Free Republic

Today at Tigerhawk, National Review’s Andrew McCarthy offers an explanation for Armitage’s behavior: First, while it now seems abundantly clear that the leak of Plame’s identity did not violate the covert agent identity protection act (50 U.S.C. 421 et seq.), this was a subject of considerable debate for the first several months after the story broke. It was not obvious back then. Second, it is still not crystal clear to this day that the leak could not have been charged under the espionage act (18 U.S.C. 793(d)). This statute has been used in the past to prosecute leaks of government...

Posted Sunday, Jul. 31, 2005 As the investigation tightens into the leak of the identity of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame, sources tell TIME some White House officials may have learned she was married to former ambassador Joseph Wilson weeks before his July 6, 2003, Op-Ed piece criticizing the Administration. That prospect increases the chances that White House official Karl Rove and others learned about Plame from within the Administration rather than from media contacts. Rove has told investigators he believes he learned of her directly or indirectly from reporters, according to his lawyer. The previously undisclosed fact gathering began...

Investigative ReportDemocrats Subvert War Intelligence Posted Dec. 22, 2003By J. Michael Waller Mellon, above, is using his position as Democrat staff chief on the Senate intelligence panel to undermine the leadership of Rumsfeld, Feith and Bolton. It's one of the unsolved political mysteries of 2003: Exactly who drew up the plan for Democrats to abuse the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) as a stealth weapon to undermine and discredit President George W. Bush and the U.S. war effort in Iraq? The plot, authored by aides to Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), vice chairman of the committee, has poisoned the working...

To: Paul Atreides This is why he stole the documents and "lost" them: http://www.nationalreview.com/levin/levin200404151634.asp 70 posted on 07/19/2004 9:49:00 PM EDT by holdonnow [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS THE RELEVANT STATUTE, 18 U.S.C. 793 (f), governing Berger's behavior: Sec. 793. - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information (f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the...

Why did Sandy Berger smuggle highly classified documents past security guards? Perhaps this will shed some light.

The following excerpt was transcribed by me from my videotape of the 5 minute segment on Fox News Channel this morning entitled, "Bracing For Battle". The segment began at 9:44 AM and ended at 9:49 AM Eastern. Guests: Richard Goodstein, Democrat strategist and former advisor to the 2000 Gore/Lieberman Campaign Ben Ginsberg, Election law expert, and national counsel for the Bush/Cheney 2004 Campaign. (He was also counsel to Bush/Cheney during the 2000 election re-count) Bottom line excerpt: Ben Ginsberg: "The essential point is, did Sandy Berger, who is one of John Kerry's top advisors, get those documents - those classified...