Skip to comments.C.I.A. Defends Officer's Firing in Leak Case
Posted on 04/25/2006 8:57:49 PM PDT by Lancey Howard
WASHINGTON, April 25 The Central Intelligence Agency on Tuesday defended the firing of Mary O. McCarthy, the veteran officer who was dismissed last week, and challenged her lawyer's statements that Ms. McCarthy never provided classified information to the news media.
But intelligence officials would not say whether they believed that Ms. McCarthy had been a source for a Pulitzer Prize-winning series of articles in The Washington Post about secret C.I.A. detention centers abroad. Media accounts have linked Ms. McCarthy's firing to the articles, but the C.I.A. has never explicitly drawn such a connection
A C.I.A. spokeswoman, Jennifer Millerwise Dyck, said: "The officer was terminated for precisely the reasons we have given: unauthorized contacts with reporters and sharing classified information with reporters. There is no question whatsoever that the officer did both. The officer personally admitted doing both."
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Yes it was. However, the CIA stated again today that McCarthy provided classified sensitive information to several media sources on several occassions, and she admitted to it.
I am sure they have a signed confession to this. She is in allot of trouble.
Thanks, probably the same facts in both articles, just different bylines.
Book deal to follow.
Since the Bush Justice Department refuses to prosecute the leakers of this and the NSA info, the Bush Whitehouse should shut the heck up about them. They obviously don't think the leaks are all that bad.
<< the CIA authorized McCarthy on a number of occasions to talk with reporters >>
We can now see what her defense is shaping up to be. The CIA says she admitted sharing classified information to reporters. Her lawyer says she never confessed to "LEAKING" it.
So she will claim she believed she had the green light from someone senior to her to share the classified info with reporters, and it was therefore not an illegal "leak."
Take it to court, get some convictions.
How long before the Marxists trot out the "witch hunt" meme, aye?
Throw her ass in jail now.
Coerced...To force to act or think in a certain way by use of pressure.
In my thinking, that 'pressure' could be she was faced with "We have the PROOF"
If my damaged memory serves me (or their recruiter may have stretched a little), CIA employees are under the 20 year rule for retirement eligibility the same as the armed forces. Thus she may be eligible to have her pension stripped. Not really sure about this one.
Anyhow Rush scored a big one refering to the Dims as the "Culture of Treason".
Allow me...I've been shouting this from every thread since I came across it a couple days ago:
1998 African Embassy bombing charges by the Clinton administration against the perps were for WMDs.
I'm not following your post.
"Officials said that Ms. McCarthy's security clearance was pulled when she was fired, but that no consideration was given to taking away the pension she had earned as a career C.I.A. employee."
I predict there will be no "pension". The woman is a traitor.
Unless the CIA makes an example of this scum, the problem will continue.
No, it was not part of the NYT story. This sounds like more spinning from McCarthy's lawyers. Next we will learn that Porter Goss accompanied McCarthy on her meetings with the reporters.
"But intelligence officials would not say whether they believed that Ms. McCarthy had been a source for a Pulitzer Prize-winning series of articles in The Washington Post about secret C.I.A. detention centers abroad."
This source of officials should also be fired. I bet the "official" is another Clintonista.
"He didn't say she didn't do it. He only says she didn't admit it."
Obviously if she didn't admit it, she cannot be a whistleblower.
"This stuff should have been confronted earlier and harder."
Actually, we want this to be as close to November as possible. The closer it gets, the more the RATS could get bashed as Traitors to this country.
Citizens will always accept a bit of corruption as part of doing business. No one accepts treason.
"So she will claim she believed she had the green light from someone senior to her to share the classified info with reporters, and it was therefore not an illegal "leak.""
Want to bet it was a Clinton appointee?
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.