CIA 'outing' might fall short of crime

[Turley]

Please don't shoot the messenger. USA Today article cites experts saying Plame outing may not be a crime. See link:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-07-14-cia-wilson_x.htm

[tuvor]

1. Then why did rove deny it?

Stupid reporters.

[maddezmom]

4. and why did the WH deny it for 2 years?

either way * and his crew have a huge credibility problem.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

58. And why did Bush and Cheney retain lawyers when this story first....

...became public, and why were they asked to testify?

Yep...major credibility issues.

[architect359]

5. To protect his polictical ass

and to ensure that he remains as a viable political resource. Reputation is king in this game.

[Briar]

2. It's not a crime because Rove did it.

That's the message - the law only applies to the powerless.

[ooglymoogly]

33. once again the pukes are defining the issues.....

this is just another circle jerk by the pukes.

[Voltaire99]

49. Exactly right. American law looks low, not high, for offenders.

Rove's got built-in immunity: his glands secrete money.

[Zynx]

3. The law is really narrow - because it was basically made to catch one scum

Issue still should be settled by indictment.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

60. No, the law is NOT that narrow....here's the actual law....

TITLE 50 > CHAPTER 15 > SUBCHAPTER IV > § 421. Protection of identities of certain United States undercover intelligence officers, agents, informants, and sources
<http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode50/usc_sec_50_00000421----000-.html>

(a) Disclosure of information by persons having or having had access to classified information that identifies covert agent

Whoever, having or having had authorized access to classified information that identifies a covert agent, intentionally discloses any information identifying such covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent’s intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

(b) Disclosure of information by persons who learn identity of covert agents as result of having access to classified information

Whoever, as a result of having authorized access to classified information, learns the identify of a covert agent and intentionally discloses any information identifying such covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent’s intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

(c) Disclosure of information by persons in course of pattern of activities intended to identify and expose covert agents

Whoever, in the course of a pattern of activities intended to identify and expose covert agents and with reason to believe that such activities would impair or impede the foreign intelligence activities of the United States, discloses any information that identifies an individual as a covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such individual and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such individual’s classified intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

(d) Imposition of consecutive sentences

A term of imprisonment imposed under this section shall be consecutive to any other sentence of imprisonment.

[mbperrin]

6. So two Republican staffers from the Raygun administration

are the "experts" who don't think a crime was committed? Well, gosh that seals it! Gotta be true! After all, the CIA doesn't know shit about any laws affecting them and their protective cover, do they?
:eyes:

[halobeam]

8. wanna sit right by your side here,

I need to read this law myself. Not a law professional though, would love to find it here... any idea how?

[Canuckistanian]

47. Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982 (50 U.S.C. 421)

http://foi.missouri.edu/bushinfopolicies/protection.html

[halobeam]

66. Wow... thanks!

:toast:

[mandomom]

7. Author! Author!

Bringing out disclaimers by the author of this law (only one of several laws relevant to the Plame outing) is typical Rove Ratting. Just like using Victoria Toensing on NPR to talk about the issue without ever acknowledging her supreme double secret work as GOP mouthpiece. What is the political background of the author quoted in this piece? Why do these reporters insist on just transcribing the words of sources without entertaining logical questions about possible motives of the sources? Just asking.

[Walt Starr]

9. Possibly the Intelligence and Identities Act does not apply

The Espionage Act of 1917 and the Federal Conspiracy Statute both apply, though.

[OKthatsIT]

46. Well then, doe that mean we can expose CIA Ops that we know?

come on....we could all join Rove and expose many many more...course we would need someone like NOVAK to make any impact.

[Walt Starr]

52. Like I said, Espionage Act of 1917 n/t

[Uncle Joe]

61. It is truly amazing that USA today is so lazy,

incompetent or corrupt that they would not know the The Espionage Act of 1917. They have continually obfuscated the news for at least a decade now.

[LostinRed]

10. It can still be a win for us

Of course they're going to spin it that Karl Rove didn't really do anything wrong, that's just the political game the Republicans play and they're much, much better at spin than us. I still think it can be a political win for us in the mid-term elections if we can drive the point home that the Republicans will always put politics above everything else including national security. Especially if the Republicans in Congress rally around the WH.

[Turley]

16. I'll take a "Martha" conviction

If it works I'm all for it.

[stray cat]

11. Playing politics with national security by a "War President"

This may not be a crime legally but ethically playing political games with people's lives and their families, should be.

Also, Clinton got impeached without commiting a crime except for lying about an affair under oath. This administration may very well be guilty of perjury.

[goforit]

12. Who at the WH wrote this story? Stand up like a man & reveal yo face!

[americanstranger]

13. But you know what works? The Espionage Act!

The one they used to0 get the Rosenbergs.

(1) possession of (2) information (3) relating to the national defense (4) which the person possessing it has reason to know could be used to damage the United States or aid a foreign nation and (5) wilful communication of that information to (6) a person not entitled to receive it.

Mark Kleiman says Fitz may be looking at charging Rove under that law - much lower legal hurdle to clear.

http://www.markarkleiman.com/archives/valerie_plame_/2005/07/the_plame_game_no_its_not_all_about_the_intelligence_identities_protection_act.php

I'd love to see him do it, just to shut up the repulsive shrew Victoria Toensing, who's been on TV all week crowing about how hard the IIPA is to enforce.

-as

[symbolman]

14. Ask Aldrich Ames about this

He's spending his LIFE in a Federal Prison for ESPIONAGE..


In other news, Aldrich Ames

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aldrich_Ames is spending the rest of his life in prison for revealing the names of undercover CIA agents.
Considering the enormity of the nuclear proliferation threat that we currently face and the fact that this leak happened in the middle of a war that was ostensibly about stopping the spread of WMD's, Karl Rove deserves nothing less than to join Benedict Arnold and Julius Rosenberg in the history books as men whose names are synonymous with "traitor". And anyone who helped cover up for these crimes should join Rove in jail or on the gallows. This not only means the occupants of the West Wing (every one of whom should be subjected to a polygraph test) but the partisan cowards in Congress who have shirked their constitutional duty in order to protect a treasonous scumbag.

THIS is the real story - they are downplaying the hell out of this, spinning madly..

But the truth is that ROve could spend the rest of his life with a roommate named Snake with a very hairy ass and a high testosterone level in a small cell..

Snake loves Pillsbury Boys :)

[kurtyboy]

15. Gee, someone ought to tell that stupid Prosecutor

That he's wasting his time. And they ought to tell the CIA folks who spent their own time and energy investigating, and then requested the Justice Department's investigation. I guess all those legal experts in the CIA and Justice got their JDs from a cracker jack box.

Phew--glad to know everything's going to be alright!

[Oversea Visitor]

17. Who was

it that say Rove should get a medal?

[KittyWampus]

18. Maybe Activist Judges Will Let Rove Slide.

[jmcon007]

19. But Rove basically said, "I did not out that woman." It's called perjury.

I believe the House impeached a President for just such a thing a while back. What say they now?

[snippy]

20. The Court of Appeals opinion indicates a different conclusion.

In reaching the conclusion that any possible journalist's privilege concerning the identity of Cooper's source would be overcome by the grand jury's need for the information, Judge Tatel wrote:

Cooper asks us to protect criminal leaks so that he can write about the crime.
The greater public interest lies in preventing the leak to begin with. Had Cooper
based his report on leaks about the leaks—say, from a whistleblower who
revealed the plot against Wilson—the situation would be different. Because
in that case the source would not have revealed the name of a covert agent,
but instead revealed the fact that others had done so, the balance of news
value and harm would shift in favor of protecting the whistleblower. Yet it appears
Cooper relied on the Plame leaks themselves, drawing the inference of sinister
motive on his own. Accordingly, his story itself makes the case for punishing the
leakers. While requiring Cooper to testify may discourage future leaks, discouraging
leaks of this kind is precisely what the public interest requires.

. . .

Were the leak at issue in this case less harmful to national security or more vital to
public debate, or had the special counsel failed to demonstrate the grand jury’s need
for the reporters’ evidence, I might have supported the motion to quash. Because
identifying appellants’ sources instead appears essential to remedying a serious
breach of public trust, I join in affirming the district court’s orders compelling their
testimony.

http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200502/04-3138a.pdf (Tatel, J. concurring opinion at pp. 82-83) (emphasis added)

Appellate Court judges typically write with a great level of precision. The other judges wrote of "possible" crimes. But not Tatel. It is unlikely that Judge Tatel would have referred to "criminal leaks" or "the crime" unless he had concluded that the leaks violated the law. These commments by Judge Tatel follow the several pages of redacted material in his opinion. That redacted material may have laid out why he concluded a crime had been commited. They almost certainly contained a great deal of Fitzgerald's arguments which were filed under seal.

I also found it interesting that he referred to "the plot against Wilson" as though such a plot was an established fact. Perhaps that conclusion also was in the redacted material.

[americanstranger]

26. Thanks for that, snip.

Great point. I quoted you on Blah3.

http://www.blah3.com/article.php?story=20050714111228118

Hope you don't mind.

-as

[snippy]

29. I don't mind. n/t

[Occulus]

Thank you for that.

Good points.

[nolabels]

21. If you say it enough times........

http://www.whitehouse.org/news/2002/072302.asp

Students for an Orwellian Society

Because 2005 is 21 years too late
http://www.studentsfororwell.org/

[Bumblebee]

22. Today's WP has a much better "forecast"/summary

(#3 is, in my mind, the likeliest of what F. is looking for -- John Dean, if I remember correctly, thinks so too. Hope we both are right :))

A number of legal experts, some of whom are involved in the case, said evidence that has emerged publicly suggests Rove or other administration officials face potential legal threats on at least three fronts.

The first is the unmasking of CIA official Valerie Plame, the original focus of special counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald's probe. But legal sources say there are indications the prosecutor is looking at two other areas related to the administration's handling of his investigation. One possible legal vulnerability is perjury, if officials did not testify truthfully to a federal grand jury, and another is obstructing justice, if they tried to coordinate cover stories to obscure facts.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/13/AR2005071302343.html

[snippy]

27. I think indictments on all three charges are possible.

And I think more people in the administration than just Rove may be indicted. Like every member of the WHIG.

[Bumblebee]

36. Wilson believes WHIG is indeed the target or should be

Raw Story: Let’s start with what your theory is on how the highly classified status of your wife as a NOC (a person of Non-Official Cover and a high level CIA asset) was leaked to others outside of the CIA. What is your theory and how have you come to it?

Wilson: Well, my view of this is based on what people have told me. It is not so much my theory but what others have told me about this.

Shortly after Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei (Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency) announced to the UN Security Council in March, 2003 that the documents that the State Department provided him were forgeries, I went on CNN and said that I thought the government new more about this than it was letting on.

My understanding is that shortly thereafter, a meeting was held - sometime in March of 2003 - in the offices of the Vice President at which it was decided to do a “work up” on me. A work up means to run an intel op to glean all the information you can about “me.” My understanding is that at a minimum, Scooter Libby was at this meeting.

But in retrospect looking at this, the natural group who would meet to discuss something like this would be the White House Iraq Group (WHIG).

[snippy]

40. I think Judge Tatel's reference to "the plot against Wilson" almost

has to involve the WHIG. In an October 2003 post about Wilson's wife I wrote:

If lies about Iraq's nuclear weapons program are involved, it is a WHIG operation. If a decision about a communication concerning any of the Iraq lies was made in the White House, WHIG was involved in the decision. If the job of making that communication was delegated to two or more people and coordinated, WHIG was involved in the delegation and coordination. That means the White House Chief of Staff, Andy Card and Turd Blossom Rove were involved.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=142863&mesg_id=142952

I believe that now more than ever.

[Bumblebee]

42. Would be SO nice to knock off so many heads of the Bush dragon

in one fell swoop.

[Bumblebee]

55. Larry Johnson on To the Point (NPR)

was absolutely great right now. Make sure you get the transcript (last 10 minutes). Olney asked him what his party affiliation was and he said he was a registered Republican and appalled by what GOP is doing and how they are spinning it. He was great -- and Olney repeated at least five times (with Tomlinson in mind, no doubt), that Johnson was a registered Republican :)

[napi21]

45. March 2003. What's the dates of the info Bolton asked for intel info

that the WH won't release to Biden and Dodd? Wasn't that sometime in 2003 too?

I still think this mess is related to Bolton and that info the WH insists it doesn't have to release to the Senators becaues it is irrelevant. Bet one of those names is Valerie Plame!!!

[1932]

23. If she was working on WMD, I think it's unlikely that she hadn't been

abroad in the previous two years. There's only so much covert work an WMD specialist can do for the CIA in the US.

[Karmakaze]

24. They say that Plame didnt serve outside the US after 97...

and they quote Wilson's book for that information.

The problem with that is, if Wilson was writing a book, do you think he would say "oh and my wife was stationed outside the US many time sover the last five years on top sectret WMD work"??

Of course not, because then he would be revealing classified information!

[AndyTiedye]

54. They Also Blew Her Network by Exposing the CIA Shell Corporation

It is said that some of her agents overseas were killed.

And who do we have to look for rogue WMDs now that Valerie Plame's
entire network has been destroyed?
:nuke:

[daleo]

25. If Rove does skate

Then, that would pretty well be the topper to show how corrupt the U.S. political culture has become. In some ways, it goes back to the Iran-Contra pardons - they showed that if you have friends in high places you can do anything.

[nolabels]

31. That is the precedent in a nutshell

Traveling the same grounds, doing the same thing often results in the same outcome. They have some trick already in the bag just ready spring and mostly they are just having fun getting people froth at the mouth. They are just not anxious enough for me to think any way else.

They cannot pull it off till after the Gj spills itself out is the only thing

[lancdem]

28. This case is about much more than that now

This is only a small part of what Fitzgerald is investigating.

[KansDem]

30. What can we say? It's "USAToday!"

First USAToday attempts to translate British English into American English and to tell us that what we read in the Downing Street Minutes wasn't really what we read, then...

A reporter, who is not privy to the facts, attempts to explain this very complicated case. Did he succeed? Well, if this is any indication of his journalistic expertise, I'd say "no...":

The stories led to Fitzgerald's investigation and the jailing of New York Times reporter Judith Miller, who did not publish a story. She has refused to discuss conversations she had with a source.

It's not "a source" informing her of a crime, but "a criminal" actually committing the crime! She was aiding and abetting a criminal! Why won't USAToday (and NYTimes) admit that?

[Whoa_Nelly]

32. Would appreciate someone posting the Federal law

that is being used against Rove. I read it several months ago, and thought I'd saved it, but can't find it.

Thanks :hi:

on edit:
Have found it thanks to a link in a story posted by here. Thanks, AmericanStranger!

The Espionage Act in its entirety:

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00000793----000-.html

[americanstranger]

34. Here ya go....

TITLE 50 > CHAPTER 15 > SUBCHAPTER IV > § 421

§ 421. Protection of identities of certain United States undercover intelligence officers, agents, informants, and sources

Release date: 2005-03-17

(a) Disclosure of information by persons having or having had access to classified information that identifies covert agent Whoever, having or having had authorized access to classified information that identifies a covert agent, intentionally discloses any information identifying such covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent’s intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

(b) Disclosure of information by persons who learn identity of covert agents as result of having access to classified information Whoever, as a result of having authorized access to classified information, learns the identify of a covert agent and intentionally discloses any information identifying such covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent’s intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

(c) Disclosure of information by persons in course of pattern of activities intended to identify and expose covert agents Whoever, in the course of a pattern of activities intended to identify and expose covert agents and with reason to believe that such activities would impair or impede the foreign intelligence activities of the United States, discloses any information that identifies an individual as a covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such individual and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such individual’s classified intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

(d) Imposition of consecutive sentences A term of imprisonment imposed under this section shall be consecutive to any other sentence of imprisonment.

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode50/usc_sec_50_00000421----000-.html

-as

[Whoa_Nelly]

37. Thanks, AmericanStranger!

Am keeping this in special place in my favs for quick future reference.

[samsingh]

35. treason isn't about parsing words

[thinkingwoman]

38. Clinton's lie about sex

wasn't technically perjury either. Did that stop the Repukes from calling him a perjurer? Nope.

We shouldn't care about technicalities either. We should call Rove a traitor over and over again for as long as it takes. Years if necessary. He's going down.

[wallwriter]

39. It's not the crime, it's the coverup.

One of Clinton's counts of impeachment was lying to affect the testimony of grand jury witnesses.

If there were no crimes, there would not be such emphasis on seeking testimony and threatening reporters with jail.

[catmandu57]

41. And I might be a thanksgiving turkey

but I'm not. The rag that printed this should go down in flames, rover is just the tip of the iceberg now, that's why they're scared.

[ixion]

43. not a crime because IOKIYAR

if this were a dem prez advisor, he or she would be swinging from the yardarm about now, you can be quite sure.

[Baconfoot]

44. This article is total BS. It claims to be based on a "little noticed"...

This article is total BS. It claims to be based on a "little noticed" part of Wilson's book. Really, however, the most important thing the article's author wants his reader to believe is that noone has noticed that you have to have been an agent (within the last five years and other qualifications blah blah blah) in order for someone to out you as an agent. Um... nobody missed THAT detail. I can assure Mr Memmott. So we really don't have to read Wilson's book to find the little noticed detail that he doesn't mention his own wife's covert activities. The prosecutor will have investigated this just as a prosecutor would have attempted to locate the body of a purported murder victim. Probably he will have consulted, you know, the people for whom Plame was purportedly working (dontcha know).

This article reminds me of either the water cooler jabber of a freshly minted legal aid (with not much promise) or the well-executed but too hastily chosen idea for a piece of propoganda mandated to be produced by a certain deadline by Donald Trump for an episode of "The Appropogandice".

[demgrrrll]

51. Here is the bottom line. The CIA presented this case to the prosecutor

as a criminal investigation. I think the CIA knows what the rules are about what is a criminal violation of their statutes and Fitzgerald isn't some rube who doesn't get it. Spin and more spin Fitzgerald is going to have the last word here.

[rocktivity]

48. Well, they DID say "might"

I love the smell of desparate GOP spin in morning.

:headbang:
rocknation

[fugwb]

50. "Unless she was really stationed abroad sometime after their marriage,"

wouldn't that ALSO be CLASSIFIED or secret if she's an agent? Not sure? I'll bet Rove can tell you. DUH!

[Dr Fate]

53. If there was no wrongdoing, why did Bush promise to fire whoever did it?

????

[barb162]

56. Been watching a lot of TV on this and the Bushies are really out

in force dissing Joe WIlson, saying he lied, saying he has no credibility, saying this is not a crime, etc

[Media_Lies_Daily]

57. Their message doesn't seem to be working very well, does it? They've....

...lied so often in the past that everyone thinks, or knows, they're lying now.

Additionally, most people understand that exposing an undercover agent is about the worst thing anyone can do, except murder someone. If it ever comes out that undercover agents lost their lives because of this betrayal, there will be quite a few NeoCons in major trouble.

And if it's not a crime, why is this case in front of a Grand Jury, and why are the judges hearing the case willing to jail reporters involved in the case?

One last point...when this story first became public, Bush and Cheney retained lawyers. What does that tell you?

[barb162]

59. Actually, I think the Bushies are working this great, like they most

often do. They are inserting enough doubt and complexity where people won't know what they remember or thought. I had two people ask me about this earlier this week and they said they heard someone say this was worse then Watergate and did I think so. ANd I told them yes as Watergate was about a breakin re political data/info and otherdirty political tricks whereas this was about LIVES and deaths of undercover agents. People aren't seeing it for what it truly is, aren't paying that much attention to it, etc. Kinda reminds me of Irancontra, which was also a huge issue, an impeachable issue, and most people didn't get it or follow it and it died away.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

68. Except for one thing...the journalists are asking questions....

...and lots of them. That means that the media's corporate masters have decided that the NeoCons have to go.

Additionally, you haven't gone far enough in your thinking. The NeoCons had to eliminate Plame's group because it was one of the last groups with the credibility to be able to report that there were no WMDs in Iraq.

Once they were out of the way, only the UN weapons inspecters could have halted the attack on Iraq. But the NeoCons ordered them out of the country just prior to the invasion.

All of this was done to "fix" the intelligence around the official NeoCon story that Iraq had WMDs.

[barb162]

62. PS this also reminds me of the swiftboat guys. They were great

at getting Kerry's polling number going south and inserting just enough doubt about Kerry's military record ANd Kerry himself. Then Bob Dole got in the act.... They pugs are brilliant at this kind of stuff.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

70. Again, it's not working this time.

[mmonk]

63. No crime?

Wonder if Miller requested jail then? Is she writing a story on life inside a cell? Fitz must be practicing investigative techniques. Maybe these people just like consulting lawyers.

[bluestateguy]

64. I'll concede it when the Right admits that Clinton never committed perjury

They want to parse and play word games, fine. Then exonerate Clinton for everything, NOW.

[laureloak]

65. But lying to a grand jury is. n/t

[rhymeinreason]

67. Valerie Plame is the tape on the office door...

or so I've been hoping since Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor, refused to roll over and rubber stamp whatever the administration wanted us to believe.

Let us remember that the unraveling of the Nixon presidency began when a security guard found the lock of the door of the DNC headquarters in the Watergate office building taped open.

Just to introduce myself, let me say that I'm old enough to have watched all (well, maybe not all, but many hours) of the Congressional hearings leading up to the Nixon impeachment.

I was thinking that all politicians had learned from the Watergate era was that they should be more clever so they could have plausible deniability. However, the recent revelation of Mark Felts and his motives for talking to Woodward, and the bits and pieces of news coming out from the Plame/Rove/ Novak investigation, leads me to think that perhaps the pols may have missed an important lesson from the Nixon era: Don't take on an institution that is more powerful than your current wannabe dynasty.

To sum up...maybe it's not so good to attack a CIA operative, even if your daddy did use to run the company.

[frustrated_lefty]

69. May fall short?

Newp, it's treason.