Skip to comments.Round up the obvious suspects (NSA leak)
Posted on 12/22/2005 7:20:13 AM PST by Abathar
Liberal fantasies of Karl Rove being frog-marched in handcuffs for leaking classified information may turn into a nightmare of prominent liberals being prosecuted for damaging the fight against al Qaeda via leaks of classified data. There are no names on the public record yet, but somebody leaked the classified information about NSA surveillance to James Risen of the New York Times, and a year later his paper published the story.
The pieces falling in place are far from conclusive, but they are mighty suggestive.
President Bush believes that the national interest has been harmed. In all probability, gears are turning right now for a criminal investigation leading to a possible a possible felony prosecution. Others are noting, as AT did last Sunday, that at the demand of the left itself, precedents have been set that could ensnare not evil Republicans, but virtuous liberals who think of themselves as whistleblowers. As the old saying goes, Be careful what you wish for.
Jack Kelly contends something valuable may yet come out of the Plame Investigation:
It is despicable, but not illegal, for the news media to publish vital national secrets leaked to them. But the leakers have committed a felony.
Those who have demanded severe punishment for whoever it was who told reporters Valerie Plame worked at the CIA have been remarkably forgiving about who leaked the existence of the NSA intercept program, whichlike the earlier leak of secret CIA prisons for al Qaida bigwigs and unlike the Plame kerfufflehas done serious harm to our national security.
But fortunately, by clapping New York Times reporter Judith Miller in irons until she talked, overzealous special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has set a valuable precedent.
Attorney General Gonzalez should subpoena Mr. Risen and Mr. Lichtblau, and have them cited for contempt of court if they do not disclose their source or sources. Maybe they could share Judy Millers old cell.
Should the Attorney General take up Kellys suggestion, A. J. Strata has a starting point suggestion about the leakers. He notes this graph from the NYT:
According to those officials and others, reservations about aspects of the program have also been expressed by Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, the West Virginia Democrat who is the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, and a judge presiding over a secret court that oversees intelligence matters. Some of the questions about the agencys new powers led the administration to temporarily suspend the operation last year and impose more restrictions, the officials said.
It does seem to suggest that Senator Rockefeller and a judge presiding over a secret court that oversees intelligence matters were sources for this leak, Strata hints. In fact, if Strata is right, Gonzales may already know that, for Strata adds that press reports to the contrary notwithstanding, Judge Robertson, an activist liberal judge, probably didnt resign, but rather was suspended for that very reason.
I'd also like an investigation into how many Democrats have accepted Oil For Food bribes from Saddam.
I have three suspects: Clarke, Clarke, and CLARKE!
What do you think are the odds? I will stake out the zero.
Sounds right. I would love to see a Federal Judge frogmarched off to prison.
Is it not yet obvious, that the once vaunted NY Times, is now on par with the Weekly Workers World.
If they could catch Rockefeller at this it would be the best Christmas present ever, and I am willing to wait until July if that is what it takes.
Rockefeller said he could discuss his concerns with no one because of the classified nature of the program. The NYT article said that Rockefeller had concerns about it. How would the Times know this if Rockefellers letter wasn't released until days after their article? Rockefeller sounds like the leak to me....
It's like the Mafia demanding that the police be honest.
In a departure of their policy of aiding any enemy of the United States, Democrat politicians seem to have missed the Saddam money pot. Some of their funders (Rich, et al) seem to have taken Saddam's blood money, so the Dem's funding pool is tainted with the blood of innocent Iraqis. But they seem not to have taken the money directly. A little laundering was first required.
"...couldn't discuss his concerns with anyone..." Sorry, sloppy syntax
In the end, you'll find it was Rockefeller. Wouldn't be surprised if due to family problems he's forced to resign.
Interesting, the media admitted that the judge didn't say why but they assumed he was resigning in protest.
Two that would come to mind... Dodd & Biden.
Now THAT would be juicy...