|
Somehow George Bush is unable to find the TRAITOR who committed a FELONY by disclosing the name of a covert CIA agent to the press in an act of revenge against her husband, a whistleblower. This TRAITOR is STILL working in the White House. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/22/politics/22LEAK.html
Ashcroft Briefed Regularly on Inquiry Into C.I.A. Leak
By ERIC LICHTBLAU
Published: October 22, 2003
WASHINGTON, Oct. 21 — Attorney General John Ashcroft's top aides have regularly briefed him on key details in the investigation into the disclosure of a C.I.A. officer's identity, including the identities of those interviewed by the F.B.I., a senior Justice Department official told members of Congress on Tuesday.
Mr. Ashcroft's regular, detailed briefings suggest that he has taken a more hands-on role in the politically charged investigation than the department had acknowledged. Senate Democrats said the arrangement threatened to compromise the independence of the investigation, a contention that Justice Department officials rejected.
<snip>
But Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, said he was troubled to learn from Mr. Wray at Tuesday's hearing that the attorney general is receiving regular reports on the status of the inquiry and has been told whom the F.B.I. is interviewing. Mr. Schumer said the attorney general's close personal and political ties to the White House pose a potential conflict if Mr. Ashcroft knows the White House officials investigators plan to interview.
"When the line prosecutors know that the attorney general knows what they are doing, it could hamper their independence," Mr. Schumer said in an interview. "It means someone is watching over them, and that's not what we want in a case like this. It has a chilling effect, and it makes the case for Ashcroft recusing himself stronger." <more>
************************************************************************
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/22/opinion/22FRYE.html
Let Someone Else Do the Talking
By ALTON FRYE
Published: October 22, 2003
WASHINGTON — In the latest debate over leaks of classified information, wisdom begins with a distinction: leaks elicited by a reporter while investigating a story often serve the public interest — and merit the journalist's protecting the identity of that source. Leaks initiated by self-serving antagonists in the political process — and calculated to exploit journalists as convenient mouthpieces — rarely serve the public interest and deserve less protection.
Most journalists are properly wary of the second type of leak, and often decline to publish them. That was true, it appears, for some members of the news media who received calls regarding Ambassador Joseph Wilson's wife, an undercover C.I.A. officer. Other journalists, as we now know, decided to act on the leak and disclose the identity of Ms. Plame. The Justice Department is investigating the case, and said last week that it hadn't ruled out subpoenaing reporters in order to find the source of the leak.
Yet journalists are dissuaded from naming sources of all kinds by both ethical considerations and pragmatic concerns over future access. This creates a situation in which a devious leaker is shielded by the journalist's ethical restraint — and derives de facto constitutional shelter under the reporter's First Amendment privilege.
Is there a cure for this problem? Yes: call it counterleaking. To protect against such manipulative behavior — and to discipline those who practice it — reporters could themselves assume the status of confidential sources and share those names with other journalists. <more>
Alton Frye is the presidential senior fellow and counselor at the Council on Foreign Relations.
************************************************************************
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/22/opinion/22BOOT.html
Full Disclosure on Leaks
By ROBERT BOOTH
Published: October 22, 2003
WASHINGTON — Secrets are created every day in the federal government: when National Security Agency personnel create codes, when C.I.A. case officers talk to their spies, when F.B.I. agents speak to their sources, when the Joint Chiefs of Staff discuss troop movements. When these secrets are revealed to the press, it is known as a leak. Not all leaks are created equal, however. Just as the motives for leaking differ, so do the consequences of a leak.
<snip>
The most serious kind of leak is the unauthorized disclosure of national security information. Robert Novak's revelation that the wife of former Ambassador Joseph Wilson was a C.I.A. "operative" falls into this category. Mr. Novak's source, by revealing the wife's name without approval from the C.I.A., has potentially compromised national security.
There are two main reasons unauthorized disclosures occur. One is to undermine the administration; the other is to silence a critic. All unauthorized disclosures are committed by people who ultimately wish to influence outcomes, events and opinions. In addition to endangering national security interests, such disclosures also subject their sources to prosecution.
We do not yet know how much damage was caused by Robert Novak's column about Mr. Wilson. But we do know that as long as there is a federal government, leaks will continue — and that people who substitute their personal judgment for their sworn oaths are leading America down a very slippery slope.
Robert Booth, who was a special agent in the State Department for 29 years, is writing a book about leaks and unauthorized disclosures.
****************************************************************
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A11208-2003Sep27.html
Bush Administration Is Focus of Inquiry
CIA Agent's Identity Was Leaked to Media
By Mike Allen and Dana Priest
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, September 28, 2003; Page A01
At CIA Director George J. Tenet's request, the Justice Department is looking into an allegation that administration officials leaked the name of an undercover CIA officer to a journalist, government sources said yesterday.
The operative's identity was published in July after her husband, former U.S. ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, publicly challenged President Bush's claim that Iraq had tried to buy "yellowcake" uranium ore from Africa for possible use in nuclear weapons. Bush later backed away from the claim.
The intentional disclosure of a covert operative's identity is a violation of federal law.
The officer's name was disclosed on July 14 in a syndicated column by Robert D. Novak, who said his sources were two senior administration officials.
Yesterday, a senior administration official said that before Novak's column ran, two top White House officials called at least six Washington journalists and disclosed the identity and occupation of Wilson's wife. Wilson had just revealed that the CIA had sent him to Niger last year to look into the uranium claim and that he had found no evidence to back up the charge. Wilson's account touched off a political fracas over Bush's use of intelligence as he made the case for attacking Iraq.
"Clearly, it was meant purely and simply for revenge," the senior official said of the alleged leak.<more> |
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
