Posted on 04/25/2006 9:00:47 AM PDT by wcdukenfield
The Washington Post today reports, in part: A lawyer representing fired CIA officer Mary O. McCarthy said yesterday that his client did not leak any classified information and did not disclose to Washington Post reporter Dana Priest the existence of secret CIA-run prisons in Eastern Europe for suspected terrorists.
The statement by Ty Cobb, a lawyer in the Washington office of Hogan & Hartson who said he was speaking for McCarthy, came on the same day that a senior intelligence official said the agency is not asserting that McCarthy was a key source of Priest's award-winning articles last year disclosing the agency's secret prisons. ...
... Cobb said that McCarthy, who worked in the CIA inspector general's office, "did not have access to the information she is accused of leaking," namely the classified information about any secret detention centers in Europe. Later in the story, the Post writes: Though McCarthy acknowledged having contact with reporters, a senior intelligence official confirmed yesterday that she is not believed to have played a central role in The Post's reporting on the secret prisons. The official spoke on the condition of anonymity, citing personnel matters. More here.
Now let's break this down. The Post published Dana Priest's original story about the prisons on November 2, 2005. Among other things, Priest wrote: The CIA has been hiding and interrogating some of its most important al Qaeda captives at a Soviet-era compound in Eastern Europe, according to U.S. and foreign officials familiar with the arrangement.
The secret facility is part of a covert prison system set up by the CIA nearly four years ago that at various times has included sites in eight countries, including Thailand, Afghanistan and several democracies in Eastern Europe, as well as a small center at the Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba, according to current and former intelligence officials and diplomats from three continents. More here.
Notice, the original Priest story refers to multiple sources. Reporters often use secondary sources to confirm part or all of information provided by an original source. So, it's a strawman to argue that Priest did not disclose the "existence" of the prisons or that she did not have a "central role" in the story.
The NBC story on Friday reported, in part: The leak pertained to stories on the CIA’s rumored secret prisons in Eastern Europe, sources told NBC. The information was allegedly provided to Dana Priest of the Washington Post, who wrote about CIA prisons in November and was awarded a Pulitzer Prize on Monday for her reporting.
Sources said the CIA believes McCarthy had more than a dozen unauthorized contacts with Priest. Information about subjects other than the prisons may have been leaked as well. Even Friday's leak story, which first identified McCarthy, she is not said to be anything other than a source — not the original source, not the primary source, not a source of specific information, etc.
Here's the full story: As for her lawyer saying that McCarthy "did not leak any classified information," that surely will be put to the test. He doesn't deny that she failed a polygraph or that she had multiple contacts with reporters. Today's Washington Post story then goes on to cite two leftwing non-profit groups for the proposition that it will be difficult to prosecute McCarthy because she took the polygraph. There are many ways to independently secure evidence against a target. An invitation to McCarthy to testify before a grand jury, and the production of phone records, notes, and so forth, would be common practice. And, of course, the testimony of family, friends and colleagues might be useful. And that's before the government even entertains the notion of following the Patrick Fitzgerald model respecting reporters (i.e., Dana Priest) and media organizations (i.e., the Washington Post).
The Post is not an objective news source here. It was the instrument through which classified information was leaked. Today it is using the front page to spin the story. 04/25 10:56 AM
Ty Cobb steps up to the plate and----strikes out!
Just a another work for paid lier.
bump
So, what they're saying is that there are more shoes yet to drop. I wonder if they did a hurry-up on Ms. McCarthy to make sure she lost out on her retirement?
GREAT ONE bttt
Ty Cobb doesn't come cheap, I'll bet. Mr McCarthy better sell some landscaping to all the other cabalists ASAP!! Wonder if they will cut back on their contributions to the Democrat Party?????????
Traitors should be shot. Period.
This makes the Felony worse, Mary searched the records for the information.
Slide Ty slide.
bump
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.