Skip to comments.Moves Signal Tighter Secrecy Within C.I.A.
Posted on 04/23/2006 7:42:45 PM PDT by Pikamax
Moves Signal Tighter Secrecy Within C.I.A. By SCOTT SHANE and MARK MAZZETTI
WASHINGTON, April 23 The crackdown on leaks at the Central Intelligence Agency that led to the dismissal of a veteran intelligence officer last week included a highly unusual polygraph examination for the agency's independent watchdog, C.I.A. Inspector General John L. Helgerson, intelligence officials with knowledge of the investigation said on Sunday.
The special polygraphs, which have been given to dozens of employees since January, are part of a broader effort by C.I.A. Director Porter J. Goss to re-emphasize a culture of secrecy.
As the inspector general, Mr. Helgerson was the supervisor of Mary O. McCarthy, who was fired on Thursday after admitting she had leaked classified information to reporters about secret C.I.A. detention centers and other subjects, agency officials said.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Also a means to clear him of any complicity in the actions of his subordinate. Wouldn't make too much of it.
> Moves Signal Tighter Secrecy Within C.I.A.
"Uh oh, our juicy sources are drying up,
and we can expect more subponeas in the
coming months. Our top Putzes will be in
the slammer for refusing to talk, rather
than on vacation in what's left of Paris."
But then you have vamps like Valerie Plame appearing on magazine covers in her jammies.
Here's part of the trick ~ any competent intelligence analyst would have already noticed that ALL of the IG directors, or top level people in every agency IG who were Clintonistas (appointed by Clinton, or schedule Cs) have turned out to be rotten to the core.
One of the first was Carla Corcoran who had been USPS IG. She'd earlier been in the Air Force IG's office, but wormed her way into a non-political job at USPS.
There have been others ~ one of them quite recently ~ remember the news flak caught cruising 13 year old girls (he thought). He was from Time, Inc., a temple of leftwingnut focus.
I'm sure there are others.
Well boo hoo. Someone ask me if I really give a damn about the ex-CIA employees and their book deals.
I thought Plame was outed by The White House? Didn't Karl Rove admit to releasing her name?
Tighter secrecy at the CIA in this day and age?
The NY Times must have a source.
Nah, you must have gotten that from the DU talking points memo.
BTW, welcome to FR.
Thanks for the welcome. But I do recall a federal investigation of White House personnel and an indictment of Libby resulting from the leak. Do I have my facts wrong?
Libby was not indicted for leaking.
"But I do recall a federal investigation of White House personnel and an indictment of Libby resulting from the leak. Do I have my facts wrong?"
Nobody is being charged with any crime related to leaking. Libby is being charged for lying or bending about what he said to some reporters.
We don't know who leaked to Novak. The prosecution won't talk, won't release the info to Libby. After the leak Novak confirmed the info with two others, Rove and some CIA press handler. According to Novak on or both of them asked him not to reveal the information. But Novak did anyway.
Plame was outed by her hubby,(/Vanity Fair) that's the scoop" nobody wants to know about.
You may need to read that memo again. Libby was "indicted" for being less than truthful to a grand jury, not for leaking a name.
No one has been indicted for "leaking" the name of a CIA clerk who was btw not a secret agent.
Stick around and you'll get a better education than you're accustomed to over at Dummies Unhinged.
I understand that Libby was indicted for perjury. But the perjury was alleged to have occurred when the federal prosecutor questioned Libby about his role in leaking Plame's name to the press. What exactly am I missing here?
So who is this ONE OFFICIAL that is leaking the details of this undoubtedly secret investigation???
"Granted anonymity" by who? The NY Slimes? That is supposed to make it okay for this person to leak information as to a confidential investigation? The arrogance of the liberal media is breathtaking.
Investigating leaks by intelligence officials would make a full time job for THREE FBIs.
See my reply to Shermy below. Are you suggesting that the federal prosecutor was not investigating the leak of Plame's identity?
You're not missing anything here. We at FR haven't tanked up on Koolaid and still have our heads on straight.
No one over here is that much interested in your regurgitating the talking points you so obviously obtained at Dummies Unhinged.
Guess the Dims will use this new buzz phrase since it ties in with the "culture of secrecy" of the Bush WH. How can an agency with "Intelligence" in its name deal in anything other than secrecy, and since the NYT does not have a Security Clearance, that leaves them out in the cold. The CIA and NSA have not been doing a very good job of keeping their secrets lately, leaking like a sieve to the 4th branch of Government - the MSM. You the 4th branch of Government that looks out for the population's good, and warns us of what our eeevil Government is doing behind the vault doors.
Please to me you, digitally speaking that is.
You are missing a BRAIN...now go back to the DU like a good little twit.
Was she even covert? I hadn't heard.... Perhaps they should ask the reporters that the Wilson's entertained in their home before the Novak story hit.
Not pleased to meet you until you know FACTS instead of Dem talking points.
Secrecy? In the CIA? How outrageous!
Huh? Am I the only one who reads the newspapers? That Plame "leak" was a big deal for quite a while. To date, the only indictment concerning the leak was the perjury charge against Libby. Why does that make me a "twit?"
Clinton's briefings in 1992. The first briefings, on September 4, 1992, concerned the major national security issues of the moment, including turmoil in the soon-to-be-defunct Soviet Union and escalating conflict in Yugoslavia. Clinton received no further briefings until after the election, at which point a CIA team established a presence in Little Rock. Leading the briefings from that point onward was John L. Helgerson, who latter wrote Getting to Know the President: CIA Briefings of Presidential Candidates, 19521992, published by CIA's Center for the Study of Intelligence in 1996.
On November 11, Helgerson met with Clinton, Berger, and Nancy Soderberg of the governor's staff. Two days later, he began his briefings with Clinton. As Helgerson explained to the candidate, the PDB goes to the vice-president, national security advisor, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, White House chief of staff, and secretaries of State and Defense. In view of the growing importance of economic issues, Helgerson suggested that the Secretary of the Treasury also be included. Clinton agreed.
Other than this one suggestion, Helgerson indicated, he was hesitant to guide the president-elect in any way. Helgerson recalled that, in view of what he described as CIA "policy buzz saws" of the 1980s (most notably, the Iran-Contra scandal), he took great pains not to try to influence Clinton's thinking on any issues. Over the period from November 13 to January 16, 1993, Helgerson and others provided the president elect with daily briefings while Bush, now a "lame duck" president, received exactly the same material in his PDB. Beginning January 17, the briefing team moved from Little Rock to Washington, preparing to make the transition to providing Clinton with daily briefings as president.
"What exactly am I missing here?"
"I thought Plame was outed by The White House? Didn't Karl Rove admit to releasing her name?"
The White House did not leak her name to Novak. It was probably someone in the State Dept. It appears many people were talking about Wilson and how he got the trip to Niger. This interest preceded Joe's New York Times article by a few months because Joe was "leaking" to the press about his trip and about how he debunked the Niger forgeries. He also stated he was working at the behest of Cheney and since he "proved" there was no "sale" of uranium, and Cheney "must have" known this, Bush lied, etc. etc. He said all these things while he was an undisclosed advisor for Kerry's Presedential campaign.
I suspect many people were talking about Joe and how he got his trip. The Senate Intelligence Committee reported that most analysts thought his trip proved nothing either way, a minority thought the info he returned increased the likelihood of Saddam's interest in uranium.
Stating Plame's name was not a crime, apparently, because Libby was charged with no such crime.
SQ do you also notice how easy these trolls are to recognize.
They just cannot conceal their glee, with talking points in hand, they just assume they sound so realistic. Not many last over a week or two.
I've been posting (1000+) at Dummies Unhinged for over a year and they still think I'm "one of them". They are so easy to fool.
The perjury charge has NOTHING to do with the leak...you are a twit...or ignorant.
Again, you seem to misunderstand what I am saying. The investigation that resulted in the perjury charge was over the leak. Obviously, the federal prosecutor did not question Libby about his alleged perjury. What did you think the investigation was about?
Well, I certainly do not know who leaked her name or how. For that mattter, I do not know whether any crime was committed. All I know is that the federal prosecutor has been investigating the leak and that investigation included White House personnel, especially Libby and Rove. How does that make me a dummie or twit?
When you get up to speed on FACTS, get back to me, otherwise don;t.
What makes you a dummy and a twit is your obsession with the Plame deal and trying to place blame on Rove and the White House.
Can you understand?
"There's been a fundamental shift in practice at the Publications Review Board," said Mark S. Zaid, the lawyer. "There's literally been a reinstitution of the 1950's attitude that what happens at C.I.A. stays at C.I.A."
Thank you God!!!
Imagine that! A clandestine agency encouraged to be secretive! What a revelation!
And now we have a bunch of disgruntled agents apparently upset now that they have learned their service does not entitle them to Book clubs on Sixty Minutes.
I'll go over to DU when all this blows up in their faces just to tell them my new book title "When Cabals Go Kaboom".
You sure do talk a lot. But so far you have said nothing. Exactly what "fact" am I misstating? The investigation or the perjury charge? Please tell me what Mr. Libby allegedly lied about? His favorite color? He was questioned about the Plame leak. The prosecutor contends that Libby lied under oath. I have not read the indictment so I cannot say what exactly Libby purportedly lied about. But there you have it: a perjury indictment resulting from questioning during the Plame investigation. What part of that is not factual?
I'm going to report you...I told you NOT to post to me. Go learn some facts and THEN come back....maybe.
You misunderstand me. I am not placing the blame on anybody. To date, no one has even been indicted for leaking her name. All I said was that the indictment for perjury occurred as a result of the Plame investigation. What is so awful or wrong about that?
If you are not a troll and really wish to stay a while and learn, do yourself a favor and do a search of this forum for Plame. after you have read for a couple of days, then post whatever questions you might still have.
I have seen no documentation yet that a "leak" occurred, only an apparently secret classified referral requesting an investigation of a supposed leak and a bunch of screaming liberals claiming a leak.
Apparently, the posters to this thread do not know how to read. I did not state that any crime had occurred as a result of the leak or even that any perjury had been committed. Apparently, my simple stattement that an investigation has occurred leads some to conclude that I am a "dummie" and a "twit." Tell that to poor Mr. Libby, who had to hire an expensive lawyer to defend against perjury charges. At least he is not in denial about the allegations.
There has only been a claim of a leak, I say again I have seen no documentation that saying Val gal's name was a leak.
I might change my mind when I get to read that criminal referral that got this ball rolling.
"SQ do you also notice how easy these trolls are to recognize. "
Trolls are one thing, but on another thread , I almost reported some creep to
Homeland Security. Maybe I offended him when referred to Osama bedlinen as the great diaper head.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.