• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Uneasy bedfellows in investigation of CIA leak. White House and journalists both under scrutiny.

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

freegeeks

Diamond Member
May 7, 2001
5,460
1
71
Originally posted by: Corn
I have a new theory about the liberal media and universities.
IMO the right wingers lack the brains to become decent journalists or professors.
There is no left-wing conspiracy in the media and in the education system.
Right wingers just don't have the brain capacity :D
Interesting. Rich = Republican. Republican = Right. Evidently in our stupor, we ended up controlling the vast majority of the world's wealth. Strange.
you are absolutely right, you even have a president that proves your theory!!!

the american people elected a rich dumbass to be the most powerfull man in the world
it's really something to be proud of

congratulations!!!

:beer:

so we can conclude

-lefties are poor or middle class smart people
-right wingers are stupid upper class dudes

I'm middle class and smart
You are dumb (there is no denying that) but are you rich???? :D


 

Lucky

Lifer
Nov 26, 2000
13,126
1
0
Originally posted by: BOBDN
I wake early every morning to read several newspapers.

I have an idea of what I expect to find there. Along with the knowledge that I will read about new events that have happened. I'm surprised every morning by the lack of coverage of this story.

I guess the "liberal" press doesn't feel a story about an illegal, intentional attack on national security by members of the Bush White House and the conservative press should be printed.


wow, it's all over the newspapers and newmagazines that I recieve on a daily and weekly basis. Can't imagine what you are reading.
 

BOBDN

Banned
May 21, 2002
2,579
0
0
Originally posted by: Lucky
Originally posted by: BOBDN
I wake early every morning to read several newspapers.

I have an idea of what I expect to find there. Along with the knowledge that I will read about new events that have happened. I'm surprised every morning by the lack of coverage of this story.

I guess the "liberal" press doesn't feel a story about an illegal, intentional attack on national security by members of the Bush White House and the conservative press should be printed.


wow, it's all over the newspapers and newmagazines that I recieve on a daily and weekly basis. Can't imagine what you are reading.
Today I read the Star Ledger, the NY Times and online I read BBC, LA Times, Rueters and Al Jazeera (so far). I saw not one article on the White House leak of classified information.

What are you reading?
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,531
3
0
Well Nocak has a difficult choice. Either reveal his source and run the risk of not being able to get anymore scoops and helping the Intelligence Community which would help America's Security or keep his mouth shut which would enhance his career!
 

BOBDN

Banned
May 21, 2002
2,579
0
0
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Well Nocak has a difficult choice. Either reveal his source and run the risk of not being able to get anymore scoops and helping the Intelligence Community which would help America's Security or keep his mouth shut which would enhance his career!
He should be given one more choice to add to those. Spend 10 years in jail for revealing classified information. Unless he's willling to reveal the names of the "two senior White House officials" who used his dumbass to leak Valerie Plame's name.
 

KenGr

Senior member
Aug 22, 2002
725
0
0
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Well Nocak has a difficult choice. Either reveal his source and run the risk of not being able to get anymore scoops and helping the Intelligence Community which would help America's Security or keep his mouth shut which would enhance his career!
He should be given one more choice to add to those. Spend 10 years in jail for revealing classified information. Unless he's willling to reveal the names of the "two senior White House officials" who used his dumbass to leak Valerie Plame's name.
I think more than a few people who post about what should be done under the law, should read the law before they make conclusions.

Here is a source with the actual text:

United States Code

You will find two interesting facts:

1. It is only illegal to reveal the identity of a covert agent, not any CIA employee and then only if you have authorized access to classified information identifying the agent and deliberately reveal this information. Therefore, Novak has not broken the law and it appears that very few White House officials would have been in a position to break the law, since covert agent identities are on a "need to know" basis.

2. Covert agents are specifically defined as those who have been assigned undercover outside the US within the last 5 years. From what has come out, it appears it has been 8 or 9 years since Plame was assigned outside the US. Therefore, she isn't a covert agent and isn't covered by the law.



 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
Originally posted by: Corn
we need going out and getting the info ourselves or develop a trusted single source news entity.. no spin just the facts maam..
Why do we *need* a "*single* source news entity? What do we gain by this other than the loss of freedom? Please enlighten me as to why the liberal slant that dominates print and television news coverage such a terrible thing? After all, we have Fox News to balance it out, right? Besides, don't we already have such a "trusted single source" in the various "public" programming out there?

Walter Winchell or Edward R. Murrow and the rest of that generation were there to tell it as they saw it.
Tell me about "bias". Who on this earth is without it? Bias in inescapable when reporting the news, because it's filtered through the reporter's bias, intentionally or unintentionally. There is no such thing as "bias free" reporting, there never can be.

Besides, who gets to determine who that "single source of news" is anyway? Do the people charged with determining that have any bias?
Corn,
I am after facts. Unvarnished facts. I can determine my own spin if I wish. For instance; a reporter should simply report the facts as he sees them. All the facts, all the details in a manner that does not favor any agenda... the third side so to speak.
I can't be in Iraq. But, why is it that the same event can be depicted favorable to one agenda and favorable to another if the agenda are opposed to each other.
We are left with listening to both sides trying to eliminate the bias and try to figure out what we have. I'd rather not have to do this. I'd rather have just reality relayed as news not a slated view omitting some parts found on another station or paper who have elimanted some parts as well..
Journalism use to be a profession that bred independent thinkers that moral entity that the founders saw as necessary for an open government... They should be chosen by their ability to tell the truth.. by others who have honor and without agenda.. commercial or political.
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
Originally posted by: Corn
I have a new theory about the liberal media and universities.
IMO the right wingers lack the brains to become decent journalists or professors.
There is no left-wing conspiracy in the media and in the education system.
Right wingers just don't have the brain capacity :D
Interesting. Rich = Republican. Republican = Right. Evidently in our stupor, we ended up controlling the vast majority of the world's wealth. Strange.
Your statement here Corn is extremely profound! It is actually beyond profound... it is true! How is it a person gets rich enough to control the lives of many? From whom do the rich get their riches? Is it at all possible the rich get their riches from the people they control? How do they control the people they control? By getting rich of course!..:)

 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
Kengr,

50 U.S.C. § 426. Definitions

For the purposes of this title [50 USCS §§ 421 et seq.]:
...
(4) The term "covert agent" means--
(A) a present or retired officer or employee of an intelligence agency or a present or retired member of the Armed Forces assigned to duty with an intelligence agency--
(i) whose identity as such an officer, employee, or member is classified information, and
(ii) who is serving outside the United States or has within the last five years served outside the United States; or
(B) a United States citizen whose intelligence relationship to the United States is classified information, and--
(i) who resides and acts outside the United States as an agent of, or informant or source of operational assistance to, an intelligence agency, or
(ii) who is at the time of the disclosure acting as an agent of, or informant to, the foreign counterintelligence or foreign counterterrorism components of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; or
(C) an individual, other than a United States citizen, whose past or present intelligence relationship to the United States is classified information and who is a present or former agent of, or a present or former informant or source of operational assistance to, an intelligence agency.

I think she qualifies. Additionally, I'd read the violation of Novak as Conspiracy to violate... consider this.. what reason to out the person. It is not news worthy in and of itself..
IMO (and I'm sure the opinion of Justice)
 

KenGr

Senior member
Aug 22, 2002
725
0
0
Lunar,

If you read the "ands" and ors" carefully, I think it says she would have had to have been stationed overseas as an agent since 1998. My understanding was that her overseas assignments ended in 1994 or 1995. The only other provision which could apply was that, in 2003 she was acting as an agent. Again my understanding is that she was acting as an analyst, not an agent.

Relative to Novak, the law seems specifically crafted to eliminate the potential of a conspiracy charge. And, in any event, I've never seen a hint that he actively went looking for information on Plame or any other agent. When the information comes to him unsolicited, no conspiracy exists. Once he has the information, even if he knows it is classified, the specific words of the statute make him immune from prosecution.

This law was specifically crafted to go after Phillip Agee, a former CIA agent, and was carefully crafted not to apply to general leaks within the government. It was passed only because the CIA found out that current statutes did not clearly prohibit identifying agents since identity of people is not within the exisiting scope of national security information and the espionage laws did not apply.

 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
67,183
3,872
126
Novak is a covert leak stooge of the White House to use for political retribution.
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
Kengr
I think she falls under this.
ii) who is at the time of the disclosure acting as an agent of, or informant to, the foreign counterintelligence or foreign counterterrorism components of the Federal Bureau of Investigation;
and because of the linkage of the homeland folks.
But, perhaps she fell into another code as well... I reason as well that Justice at the request of CIA would not be investigating a non issue.
Regarding Novak.. Conspiracy is coded to link a non direct or codified individual to a crime. I suspect what they are looking into is not only the person who outed the agent but the why. It is clear she is a covered agent. Least ways to me and the folks who said she was.. the Director of CIA called for the Justice involvement. Novak is either a dupe in their mind or a participant. Why would he find it news worthy? Only to cast a political reason for Wilson going to Niger regading WMD and facilitated by his wife..... Me thinks.
 

BOBDN

Banned
May 21, 2002
2,579
0
0
Originally posted by: LunarRay
Kengr
I think she falls under this.
ii) who is at the time of the disclosure acting as an agent of, or informant to, the foreign counterintelligence or foreign counterterrorism components of the Federal Bureau of Investigation;
and because of the linkage of the homeland folks.
But, perhaps she fell into another code as well... I reason as well that Justice at the request of CIA would not be investigating a non issue.
Regarding Novak.. Conspiracy is coded to link a non direct or codified individual to a crime. I suspect what they are looking into is not only the person who outed the agent but the why. It is clear she is a covered agent. Least ways to me and the folks who said she was.. the Director of CIA called for the Justice involvement. Novak is either a dupe in their mind or a participant. Why would he find it news worthy? Only to cast a political reason for Wilson going to Niger regading WMD and facilitated by his wife..... Me thinks.
Several links were posted regarding her classification as a "noc" as well as her work overseas through a dummy corporation which the defenders of Bush have of course refused to recognize.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
67,183
3,872
126
Yeah, and the CIA asked for an investigation. I think they know the relevant law.
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Originally posted by: LunarRay
Kengr
I think she falls under this.
ii) who is at the time of the disclosure acting as an agent of, or informant to, the foreign counterintelligence or foreign counterterrorism components of the Federal Bureau of Investigation;
and because of the linkage of the homeland folks.
But, perhaps she fell into another code as well... I reason as well that Justice at the request of CIA would not be investigating a non issue.
Regarding Novak.. Conspiracy is coded to link a non direct or codified individual to a crime. I suspect what they are looking into is not only the person who outed the agent but the why. It is clear she is a covered agent. Least ways to me and the folks who said she was.. the Director of CIA called for the Justice involvement. Novak is either a dupe in their mind or a participant. Why would he find it news worthy? Only to cast a political reason for Wilson going to Niger regading WMD and facilitated by his wife..... Me thinks.
Several links were posted regarding her classification as a "noc" as well as her work overseas through a dummy corporation which the defenders of Bush have of course refused to recognize.
I have no doubts she meets the test which justifies the investigation. Some one told Novak. I still think it was done in a over dinner scene. Where someone said 'Wilson wouldn't have even gone to Niger if it wasn't for his wife, she into WMD over at CIA' and 'they're playing games here with National Security' Novak would have found that to be news worthy.. I don't think the teller knew he broke the law and don't think Novak did either... but, there still exists the possibility that Novak amongst others conspired to undermine Wilson by linking his actions in Niger as political and as set up by his wife...
Time will tell.. I have great faith in the career Justice folks. The Attorney General cannot and would not interfere in this.. too hot and it would tie directly to Bush at the polls.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY