Michael Gross, a civil rights attorney and Ron Christie, former advisor to President Bush appeared on Hannity & Colmes this evening to discuss the recent domestic spying kerfuffle.
Christie wonders where all the outrage from the Valerie Plame “leak” is on this issue, because the same people who were complaining about that aren’t complaining about this situation, which is an actual leak. Democrats are more interested in prosecuting the Bush administration and not finding out who leaked this information. Alan, being the Democratic apologist that he is, says that “leaking” Valerie Plame’s name was illegal, yet leaking information about domestic spying was not illegal. I don’t know Colmes got the memo, but there was an investigation on “leaking” Plame’s name and what was done was not illegal.
Gross says “Why can’t we bring this to congress and debate this openly?” Because then terrorists would know!
As usual, Colmes jumps in and interrupts his opponent when they are answering his question and making him feel like a dumbass. It’s getting quite hard to watch Colmes because you know that he is going to negatively spin something (i.e. Iraq) or spout his anti-Bush rhetoric.
DOWNLOAD – .WMV
DOWNLOAD – .MP4
The Blarg linked with NSA “Leak” Overview
Thespis Journal linked with Treason at The New York Times
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Register to comment here.
11:40 pm [ Quote ]
Treason at The New York Times
11:44 pm [ Quote ]
I thought FNC, and a few Republicans already exposed the fact that Valerie Plame was not undercover in the past 5 years at the time of the alleged leak which does not make revealing her name & CIA occupation a crime? Why are they still bringing it up?
(from what I hear) As for this leak, Bush specifically asked the NYT not to publish the story because it was a matter of national security, and thus can also hurt the war on terror, put our lives at risk, etc. A completely different case. Interesting point on citing the 4th: “Unreasonable search and seizures?. Unreasonable. Key word, but still open to the interpreter.
If Bush did not break any laws, I sure hope someone at NYT gets arrested and forced to reveal who leaked and everyone does time, just like they are still trying with Valeria Plame’s case (which was not a crime). In fact they should be doing this even if Bush did break a law.
Otherwise, we might as well just put all our cards on the table so every terrorist and “axis of evil? country knows what we are doing, plan to do, and how we operate so that they can plan more accordingly against us.
Can anyone produce a single person who was spied on that obviously did not have any (apparent or actual) ties to terrorism?
3:17 am [ Quote ]
elguapo, here is my 2 cents on some of the questions you pose..
I agree with you that if there is no doubt that the Bush admin broke any laws then the leaker should be prosecuted. Leaking information for the sake of exposing wrongdoing in one thing, but doing it for only political purposes is despicable.
Even though the leak is itself illegal, I find it difficult to come up with ways in which the news story helps the terrorists in any way. There is simply no new information revealed regarding tactics that we use in the war on terror – everyone knew that under the current law terrorist suspects can be put under surveillience. You might argue that the current spotlight on the issue might force the terrorists to be more aware of the situation, but that would only hold if we assume that they are unprofessional to begin with which is not the case. Unfortunately we happen to be fighting highly trained professionals who are well aware of the ways they could be spied upon and are certainly doing everything they can to prevent their communications from being detected, regardless whether we discuss the issue or not. If someone can pinpoint me to a concrete argument as far as how the release of the news story helps the terrorists, please, feel free to enlighten me.
Regarding cases of misguided spying, well, chances are we’ll never know since there are no court records of these. I personally have no problem with spying on terrorism suspects – I have yet to hear from anyone who would oppose that. I do have a problem with unchecked power to conduct such spying. Lets assume the best case scenario – that absolutely nobody in the Bush administration would ever ever abuse such power – if that is true and if I had 100% proof that this is the case I would still be against a policy of domestic spying without court oversight. This is because even if there is nobody currently in power who would abuse this policy, that in itself does not mean that someone won’t come around sooner or later who will. While it is impossible to have a government that is perfect, I would like for our government to be designed in such a way as to minimize the opportunity to abuse power. Giving the executive branch the power to spy on US citizens without court oversight (especially when the actual spying could and would be approved by FISA courts to begin with) is something that I simply would not accept. You can go whine about Clinton doing the same thing, well if he did, I am just as much against it. I was not interested in politics and way too young at the time, but it still boggles my mind that conservatives at the time, especially the ones priding themselves on defending individual liberty, were silent on the issue and chose to impeach the president on a lie about a blowjob rather than something that is actually an impeachable offense.
3:32 am [ Quote ]
Elguapo,
Do you have more information on what evidence there is that Plame hasn’t worked as a covert agent in the last 5 years? I’ve heard that claim before. But I know Fitzgerald hasn’t said anything about Plame’s covert status and I would think that informationitself would be classified, making me wonder where that info came from and how reliable it is.
We do know however from the New York Times OCT. 5 article that she worked under Non-official cover, the most dangerous assignment for a CIA operative. Furthermore, we also know that the front company she used as cover is also used by other agents still in the field, thus revealing that information still puts peoples lives at risk and was highly unethical regardless of what laws actually applied in the case. At any rate, the issue is still under investigation by Fitzgerald, and if he hasn’t proven one one way or another whether a crime was committed (aside from the perjury which was incidental to his investigation) I don’t see how anyone else could have done so.
As for wiretapping, there is no reason not to go through FISA if there is any evidence that a person is in way linked to terrorism. The fact that FISA is being bypassed is proof enough that people are being spied on that do not have any apparent or actual ties to terrorisms.
With the technology available, especially with the Echelon system already set up, there’s even a good probability that entire neighborhoods are being spied on, possibly keying in on certain words that can be used in more in one context.
At any rate I’m all for investigations. Let’s find out if President Bush or anyone else broke the law. Sadly I don’t believe this will be the last investigation that will have to be done into this administration.
1:30 pm [ Quote ]
LoK your jumped conclusion: “The fact that FISA is being bypassed is proof enough that people are being spied on that do not have any apparent or actual ties to terrorisms? is just what it is: rushed judgment. Bush or someone at his admin specifically said that every wire tap had the strict criteria of being at least 50% terrorism connected. IOW, at least one person on the line had to have suspected or sure links to terrorism.
Unfortunately, no I cannot find the article that cited Plame as not being undercover. I also heard Fox News and both Rush and Hannity discuss it too. I also heard an interview from a man who met Joe Wilson on a FNC set that claims Wilson more-less bragged to him about his wife being part of the CIA. I will keep looking, for both accounts.
I agree I do not want unchecked power. I am actually questioning why Bush did not go to the courts within 72 hours after the start of the wire tapping (for each case) as he was permitted to do so, not restricting him to need a warrant in order to just start the tapping. But, facts are still trickling out. There could be actual legal justification for what he did, no matter how controversial, or there could be proof he overstepped his power. The wording in both FISA and the Patriot Act, as well as other laws, are argued in favor of both sides of the story because some of the wording of these documents weren’t written specific enough, leaving room for interpretation (from what I have gathered thus far). So I am waiting to see.
Either way I want those at NYT and who leaked this to pay the price because the CINC of our country not only asked them not to do the story, but he also told them how it could hurt the country as a whole. There are ways and actual professional, required chain of command procedures to take care of things like this, and if you don’t get the results you want, you keep going higher. Leaking the story to the press is definitely breaching national security and circumventing the chain of command. He/she/they do not deserve to ever hold a clearance again, and probably needs jail time.
Not only that, Bush could have used legal authority to take them (NYT) into custody right then and there and start legal proceedings/interrogations to get the “mole?. But he didn’t. That would make another international mess for our image. It was a lose-lose situation and NYT chose to shaft the President for their own self gain.
My prediction: There will be no charges that stick, and as a result of what has happened, all these war and antiterrorism laws will get revised to be so specific and so long that it would require even more lawyers and more $$ to ensure no laws are broken while trying to find those who want to blow us up. Not that I mind that. But why hasn’t this issue come up 1, 2, 3, or even 4 Presidents ago?
1:49 pm [ Quote ]
Ian, can you help us out? Do you have anything archived linking to the investigation or any reported news about the Plame leak actualy not being a crime?
3:02 pm [ Quote ]
AFAIK they interviewed her former boss who she last worked with about 13 years ago, and he said her neighbors at the time “probably guessed” she was CIA…
Of course, actually interviewing her neighbors shows that they didn’t know she was more than a soccer-mom. If anyone has something to add to this, by all means…
Oh please. Is knowing that the FBI can have informants wear a wire and use it for legal prosecutions the same thing as making it impossible to bust people? Does knowing that you have the right to a lawyer somehow invalidate all criminal prosecutions?
It’s not due process or rule of law if the process is secret or the law is nonexistent.
This has worked so well with torture issues… Really, this is one of the most secretive, stonewalling presidencies in a very long time. Remember long long ago, Cheney’s energy task force meetings? We still don’t know the whole story, but it turns out four of five Big-Oil execs lied to Congress about whether they were in on it. And this is how long after the fact?
BTW, this Ron Christie guy—saw something on the Dayside or whatever a few hours ago, idly flipping channels—he claimed FISA wasn’t used because there was no time, it was a split-second decision… Which his opponent somehow didn’t call him on… (the 72-hour provision) Urgh.
3:03 pm [ Quote ]
Uh… link got… fubared. Somehow. For those interested, her former boss that they interviewed was a Mr. Rustmann, I believe.
5:13 pm [ Quote ]
First, it has been established (everywhere but in the RW media that Valerie Plame was in deed an undercover officer working NO LESS in weapons of mass destruction. There were be no grand jury if this were not a serious crime and let’s face it, there would not have been a cover up either.
On July 22, Newsday’s Washington Bureau notes: “Valerie Plame … works at the agency on weapons of mass destruction issues in an undercover capacity…” Does that clear up the republican confusion? Do we need more? Let’s try this, from the same article: according to “a senior intelligence official” Plame worked in the “Directorate of Operations (as an) undercover officer.”
The issue of the NYT even being considered treasonus is ridiculous. I was taught that the press was to always remain and be independent and basically be the 4th estate of the government. For once, they actually did their job right – instead of having a Judy Miller plant bogus stories – that to me would be considered abit more treasonus. The paper did its job and I think the RW is just looking silly saying otherwise. The disturbing part to me is that they held on to the story for a year. An election year no less, that’s scandalous and a disservice to all Americans.
I would seem that common sense has left the building. Outing a CIA officer whose job was to protect America from terrorists with WMD is “okay” – no crime here, but reporting on government malfeasance somehow becomes treasonus. And as far as Bush spying – lets face the facts, the FISA Court had to alter and turn down his requests – which they had never had to do before – the fact that he didn’t go to the court as the law states is pretty clear and simple – the president broke the law. Period. The president is not above the law and I think our Constitution went to great lengths to protect us from exactly this scenario. The fact that he didn’t seems pretty clear on its face to me – obviously they were spying on their political opponents, the UN, and God knows who else. Its wrong and making all the excuses in the world does not make it right. I believe he will have to be impeached for this act. If we are in fact a nation of laws and our Constitution means anything, then there is no way out but impeachment for breaking the law. Dancing around semitics is not going to change the fact that a crime was comitted.
6:28 pm [ Quote ]
Too much contradicting info out there. This seems to cover a lot.
“Plame worked in the Langley, Virginia, CIA headquarters since 1997, when she returned from her last assignment, and married Joe Wilson and had her twins. It is very unlikely that a CIA employee commuting to the headquarters building each day would be a covert agent. Columnist Robert Novak wrote that an Agency source said Plame “has been an analyst, not in covert operations.”
From:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valerie_Plame
Terr: Knowing the FBI has informants is no big deal (broad knowledge). But knowing that they have active informants who successfully infiltrated al Qaeda cells in the U.S. (hypothetical) is a big deal. See the difference? No big deal saying that we wire tap enemies in general. But by publishing stories about our wire taps on terrorists in our own country not only confirms what the terrorists were probably cautious of (we are listening and watching), but it also alerts this info to the sloppy ones and makes them harder to catch as well. It only helps them out more than us. I saw no benefit by running this story except to either attack Bush (maybe), and/or get readers for their paper and sell a book (most likely).
I am not for unchecked wiretaps. What I am against is all these people crying like they just violated in the worst embarrassing way and they can never get their lives back, when they weren’t even the ones being spied on. Perhaps Bush messed up by not reporting the taps with in 72 hrs to the court. But as I said before, some of these laws are written with room for interpretation so no crime could have been broken. So whose fault would that be? The congress that passed the law more so than the President.
If I were Bush, I would have informed the courts after the fact, (72 hours). I am eager to hear why de didn’t. Nonetheless, I am waiting for all the info before I judge.
And my chain of command reference applies to all gov’t jobs. There are checks and balances at all levels of the gov’t, even in the military. Whether or not they are used, as we see with the wire tap leaks, is another story. But they do work in solving issues and stopping illegal activity when used properly.
3:17 am [ Quote ]
[...] We are in a battle of ideas, and the enemy cannot win. « Tom Jones Is Going to Explode NSA “Leak” Overview January 3rd, 2006 I admit I have not paid much attention to the NSA "leak" storylately. From the beginning it has sounded mostly like another excuse for liberals and the media to attack Bush, but I thought I’d look into the story. The Political Teen has a great video of a debate that gives a decent overview of the issue. Take a look to catch up on some of the latest arguments. [...]