more per talk and first-class flights to European capitals, according to two sources familiar with the arrangements.

Edward Rendell, a former Pennsylvania governor and ex-Chairman of the Democratic National Committee, whose speaking firm also received a subpoena, has received $160,000 over the past year for appearing at about seven conferences and rallies, including some in Paris, Brussels and Geneva, according to his office. (Rendell is a contributor to MSNBC TV.)

The former officials have said they were told the fees came from wealthy American and foreign supporters of the MEK, not the group itself — and they resent any suggestion they are abetting a terrorist group. 

"We're all pretty miffed," Shelton told NBC News. "None of us involved in this would say a good word about anyone suspected of being a terrorist." But Shelton said that he's "pretty passionate" that the MEK represents a legitimate resistance group fighting to overthrow "America's number one enemy" — the Iranian government.

In a statement Friday, Hossein Abedini, a spokesman for the MEK,also  denied the group has ever “paid senior former U.S. officials or any other dignitary in the U.S.”

 “This is an utter lie and there is not even a scintilla of truth to it,” Abedini said. “The MEK, as the legitimate opposition to the clerical regime, enjoys international recognition in Europe and the U.S. The objective of this failed propaganda is to weaken the widespread public support of the members of Congress, officials and scores of U.S. generals for … revoking of the illegitimate and unjust terror listing of the MEK.”

Shelton said that he was informed by Keppler Speakers, the agency that handles his speaking engagements, that it had been subpoenaed for records of talks he has given over the past year at conferences and rallies sponsored by the MEK. He said Freeh told him that Greater Talent Network, the firm that handles the former FBI director's speaking engagements, also received a subpoena.

Slideshow: Everyday life in Iran

At schools, in shops and on the streets of big cities and small towns, daily life plays out in Iran.

Launch slideshow

Freeh did not respond to requests for comment. (A Keppler executive also did not respond. Reached by phone, Tom Marcosson, an executive vice president of Greater Talent, declined to comment.)

But Rendell told NBC News that he received an email this week from Freeh's office alerting him and more than three dozen other former senior officials that subpoenas were being issued by the Treasury Department Office of Foreign Assets Control. The email asked that the former senior officials contact Freeh and former Attorney General Michael Mukasey. Freeh and Mukasey, who have been among the leaders in the campaign to "delist" the MEK, are hiring a lawyer to represent all former senior officials caught up in the investigation, the email from Freeh's office said, according to Rendell.

Why Iran wants to beef up Zimbabwe's military

John Sullivan, a spokesman for the Treasury Department, said the department does not comment on "potential" investigations. But he added in an email: "The MEK is a designated terrorist group, therefore U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in transactions with or providing services to this group. The Treasury Department takes sanctions enforcement seriously and routinely investigates potential violations of sanctions law."

It is unclear how far Treasury Department officials intend to push the probe — or why they chose to launch it now, more than a year after the lobbying campaign began. But NBC News has obtained one possible clue: A small Pennsylvania-based speakers firm called Speakers Access wrote an email in September inviting a Washington based national security expert to speak at a conference in Geneva, Switzerland "on behalf of our client, National Council of Resistance of Iran, Foreign Affairs Committee." The National Council of Resistance is considered by the Treasury Department to be one of the "aliases" of the MEK and is itself designated as a terror group. 

'Mistake'
The email was later turned over to the FBI and other U.S. officials. The Speakers Access executive who wrote the email, who asked not to be identified, said the email was a "mistake" and that the client was actually another organization — "the Committee for Human Rights in Iran," which is not on the terror list but which has the same contact in Paris as the National Council of Resistance of Iran.

The executive said Speakers Access has since ceased any dealings with either group and turned over all its records on the matter after receiving a Treasury Department subpoena months ago.

The investigation comes at a time of intense internal debate about the MEK, in part spurred by assertions it could prove a useful ally in pressuring the Iranian government to suspend its nuclear program. NBC News reported recently that MEK operatives, trained by the Israeli Mossad, are believed by some U.S. intelligence officials to have been involved in the assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists — a report that the group has denied as "absolutely false."

Israel teams with terror group to kill Iran's nuclear scientists, U.S. officials say

U.S. officials say that the MEK has a long history of terrorist acts, including bombings and assassinations, against Iranian leaders during the 1980s and that at least six Americans died in such attacks. The group — which was once allied with Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein — is also viewed warily because of the slavish devotion of its followers to its Paris based leader, Maryan Rajavi.

"The MEK has a crazy edge to it," said Michael Leiter, former director of the National Counter-Terrorism Center and an NBC News consultant. "It always struck me as a cult as much as a terrorist group."

But the group's supporters say it has long since publicly renounced violence and that Rajavi has proclaimed the group's adherence to democratic principles. "They want the mullahs out of Iran and they want to replace them with a constitution based on the Declaration of Independence," said Shelton.

The group has also generated sympathy over the plight of its followers at Camp Ashraf, a paramilitary camp on the Iran-Iraq border, where they have been detained – and until recently protected – by the U.S military since the 2003 invasion of Iraq. U.S. officials have been seeking the group's cooperation to resettle the estimated 2,500 remaining MEK members at Camp Ashraf to a new facility near the Baghdad airport, where they can be processed by the United Nations as refugees and resettled elsewhere.  

But the process has stalled – in part over disputes about the conditions of transfer – and MEK advocates say they fear the government of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, at Iran's urging, may move in to slaughter the group’s members. "This could be a humanitarian disaster," said Rendell.

Rendell said that there have been weekly conference calls among a "core group" of former U.S. senior officials participating in the lobbying campaign, organized by Freeh, to talk about ways to prod the State Department to remove the MEK from the terror list and protect its followers at Camp Ashraf. He identified this group as including former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, former Democratic National Committee Chair Howard Dean and Mukasey — all of whom have publicly spoken out on behalf of the MEK and spoken at its rallies.

Officials act as middle men
These weekly conference calls have also turned into back channel negotiations over the Camp Ashraf issue. In recent weeks, Rendell said, State Department Ambassador Daniel Fried, the special envoy for detainee issues, has joined the phone calls, urging the pro-MEK "core" members to pass along messages to MEK leaders in Paris, Rendell said.

"The core group talks to Freeh every week," he said. "It's Ridge, myself, Dean, Freeh, Mukasey. Shelton has joined us on occasion. … We were the ones that Fried asked to communicate with the MEK, telling them, 'This is the best deal you're going to get.' He will say, 'Listen, you guys have to persuade the MEK to do this. Tell them, OK, tell Paris, they have to persuade the people to get on the buses (at Camp Ashraf.) We then communicate [with the MEK]."

Fried declined comment. But a senior State Department official confirmed his participation in the calls as a means of communicating with MEK leaders in Paris — something U.S. officials are barred from doing — in order to work out a "peaceful" resolution over the conflict over Camp Ashraf. 

Rendell said that he and other members of the core group have met with Rajavi in Paris and sent emails to her chief deputy, Farzin Hashemi, passing along Fried's messages. "The bottom line is, we all believe we are protecting people," he said.

But the bottom line for some U.S. officials is that the former government officials participating in the pro-MEK campaign are being paid handsomely for promoting a dubious cause sponsored by an officially designated terrorist group. Despite the public lobbying campaign, there is still deep suspicion about the MEK and its motives — and concerns that once its members leave Camp Ashraf, many of its followers will return to terrorism, said one senior official speaking on condition of anonymity.

"It's extraordinary that so many distinguished public servants would shill for a group that has American blood on its hands," the official said.