Posted on 04/07/2006 10:28:42 PM PDT by CyberAnt
Dems' Falsely Attack The President For "Leaking" Information That Was Declassified Legally And Appropriately (3 years ago).
FACT: The President And The Vice President Have The Authority To Declassify Information:
Vice President Cheney: "There is an executive order that specifies who has classification authority, and it, obviously, focuses first and foremost on the President, but also includes the Vice President." (Fox News' "Special Report," 2/15/06)
"Cheney Was Referring To Executive Order 13292, Issued By President Bush On March 25, 2003, Which Dealt With The Handling Of Classified Material. That Order Was Not An Entirely New Document But Was, Instead, An Amendment To An Earlier Executive Order, Number 12958, Issued By President Bill Clinton On April 17, 1995." (Byron York, Op-Ed, "The Little-Noticed Order That Gave Dick Cheney New Power," National Review, 2/16/06)
FACT: On July 18, 2003, The NIE Was Formally Declassified Asserting "Compelling Evidence" Saddam Hussein Was "Intent On Acquiring" WMDs:
On July 18, 2003, CNN's Suzanne Malveaux Reported: "The White House declassified a small portion of the National Intelligence Estimate, eight of the 90 pages. It is a report from the six intelligence agencies that was used to shape President Bush's State of the Union address. It was also used to bolster his case for the war and the claim that Iraq was trying to obtain uranium from Africa." (CNN's "Live From," 7/18/03)
"The White House ... Released Newly Declassified Intelligence And Dispatched A Senior Administration Official To Explain How Erroneous Material Ended Up In The State Of The Union Address." (Joseph Curl, "White House Buttresses Iraq Claim," The Washington Times, 7/19/03)
"The Intelligence Declassified [July 18th, 2003] - Portions Of The October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate [NIE], A U.S. Intelligence Summary Based On The Work Of Six Agencies - Asserts 'Compelling Evidence' That Iraqi Dictator Saddam Hussein Was 'Intent On Acquiring' Nuclear-Weapons Material." (Joseph Curl, "White House Buttresses Iraq Claim," The Washington Times, 7/19/03)
FACT: Valerie Plame's Name Does Not Even Appear In The Declassified NIE:
"Libby Testified That He Was Specifically Authorized To Disclose The Key Judgments Of The Classified Intelligence Document ..." (Pete Yost, "Bush, Cheney Directed Libby's Leak Campaign On Iraq Critics, Court Papers Indicate," The Associated Press, 4/7/06)
A Complete Search Of The Declassified National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) Reveals No Mention Of Valerie Plame. ("Iraq's Weapons Of Mass Destruction Program," Director Of Central Intelligence, October 2002)
FACT: According To Media Reports, There Is No Indication The President Or Vice President Authorized Disclosing The Identity Of Valerie Plame:
The Associated Press: "There was no indication in the filing that either Bush or Cheney authorized Libby to disclose Valerie Plame's CIA identity." (Pete Yost, "Bush Authorized Leak Of Intelligence Data On Iraq, Says New Court Filing In CIA Leak Case," The Associated Press, 4/6/06)
Los Angeles Times: "The court filing makes no allegation that Bush ... encouraged or authorized the disclosure of [Plame's] identity." (Richard B. Schmitt And Peter Wallsten, "The Washington Leaks," Los Angeles Times, 4/7/06)
The Washington Post: "Legal experts say that President Bush had the unquestionable authority to approve the disclosure of secret CIA information to reporters ..." (Michael A. Fletcher, "Experts: Tactic Would Be Legal But Unusual," The Washington Post, 4/7/06)
Fox News' Carl Cameron: "[E]ven the prosecutor doesn't question the President's authority and power to declassify information ..." (Fox News' "Special Report," 04/6/06)
FACT: In 2002 And 2003, Dems Repeatedly Called For Declassifying More Data About Iraq:
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA): "[I] don't think that he presented enough evidence [on Iraq] for us to assess the threat in the manner that he does." (National Public Radio's "Morning Edition," 1/29/03)
Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA): "This government is able to declassify documents quickly when necessary. ... That's the process that should be followed now." (NPR "All Things Considered," 5/2/03)
"[S]everal Senators Press[ed] The CIA To Declassify More Data About Iraq." (Frank Davies, "Democrats Urge Focus On Terror Instead Of Iraq," The Philadelphia Inquirer, 10/5/02)
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL): "It's troubling to have classified information that contradicts statements made by the administration ... There's more they should share with the public." (Frank Davies, "Democrats Urge Focus On Terror Instead Of Iraq," The Philadelphia Inquirer, 10/5/02)
Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI): "There were some very difficult moments in [a hearing], relative to the CIA giving us timely information." (Frank Davies, "Democrats Urge Focus On Terror Instead Of Iraq," The Philadelphia Inquirer, 10/5/02)
Now Dems Criticize President Bush For Answering Their Calls And Falsely Claim President Bush "Leaked" Classified Information:
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA): "I am troubled by news reports that President Bush may have authorized Mr. Libby to disclose intelligence information to support the Administration's case for war in Iraq." (Rep. Pelosi, "Intelligence Must Never Be Classified or Declassified For Political Purposes" Press Release, 4/6/06)
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL): "[T]hey were disclosing secret classified information from the national intelligence estimate to the press in hopes of bolstering the President's popularity. It is a grave disappointment." (Sen. Dick Durbin, Congressional Record, p. S3186, 4/6/06)
Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA): "I am absolutely stunned at the news. Our President turns out to be leaker in chief." (NBC's "Nightly News," 4/6/06)
Sen. John Kerry (D-MA): "[T]he fact is that the bottom line remains that if the President of the United States is authorizing for political purposes the release of classified information, you have a very serious issue." (CNN's "The Situation Room," 4/6/06)
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV): "In light of today's shocking revelation, President Bush must fully disclose his participation in the selective leaking of classified information. The American people must know the truth." (Sen. Harry Reid, "Reid: President Bush Must Disclose His Role In The Leak Of Classified Information," Press Release, 4/6/06)
DNC Chair Howard Dean: "The fact that the president was willing to reveal classified information for political gain and put the interests of his political party ahead of America's security shows that he can no longer be trusted to keep America safe." (Pete Yost, "Bush Authorized Leak Of Intelligence Data On Iraq, Says New Court Filing In CIA Leak Case," The Associated Press, 4/6/06)
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY): "At the very least, President Bush and Vice President Cheney should fully inform the American people of any role in allowing classified information to be leaked." (Pete Yost, "Bush Authorized Leak Of Intelligence Data On Iraq, Says New Court Filing In CIA Leak Case," The Associated Press, 4/6/06)
If the president discloses classified information, its a bad thing. If the New York Times does it, its a good thing.
Can we just please, I beg you drive by media, just start the impeachment and let's get this thing behind us!!!! I am sick and tired of listening to these looney liberals and their hatred of GWB. There will be nothing found that will support impeachment and I want them make fools of themselves all over this issue. They will never forget the impeachment of THEIR PRESIDENT for having sex in Oval Office . . . ./sarcasm
It just makes one crazy doesn't it? Don't you know it is the NYT duty to let the American public know every secret this Evvill Bush Admin is up to!!! The President has no right to be disclosing, and as you said all leaks must be cleared first by the NYT editorial board to see if they fit the current agenda. Shame on GWB for not consulting with the NYT and attempting to leak through them, shame on him!! /sarcam
No. If a Republican president discloses classified information, its a bad thing. If a Democratic president does it, it is a good thing.
Remember when Jimmy Carter declassified the existence of the Stealth program, before the 1980 elections? There was no Internet then, no Rush Limbaugh, no Fox News--and no media complaints, either.
I think Stealth was far more vital to the USA than Valerie Plame.
Bill Clinton was NOT IMPEACHED FOR ORAL SEX IN THE OVAL OFFICE.
Bill Clinton was IMPEACHED FOR LYING UNDEROATH. He was also disbarred and lost his license to practice law for 5 years. He was also charged with obstructing justice and witness tampering.
The dems want the public to think it was "just about sex" - but it wasn't.
But .. the President DIDN'T DISCLOSE CLASSIFIED INFORMATION.
The information released WAS ALREADY DE-CLASSIFIED - please get this point!!
This is another case of the media LYING THROUGH THEIR TEETH.
FACT: On July 18, 2003, The NIE Was Formally Declassified Asserting "Compelling Evidence" Saddam Hussein Was "Intent On Acquiring" WMDs:
FACT: Valerie Plame's Name Does Not Even Appear In The Declassified NIE:
FACT: According To Media Reports, There Is No Indication The President Or Vice President Authorized Disclosing The Identity Of Valerie Plame:
FACT: In 2002 And 2003, Dems Repeatedly Called For Declassifying More Data About Iraq:
Easier to see this way... :)
bttt
Not to mention:
Which is worse:
(Even assuming that what the Dems say is true and accurate about this subject{Which it isn't})
A: The President's staff mentioning the identy of a non-undercover CIA analyst who happens to be married to a genuine 'Enemy of the State' to a reporter.
or;
B: The Presedent and his wife directly selling top-secret nuclear bomb AND missile guidance information to a bona-fide enemy of the nation????
Well, I did mention it... But nonetheless, the question still stands.
And .. very hard hitting .. thanks!
Consider Matthew 6: "Use not vain repetions, For they hope they shall be heard for their much speaking; it profits them not."
Yes it is, thanks. Their last point stretches credulity a bit though. That the Dems called for more declassification of information isn't all that relevant.
I mean, come on, the Plame/Wilson connection stunk of partisanship from the get-go and the White House wanted us to know. I see nothing wrong with that.
The press has smoke-screened this as the heart of the issue, even though initially Wilson loudly denied that his wife had anything to do with his being assigned. Wilson knew the wife connection at the CIA wouldn't look good. And it doesn't!
But fortunately for this liberal couple, the press has camouflaged that fact quite well.
I mean the CIA might as well have sent friggin' Harry Reid to Nigeria as Wilson.
The Wilson/Plame connection merely proves the old adage: garbage in, garbage out.
CIA really needs a house cleaning, so does the State Dept.
Evidently it's easier said than done. I sound like a broken record but that's the real on-going story here. Partisan leaks of classified info and embarrassing partisan reports like Wilson's, make it obvious we have competing agendas in both the CIA and the State Dept.
The drive-by media is at it again!
I keep hearing that the only reason they are against the President is to get back at the Republicans for impeaching the President for giving a BJ in the White House (I know there is more to it than that but I am only giving media impressions). I don't understand why the dems would think that way because aren't they the ones who got Nixon and we supposedly used Clinton to get back at the dems. Now isn't it even and this impeachment stuff should be done. It could be a never ending circle if it is not stopped now. I have always been convinced that if they do get President Bush in 2007 and censure or impeach, then I truly believe that EVERY President from here on out will be at least censured for something. This has got to stop before it is too late.
Partisanship will never end in Washington unfortunately it goes with the territory. :\
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.