WAPO on Leak: Experts: Tactic Would Be Legal but Unusual

[Pryderi]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/06/AR2006040601806.html

Experts: Tactic Would Be Legal but Unusual

By Michael A. Fletcher
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, April 7, 2006; A08

Legal experts say that President Bush had the unquestionable authority to approve the disclosure of secret CIA information to reporters, but they add that the leak was highly unusual and amounted to using sensitive intelligence data for political gain.

"It is a question of whether the classified National Intelligence Estimate was used for domestic political purposes," said Jeffrey H. Smith, a Washington lawyer who formerly served as general counsel for the CIA.

In court papers filed Wednesday, Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald said I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Vice President Cheney's former chief of staff, has testified that Cheney told him that Bush had authorized the leak of secret information from the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq in the summer of 2003. Fitzgerald's court filing portrays the leak as part of an effort to discredit former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, who contended in a newspaper column that intelligence about Iraq's nuclear weapons program was distorted in the run-up to the U.S. invasion.

The court filing says that Libby, who is fighting perjury and obstruction-of-justice charges in connection with the leak investigation, was concerned about the legality of sharing classified information with reporters. But he was assured by David S. Addington, who then served as counsel to Cheney, that presidential authorization to disclose the information amounted to declassification.

HORSESHIT IT IS!

[oldtime dfl_er]

1. bs

What about the lying, the peril to other agents -- it's nothing short of treason. TREASON.

http://www.cafepress.com/scarebaby/1097640

[Kagemusha]

2. If the President decides the lying and peril is worth it,

for the security of the nation, then the system is set up that he can do these things. It is the responsibility of Congress to hold him to account if what he does is egregiously contrary to the good of the country.

Bush decided that war with Iraq was *that* important. That's his call to make.

I don't expect Congress to make the call that he overstepped his bounds.

[Webster Green]

3. Legal experts my ass......none of them are named in the article.

Some bush-bot lawyer from the administration?

Treason!

[Hand]

9. Probably the great legal experts Miers and Gonzalez... nt

[Pryderi]

13. It is a question of whether the classified National Intelligence Estimate

"It is a question of whether the classified National Intelligence Estimate was used for domestic political purposes," said Jeffrey H. Smith, a Washington lawyer who formerly served as general counsel for the CIA.

Why would it be leaked to a reporter, if it wasn't being used for "domestic political purposes"???

[0007]

4. Sounds like pure fiction, 'eh? We know better!

[fooj]

5. Oh really? Well, here is what * said.

This is a serious charge. BTW- we're talking about a CRIMINAL ACTION.

HIs OWN words. More WAPO BS........

Treason is NOT legal.

Peace.

[unblock]

7. shades of nixon -- if the president does it, it's legal by definition.

:eyes:

[unblock]

6. if the president wants to DECLASSIFY classified information, he can

there's a proper procedure for that and it doesn't involve having subordinates drop hints to reporters and denying involvement.

if he had signed the appropriate paperwork to declassify the information, that would probably be fine. i imagine an executive order would have made it legal.

but he didn't, because he didn't want to take political responsibility for outing a cia agent even if he could have done it legally.


proving that he's both criminal AND yellow.

[fooj]

8. Exactly.

Peace.

[melissinha]

10. Have to submit request to subcommittee

According to randi...

It can be done by President, but has to be reviewed by a committee... you know, to make sure important stuff isn't overlooked... like the identity of an agent!!!!!

They think that if they can consult their pack of lawyers but never go through public congressional channels, deny...deny..deny..until caught, THEN they can fall back on legalize that gives him all the authority..... NEVER would Clinton been allowed to do such a thing!NEVER!

We need to win this next election or else... who else will stand for the rights of all of Plame's collegues, the soldiers, seniors, Gulf Coast residents, the middle class, the poor...

[ThoughtCriminal]

11. What did Bush & Cheney tell Fitzgerald?

Not under oath, but did they lie to him?

Even if it was not under oath, but they deliberatley misled him, it would still be obstruction of justice. If I witness a crime and deliberatly give police false information (they went that-a-way when in fact I know the bank robber went this-a-way) that is itself a crime.

[depakid]

12. The Post has less than zero credibility

on this issue.

As far as anything that the Post prints- I'm going to assume the opposite until I actually see a credible source. Anyone who wants to be played for a sucker- by all means, read the Post.

and pay particular attention to Bob Woodward.... you know he'll tell you true.