That pesky Executive Order 12958

[babylonsister]

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/10238.html

That pesky Executive Order 12958


Following up on an item from yesterday, I continue to be fascinated (and more than a little disgusted) by the White House’s negligence on the Plame leak. The revelations from yesterday confirmed our worst fears — and then some.

Let’s be clear about the big picture. When it comes to handling of classified information, there are a series of administrative rules that govern federal agencies, including the White House. These are not optional. They can’t be ignored for political convenience. They are not suggestions for employees to consider.

One of them is Executive Order 12958, which includes specific requirements that must be followed to prevent leaks from occurring and for investigating and responding to leaks after they occur. Includes all kinds of provisions, including a mandatory investigation, and revoked security clearances for those who mishandle — accidentally or deliberately — classified information.

Officials from the Bush White House, after the Plame scandal broke, insisted that existing rules were being followed. Bush said he was anxious to get to the bottom of what happened. The White House declared, “There is a process that the administration has in place to address the leak of classified information.” The president’s chief spokesperson assured the nation, “There is a process that the administration has in place to address the leak of classified information. Make no mistake about it, the President has always held the view that the leaking of classified information is a very serious matter. And the process was followed.”

There’s no way around the simple fact that White House officials were lying, blatantly and without shame. But even more importantly, we learned yesterday that these same officials were legally obligated to follow administrative rules, but decided to ignore them altogether. There was a process in place, but Bush’s aides decided not to follow it.

more...

[mike_c]

1. Bush's aides know that political loyalty is the only currency with any value...

...in the Bush administration. The ONLY currency. Following an executive order that led to damage in the inner circle would be professional suicide in the Bush White House. Doubtless they all know it.

[TerdlowSmedley]

2. Years ago, when I worked for the Navy, I held a secret security

clearance. I was just a low-level functionary, but they put the fear of God into all of us who held security clearances. There was absolutely no excuse for ever divulging information or releasing classified material to anyone who did not have the proper security clearances. This administration's spin that it's no big deal is nonsense. It was always my understanding that if I compromised any of the material I was entrusted with, my ass was grass.

[Tigress DEM]

3. One more reason to impeach the liars and war criminals!

I STILL think it's UP TO US to impeach them, and that the congress is digging up the evidence we need through their investigations, but I AM PSYCHED!! about 4th of July in Philadelphia PA to declare our independence from KING Geo. and this ROGUE Govt.

ANSWER War Rally in DC IS AWESOME! 10,000+ in temps of 20 degrees with a retched wind. CSpan is covering it now.

[Bucky]

4. Carpetbagger is great. He oughta be mandatory reading

[lyonn]

5. The testimony by the guy who was in charge of White House

Security reminded me of "You are doin' a good job Brownie". A true know nothing appointee of the bushies. The whole WH must be full of those that get a title and draw a check for a job well done for the bushies in another life.

[bleever]

6. Yep. Blantant violation of an executive order,

on top of showing the utter falsehood of *'s declaration that he would investigate and holder the leaker responsible.

Bad PR day for liars.

[The Doctor.]

7. That's the truth;

"There’s no way around the simple fact that White House officials were lying, blatantly and without shame."

How anyone can still support these sociopaths is inconceivable to me.

[struggle4progress]

8. Here's what the White House was telling the press in Fall 2003:

September 29, 2003
Press Briefing by Scott McClellan
The James S. Brady Briefing Room

<Excerpts cannot possibly illustrate McClellan's behavior in this briefing>

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/09/20030929-7.html
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/09/text/20030929-7.html

September 30, 2003
University of Chicago
Chicago, Illinois
...
Q Do you think that the Justice Department can conduct an impartial investigation, considering the political ramifications of the CIA leak, and why wouldn't a special counsel be better?

THE PRESIDENT: Yes ... There's just too many leaks. And if there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is. And if the person has violated law, the person will be taken care of.

And so I welcome the investigation. I -- I'm absolutely confident that the Justice Department will do a very good job. There's a special division of career Justice Department officials who are tasked with doing this kind of work; they have done this kind of work before in Washington this year. I have told our administration, people in my administration to be fully cooperative.

I want to know the truth ...

Q Yesterday we were told that Karl Rove had no role in it --

THE PRESIDENT: Yes.

Q -- have you talked to Karl and do you have confidence in him --

THE PRESIDENT: Listen, I know of nobody -- I don't know of anybody in my administration who leaked classified information. If somebody did leak classified information, I'd like to know it, and we'll take the appropriate action. And this investigation is a good thing ...

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/09/20030930-9.html

October 1, 2003
Press Briefing by Scott McClellan
The James S. Brady Briefing Room
...
Q Scott, when did the President first find out that someone in his administration had outed an undercover CIA official? What was his reaction? What did he do about it?

<Another long joust with McClellan>

Q Right. But you were asked about it in July -- ...

<&c &c>

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/10/20031001-6.html

October 2, 2003
Press Briefing by Scott McClellan
The James S. Brady Briefing Room
...
Q Scott, has the White House received any subpoenas for documents in the leaks case?

MR. McCLELLAN: No ...

Q No senior staff has been interviewed then?

MR. McCLELLAN: Not to our knowledge ...

Q Can I ask a follow-on point I just wanted to -- why does the White House feel that it's appropriate to coordinate an attack on Joseph Wilson in coordination with the RNC and Republicans in Congress, to attack him on his partisanship and his record as a partisan? Why does the White House feel that that's appropriate and relevant here? ...

Q Right, but my question still hasn't been answered. I mean, you're not denying that there are challenges and attacks on Joseph Wilson's character because he's a partisan, and the partisan nature that the White House believes is irrelevant here -- I'm asking you, why that's relevant in all of this and why the White House feels it's appropriate when there's an investigation going on to coordinate such attacks with the Republican National Committee and with Republicans on the Hill -- ...

Q Right, but you're speaking for the White House, and the White House is coordinating with Republicans on the Hill and with its arm, which is the political arm, which is the RNC, to go after this guy. So why is that appropriate? Why is it relevant? ...

Q Well, why won't you answer this question? ...

Q Scott, between the time period of mid-July when this story first broke, and late September when it became much more public, what, if anything, did White House officials -- the President, National Security Advisor, Chief of Staff, others, general for the Counsel's Office -- do to address the leak problem that emerged in July?

MR. McCLELLAN: I'll tell you what we were doing in that period. We were focusing on the priorities of the American people ...

Q Scott, I'd like to take another crack, if I may, at Steve's question. You keep using the phrase "career Justice Department investigators leading the investigation." But really what Senator Schumer is concerned about is the fact that the Attorney General, a political appointee, in some cases has to sign off on subpoenas. And is the White House concerned that there just may be an appearance here that there's foot-dragging. We're this far into it, we haven't heard any subpoenas have been served or investigators have come on ...

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/10/20031002-2.html
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/10/20031002-1.html

October 6, 2003
Press Briefing by Scott McClellan
The James S. Brady Briefing Room
...
MR. McCLELLAN: Now we're trying to talk about other issues. The subject of this investigation --

Q Why can't we talk about --

MR. McCLELLAN: -- the subject of this investigation is, did someone leak classified information? ... But the subject of this investigation -- no one wants to get to the bottom of it more than the President of the United States. And that's why we're pushing -- that's why we're making it very clear to the White House that we want to cooperate fully in this investigation. And the President --

Q On that subject, are investigators from the Department of Justice coming here to interview White House aides today, tomorrow?

MR. McCLELLAN: <blah blah blah>

Q But are --

MR. McCLELLAN: ... Obviously, they are pursuing the investigation, and they're doing it independently, as they should.

Q ... I'm asking, do you know whether investigators are here this afternoon or tomorrow?

MR. McCLELLAN: <blah blah blah>

Q Scott, has the President asked his advisors how much or whether there was damage done to national security by this leak?

MR. McCLELLAN: ... The investigation is ongoing at this point. And I think that the CIA is the one that will look at those matters. Where we are right now is, we want to move forward on this investigation and get to the bottom of this, and we want to do everything we can to cooperate in that investigation ...

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/10/20031006-5.html

October 6, 2003
President Bush, Kenyan President Kibaki Discuss State Visit
Remarks by President Bush and President Kibaki of Kenya in Press Availability
The East Room
...
Q Mr. President, on another issue, the CIA leak-gate. What is your confidence level in the results of the DOJ investigation about any of your staffers not being found guilty or being found guilty? And what do you say to critics of the administration who say that this administration retaliates against naysayers?

PRESIDENT BUSH: ... This is a very serious matter ... And, therefore, we will cooperate fully with the Justice Department ... I have told my staff, I want full cooperation with the Justice Department ... We're talking about a criminal action ...

Q What about retaliation? People are saying that it's retaliation --

PRESIDENT BUSH: ... These are professionals who are professional prosecutors who are leading this investigation ... And all I can tell you is inside the White House, we've said, gather all the information that's requested and get it ready to be analyzed by the Justice Department ...

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/10/20031006-3.html
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/10/20031006-4.html
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/10/20031006-8.html

October 7, 2003
Press Briefing by Scott McClellan
The James S. Brady Briefing Room
...
MR. McCLELLAN: ... The President -- no one wants to get to the bottom of this more than the President of the United States. And the sooner the better ...

Q But I still want to nail down, because I don't think this is clear. Does the President want you, or will he, himself -- or does he want someone else within the administration, besides the two of you, to individually poll senior staff members to find out who the leaker is? ...

MR. McCLELLAN: <blah blah blah>

Q Scott, you said earlier that the White House Counsel's Office was reviewing, scanning the information that eventually would be turned over to the Justice Department. Under what circumstances would the White House withhold information? ...

Q Under what circumstances would information not go over there? Why don't you just send it all? ...

Q Counsel's Office will go through some of these documents before turning it over to the DOJ? ...

Q Well, what will they weed out, for instance? ...

Q Yes, right. And so the question is, do the people who are investigating, are they sufficiently cleared that you have no issues with classified information going to the investigators? ...

Q How could something fit that criteria, and yet possibly be non-responsive to the request? ...

Q So just to clarify, you're not going after this allegation because you basically don't trust the credibility of Joe Wilson? ...

<And lots more jousting with McClellan>

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/10/20031007-4.html

October 7, 2003
President Meets with Cabinet, Discusses National and Economic Security
The Cabinet Room
...
Q Mr. President, how confident are you the investigation will find the leaker in the CIA case? ...

THE PRESIDENT: ... Randy, you tell me, how many sources have you had that's leaked information that you've exposed or have been exposed? Probably none ... I don't have any idea. I'd like to. I want to know the truth. That's why I've instructed this staff of mine to cooperate fully with the investigators -- full disclosure, everything we know the investigators will find out. I have no idea whether we'll find out who the leaker is -- partially because, in all due respect to your profession, you do a very good job of protecting the leakers. But we'll find out ...

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/10/20031007-2.html
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/10/text/20031007-2.html

October 8, 2003
Press Briefing by Scott McClellan
the James S. Brady Briefing Room
...
Q Scott, on the leak investigation, will you sketch out a little more specific about the role that the Counsel's Office is playing institutionally within the White House in terms of liaising with the Justice Department, but also providing advice within the institution here? And does the screening --

MR. McCLELLAN: What do you mean providing advice? ...

Q On the issue of getting to the bottom of this, does the review of documents, as they're being collected and collated and prepared to be transmitted, include a proactive look on the part of the Counsel to try, within the White House, to get to the bottom of the allegations and to find out who the leaker is or what happened? ...

MR. McCLELLAN: Again, ... the Department of Justice, the career officials over at the Department of Justice, who have vast experience in these issues, they are the ones who are doing the investigation ...

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/10/20031008-3.html

October 10, 2003
Press Briefing by Scott McClellan
The James S. Brady Briefing Room
...
Q What can you tell us about how the investigation into the CIA leak are proceeding? Are White House officials being interviewed today, for instance?

MR. McCLELLAN: ... I think it's important to keep in mind that this is an ongoing investigation. The Department of Justice, the career officials of the Department of Justice are working to get to the bottom of this. And the White House is committed -- at the direction of the President, the White House is committed to cooperating fully and doing everything we can to assist the career officials get to the bottom of this ...

Q But you can't tell us whether or not anyone is being interviewed today or whether --

MR. McCLELLAN: Again ... it is an ongoing investigation ...
Q Scott, earlier this week you told us that neither Karl Rove, Elliot Abrams nor Lewis Libby disclosed any classified information with regard to the leak. I wondered if you could tell us more specifically whether any of them told any reporter that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA?

MR. McCLELLAN: Those individuals -- I talked -- I spoke with those individuals, as I pointed out, and those individuals assured me they were not involved in this. And that's where it stands.

Q So none of them told any reporter that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA?

MR. McCLELLAN: They assured me that they were not involved in this ...

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/10/20031010-6.html
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/10/20031010-9.html

October 18, 2005
Press Briefing by Scott McClellan
James S. Brady Press Briefing Room
...
Q Is the President confident that Cheney did not leak Valerie Plame's identity?

MR. McCLELLAN: Again ... our policy is not to comment on an investigation ... What we have done is to make sure that we're cooperating fully with the special prosecutor ...

Q You said that you were going to check to see if President Bush or either Cheney had been asked, once again, to go before the special prosecutor and answer questions after their initial hearing.

MR. McCLELLAN: No, the President has not ... And my understanding is the same applies to the Vice President.

Q Yes, Scott, you said that the President has directed the White House to cooperate fully with the investigation. So can you tell us whether Harriet Miers, in her connection with the White House, has been involved in any way with the leak investigation, or whether she's testified before the Fitzgerald grand jury?

MR. McCLELLAN: ... She has been White House Counsel during part of the time that this investigation has been ongoing ...

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/10/text/20051018-1.html

October 28, 2003
President Holds Press Conference
Press Conference by the President
The Rose Garden
...
Q Thank you, Mr. President. You have said that you are eager to find out whether somebody in the White House leaked the identity of an undercover CIA agent. Many experts in such investigations say you can find if there was a leaker in the White House within hours if you asked all staff members to sign affidavits denying involvement. Why not take that step?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, the best person to that, Dana, so that the -- or the best group of people to do that so that you believe the answer is the professionals at the Justice Department. And they're moving forward with the investigation. It's a criminal investigation. It is an important investigation. I'd like to know if somebody in my White House did leak sensitive information. As you know, I've been outspoken on leaks. And whether they happened in the White House, or happened in the administration, or happened on Capitol Hill, it is a -- they can be very damaging.

And so this investigation is ongoing and -- by professionals who do this for a living, and I hope they -- I'd like to know ...

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/10/20031028-2.html
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/10/20031028-3.html