CIA Leak: A Blog Primer
posted at 10:58 pm on April 24, 2006 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
This is one of those stories where, if you miss the first 48 hours, you end up feeling so far behind the curve that you tune it out and never bother with it again. So here’s a round-up of news and blog coverage which, while longish, will bring you up to speed. As of this writing, McCarthy “categorically denies” being the leaker, according to former counterterrorism official/Kerry campaign staffer Rand Beers. So the jury’s still out – although government sources are telling Newsweek to fret not, for the leaker is most definitely she.
First, background. McCarthy joined the CIA in 1984. Fourteen years later, she’d risen to the position of senior director for intelligence programs on the National Security Council. How fast was her ascent? “Meteoric,” according to Spook86, a blogger claiming to be a former intelligence official who wonders whether the rapid promotion of comparatively inexperienced officers like McCarthy explains some of the pre-9/11 intel failures under Clinton. If so, then the Reagan and Bush I administrations should share some of the blame: according to the New York Times, by the late 1980s McCarthy was already chief of the CIA’s Central America and Caribbean section despite having no experience in those areas. By 1991 – just seven years after joining the agency – she was a top deputy to Charles Allen, then-national intelligence officer for warning. McCarthy inherited that position from Allen in 1994, then went to work in the Clinton White House in 1996 before replacing Rand Beers as senior director for intelligence programs in 1998.
Bear all this in the mind the next time you read or hear a news report suggesting she was some no-name “analyst.”
Bonus fun fact #1: the guy who appointed her to the position of senior director in 1998 was then-NSA Sandy Berger, who was last seen pleading guilty to destroying intelligence documents after smuggling them out of a National Archives reading room. In his pants.
Bonus fun fact #2: one of the Freepers recognized that from June 1997 to July 1998, McCarthy served on the National Security Council with none other than Yellowcake Joe Wilson, which naturally led some to speculate that McCarthy might have had a hand in sending him on the now-infamous trip to Niger. (McCarthy’s expertise is in Africa.) Her career arc makes this unlikely, though. McCarthy did stay on as senior director after Bush took office but only until July 2001, when she left the NSC to join the Center for Strategic and International Studies. (Curt at Flopping Aces has her CSIS bio – which, he claims, was conveniently expunged from the organization’s website shortly after the leak story broke on Friday evening.) Wilson’s trip to Niger didn’t occur until February 2002. Unless CIA operations have an awful lot of lead time, she probably had nothing to do with it.
McCarthy worked at CSIS and on a terrorism task force organized by the Markle Foundation for the next three years and testified before the 9/11 Commission in 2003 about improving counterterrorism measures. According to the Times, she returned to the CIA in 2004 – specifically, to the Inspector General’s office - and later allegedly leaked the story about secret U.S. prisons operating in eastern Europe to the Washington Post’s Dana Priest, who won a Pulitzer for the story a few weeks ago.
So far, so good. Now, here’s what Saturday’s Washington Post (ironically enough) had to say about the Inspector General’s office:
[A]s the person singularly responsible for sensitive internal investigations of alleged wrongdoing at the agency, the inspector general is routinely granted extraordinary access to secrets ordinarily not shared with others inside the CIA.
The inspector general’s combination of independence and access may have been combustible in McCarthy’s case, if allegations about her involvement in leaks prove true.
Emphasis mine. From the same article, this quote from former IG L. Britt Snyder:
The IG, he said, “gets into everything, including personal things. That makes it a little different than other places.”
Also from the same article, we learn that Porter Goss personally oversaw the McCarthy investigation instead of handing it off to the DOJ per standard protocol. Why? Maybe because he wanted to send a message to other CIA employees. Maybe because the story she spilled the beans on was so sensitive. Or maybe because McCarthy, by virtue of her position in the IG’s office, is perfectly positioned to roll over on other leakers inside the agency. If anyone’s likely to know who else is leaking, it stands to reason it’d be someone within the CIA’s version of internal affairs; possibly Goss figures that if he knocks her over, a lot of other dominos will tumble. There do seem to be plenty of other dominos out there: nearly every story this weekend about McCarthy emphasized that her dismissal is part of a broader campaign to ferret out leakers in various parts of the intelligence community. This AP story – illustrated with a photo of Scooter Libby, natch – claims there are “dozens” of leak investigations under way. And one sensational report from MichNews quoted former DoD official (and current NRO contributor) Jed Babbin as saying the crackdown may lead to polygraph tests for Democratic Senators Jay Rockefeller and Dick Durbin, both of whom have been accused of leaks in the past. It’s not clear from the article whether Babbin has an inside scoop or whether he’s just thinking out loud, but wild speculation sure is fun!
So extensive is the crackdown on leaks, and so adamant has Goss been about plugging them since becoming DCI in 2004 (and with good reason), that some bloggers wondered whether the story about secret prisons might have been floated to McCarthy intentionally as part of a sting. The sting theory stems from the fact that a recent EU probe into the prisons uncovered no evidence of illegal CIA activity there – which some took to mean that the prisons were fictional, and Priest’s story bogus. Not so; as Rick Moran explains, Priest had multiple sources for her report. What’s more, it simply beggars belief to think that CIA higher-ups would have concocted a story as incendiary as one involving secret prisons in the expectation that it might end up in the Washington Post. In all likelihood, it was the fact that McCarthy worked in the rarefied air of the IG’s office that led investigators to her. Quoth WaPo: “[Some intelligence officials] pointed out that the information in question was known by so few people that the number of suspected leakers was fairly small, enabling investigators to work swiftly.” (emphasis mine) There was no sting; McCarthy simply got caught.
And man, did she ever get caught. WaPo says she failed multiple polygraphs before confessing. AJ Strata cites reports describing a “pattern of behavior”. But what’s really got right-wing bloggers exercised is the discovery that McCarthy and her husband have donated upwards of $10,000 to Democratic political campaigns and organizations since 2004. Curiously enough, certain mainstream media outlets have had trouble nailing down the exact figure despite the fact that Ace and Tom Maguire were able to find it on OpenSecrets.org in about thirty seconds. And that’s not the only convenient omission from their predictably sympathetic coverage. Sweetness & Light looks at two of the press’s go-to guys on this story – former CIA analysts Ray McGovern and Larry Johnson [update 5/5/06: see below] – and reveals a few salient facts about their views on intelligence that somehow have managed to fly under the media’s radar.
Righty bloggers have also been having fun playing connect-the-dots with the various moonbat hearthrobs making cameos in this story: McCarthy, Beers, Richard Clarke (for whom McCarthy once worked at the NSC), Joe Wilson, John Kerry (who received the lion’s share of the McCarthys’ political donations), and Dana Priest and her husband William Goodfellow, who happens to be Executive Director of the Center for International Policy, which advocates rapprochement with Fidel Castro’s Cuba. Smells real bad, but there’s much less here than meets the eye: as mentioned above, the best anyone’s been able to do thus far conspiracy-wise is put McCarthy and Wilson on the NSC at the same time eight years ago, which is hardly damning. Some bloggers have attempted to link Goodfellow’s CIP to something called the Iraq Policy Information Program, which allegedly arranges anti-war speaking gigs for Joey Yellowcake. I’ve tried Googling the IPIP, though, and I can’t even find independent confirmation that it exists. The only mentions of it come from Discover The Network, FrontPage, Free Republic, and a few righty blogs. If anyone can help, I’d appreciate it. UPDATE: Existence confirmed. See below.
And with that, you’re more or less caught up, except for the 75 links people will send me telling me what I missed as soon as I post this. Keep your eye on Ace of Spades, Protein Wisdom, Flopping Aces, Strata-sphere, Just One Minute, Sweetness & Light, Riehl World View, Rightwing Nuthouse, Former Spook, and Belmont Club for more in the days ahead.
UPDATE: Just got an e-mail from Jennifer Verner, author of the FrontPage article that first brought IPIP to the blogosphere’s attention. Turns out the reason you can’t find any mention of it elsewhere is because FrontPage erred slightly in rendering the group’s name: it’s the Iraq Policy Information Project, not Program. Here’s the Google cache of the press release at Fenton Communication confirming that CIP was indeed involved in creating IPIP and that Yellowcake Joe was a consultant on the project. The press release also lists IPIP’s homepage as http://www.iraqpolicy.com, but that address now belongs to something called middleeastpeace.org. Not sure if they’re related to IPIP or not.
Thanks to Jennifer and reader Sally V. for calling this to my attention so promptly.
UPDATE 2: Another Democratic heavy hitter enters stage left: lawyer Ty Cobb will apparently defend McCarthy.
UPDATE 3: Via Flopping Aces, Hitchens weighs in:
It has long been pretty obvious to me that the official-secrecy faction within the state machinery has received a gigantic fillip from the press witch hunt against Lewis Libby and Karl Rove. What bureaucrat could believe the luck of an editorial campaign to uncover and punish leaking? A campaign that furthermore invokes the most reactionary law against disclosure this century: the Intelligence Identities Protection Act? It was obvious from the first that the press, in taking Wilson and Plame at their own estimation, was fashioning a rod for its own back. I await the squeals that will follow when this rod is applied, which it will be again and again.
UPDATE 4: A perceptive e-mail from reader Gary G.:
Does Ms. McCarthy know John Kerry personally? Did she ever have occasion to brief him (as was his right as the Dem presidential candidate or as senator)?
My own thought about the McCarthy campaign donations was that she was simply sowing seed in the hopes that a
real
nice job might be hers in the Kerry administration. As you point out her career was meteoric. Where might she have landed if the election had gone the other way?
Anyone know whether McCarthy and Kerry have met? Stephanopoulos could have asked Kerry point-blank when he appeared Sunday on This Week. But he didn’t. Of course.
UPDATE 5: Newsbusters watches Keith Olbermann so you don’t have to. Which, judging from Keith’s ratings, isn’t something you were planning on doing anyway.
UPDATE 6: You will be shocked to know that the L.A. Times’s coverage of the leak investigation is also missing a few relevant facts here and there.
UPDATE 5/5/06: Larry Johnson is a former clandestine case officer, not a former analyst. I apologize for the error.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: [1] 2 »
The cover-up is underway, surprise. Rand Beers is now vouching for Ms. McCarthy. I smell a lawsuit and a full court MSM press.
Captain America on April 24, 2006 at 11:30 PM
Thanks, Allah, you’re exactly right–the 48 hours I was “busy” (sleeping?) made me miss the whole thing.
bamapachyderm on April 24, 2006 at 11:35 PM
As Rush Limbaugh said today, Mary McCarthy and her liberal pals have in effect formed a Shadow Government intent on subverting our ELECTED Government. Other Shadow Government figures include Sandy Bergler, Joe Wilson, and many others.
pjcomix on April 24, 2006 at 11:40 PM
Re: Bonus fun fact #1 about Sandy Berger (aka “The Burglar”) — I still can’t believe how the guy not only stole classified documents, but then went on to destroy them. And what was his punishment? A $10,000 fine and loss of his security clearance for a few years? Big whoop. He got off easy, and McCarthy will, too.
Thanks for all the good and helpful background info on this story. Please keep it up.
Ann on April 24, 2006 at 11:43 PM
May I add that raving anti-Semite Ray McGovern has appeared with Joe Wilson(D) repeatedly including Rep. Conyers(D) ‘impeachment’ hearing where he embarrassed those attending by stating:
The session took an awkward turn when witness Ray McGovern, a former intelligence analyst, declared that the United States went to war in Iraq for oil, Israel and military bases craved by administration “neocons” so “the United States and Israel could dominate that part of the world.” He said that Israel should not be considered an ally and that Bush was doing the bidding of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.
“Israel is not allowed to be brought up in polite conversation,” McGovern said. “The last time I did this, the previous director of Central Intelligence called me anti-Semitic.”
At Democratic headquarters, where an overflow crowd watched the hearing on television, activists handed out documents repeating two accusations — that an Israeli company had warning of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and that there was an “insider trading scam” on 9/11 — that previously has been used to suggest Israel was behind the attacks.
DANEgerus on April 24, 2006 at 11:53 PM
Great to have you back Allah. Good read.
Mark V. on April 24, 2006 at 11:54 PM
The beauty of this treason is that Dana Priest will make a fortune (until her Janet Cooke-like Pulitzer is withdrawn) Mary McCarthy on the other hand will lose almost $2 million in retired pay. And as a convicted felon she can forgo her plans to become an education lawyer. One thing you can be certain about these Beltway bound civil servants is that they treasure their government retirements. McCarthy will be dealing like a devil to get it back. This is going to be like Alger Hiss and Whitaker Chambers.
manoftwistsandturns on April 24, 2006 at 11:55 PM
It’s such an incestual relationship with these left wing people. It just seems like a conspiricy because it’s what they all do. It comes natural for them to do everything in their power to destroy this administration and if that means hurting national security so be it. It sure would be nice to see someone tried for treason but I seriously doubt it will happen.
Capitalist Infidel on April 25, 2006 at 12:13 AM
I received the following note from the author of one of the FrontPageMag articles which may help:
There is a reason that Allah can’t find Iraq Policy Information Program. In the original FrontPage article, I made a small error—the real name is Iraq Policy Information PROJECT.
I have google caches proving that this group existed.
Here’s the link to google cache. There are others–though most have been taken down:
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:nBC4mSD5TTMJ:www.fenton.com/casestudies/iraq.asp+%22Iraq+Policy+Information+Project%22+%22Fenton+Communications%22&hl=en
Salabama on April 25, 2006 at 12:21 AM
McCarthy is all lawyered up and embarking on a risky strategy. Her lawyer is claiming she is innocent. Not good if you want to make a deal. If the lawyer is from the liberals interest groups I wouldn’t trust him at all. He is not at any risk, he just makes his money. More here
http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/1697
AJStrata on April 25, 2006 at 12:23 AM
The Dems are going bonkers over the McCarthy story, and saying the most unbelivable, insane, things in her defence that I have ever heard in my life…Then again I should never be suprised with libs, they are nut cases. I can’t wait to see if this leads to Sen. Rockafeller, Sen. Nelson, or Sen. Leven who are rumered to be under investigation by the Justice Dept.
birdman on April 25, 2006 at 12:31 AM
I can hardly believe that someone would place politics about the oath to protect secret information.
We are a country in trouble indeed. The reality of many irrational liberals having access to highly classified information could be the biggest threat to our national security.
Easy87us
easy87us on April 25, 2006 at 12:34 AM
FOR THE SUGGGESTION BOX:
Try to get the video from the last portion of yesterday’s Fox News Sunday roundtable. It will leave you stunned, even if you’re a life long Monty Python afficionado.
Juan Williams performed bone breaking contortions never before recorded on film. At one point, he even accused Bill Kristol of leaking while he was a govt employee. Y’all should watch it, just to see Hume/Kristol/Wallace pile on Williams, without effect. Juan simply dug in, retrenched, and held the line… McCarthy is a whistleblower, doncha know! A woman of conscience with the best interest of the American public at heart!
Salabama on April 25, 2006 at 12:46 AM
Look at all the Left-wing anti war front groups, there all fronts for either the Revoulionary Comunist Party, or the Workers World Party part of the base of the Democratec Party.
birdman on April 25, 2006 at 12:50 AM
So when is the trial going to be on pay-per-view? I would pay for that as fast as I would pay to see Michelle or Ann Coulter as WH Press Secretary for a day….and how they would handle Helen Thomas.
Would it be possible, if this came to a trial, that the innocent Dana Priest would be subpoenaed in any manner?
It would be nice to see the drive-by media on the hotseat defending their treasonous actions.
91Veteran on April 25, 2006 at 1:02 AM
Why do I feel a giant headache coming on with the release of this story…for the life of me, I will never understand how the left in this nation can honestly justify the actions of McCarthy and others like her…when did it become fashionable to undermine the elected goverment while in the middle of a war all the while essentially burying their heads in the sand like an Ostrich to the dangers of extermination facing our nation. I’m simply disgusted.
Terlizzi999 on April 25, 2006 at 1:06 AM
The answer to your question I belive Terlizzi999 is ther hate for George Bush, and I belive the sucess he is having fighting this war on terror among other things.
birdman on April 25, 2006 at 1:13 AM
That Scooter Libby is on trial while Mary McCarthy walks around freely and may not even face an investigation speaks tons.
Never forget. Democrats are Whistleblowers. But, let a Republican President with the power to declassify reveal something and he is a “leaker,” meriting impeachment.
Nothing like Double Standards.
LewWaters on April 25, 2006 at 1:23 AM
While I agree that hatred of George Bush is one reason the left acts like a 5th column but I don’t believe its the main reason. They simply hate the West and our values. Wouldn’t make any difference who was President.
Witness Eurabia where the far left are now the policemen for the Multiculturalists trying to prevent alarm over Muslim atrocities from being spread in the press. http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2006/04/new-oslo-peace-process.html
This is a barnburner of a fight and we are merely in the very beginning of the fight. We are not even at the end of the beginning yet.
Great to see you back Allah!
PierreLegrand on April 25, 2006 at 1:27 AM
Holy jihad Batman, Allah is back in the House!
Now we just need some of your brilliant photoshop visual aids.
Thanks Allah Pundit.
beth on April 25, 2006 at 1:30 AM
The sad part of this whole sordid affair is that Conservatives will tie themselves in knots trying to connect the dots getting to the bottom of the story. With the cooperation of the MSM, the democratic party will obfuscate to ends never seen before. One of the most interesting stories will be how Ms. McCarthy worked her way back into the CIA and in a position where she had access to nearly every national security issue in sight. She had help from other entrenched bureaucrats whose mission is to bring down this Administration. In the end, despite the treasonous behavior of she and others in the intelligence community who will come to light, there will be no political gain for the Republicans and the culprits will remain relatively untouched.
csjd on April 25, 2006 at 1:35 AM
So she leaked about secret prisons that no-one has yet proven exist. If they don’t exist, no problems for her. If they do exist and are critical to our security, she should be prosecuted.
If all that’s happened is her dismissal, that suggests national security wasn’t damaged and she was let go only for breaking the rules. Is that what you’re thinking or am I missing something?
BluestateNeotard on April 25, 2006 at 1:39 AM
Allah is In the House!!
Now all we need are some of your super photoshop visuals.
Great that you have a this forum.
beth on April 25, 2006 at 1:43 AM
Your absolutly right the left does hate our values, and this country. I heard David Horiwitz say on the Monica Crowley show no WABC radio,” millions of people in this country would like to see us lose this war.
birdman on April 25, 2006 at 1:43 AM
Mary McCarthy comitted treason no matter if there were prisons in Europe or not, she belongs in jail.
birdman on April 25, 2006 at 1:47 AM
She may not be prosecuted for the same reason we let some traitors slide during the Cold War: National security comes before punishing an individual. Might not be worth it to have weeks of direct and cross examination of who knows how many witnesses. We know she will be as lawyered up as the Soviet moles we did prosecute or call before Congress. Her defense team will put the CIA on trial and the media (both American and Al-Jazeera) will be on the side of the defense.
She might also not face prosecution because she has flipped. If the CIA and DOJ are doing their job and there are no moles to squeak about that to the media, we won’t know about it perhaps for years.
Bottom line is no action is nothing to become depressed about. This is a win. A huge win. Liberals have been seriously injured (just listen to them). They are babbling because the Center for American Progress (the nexus of all this) has not issued definitive talking points. It hasn’t because it does not know what is going to drop on the left’s heads next.
For my part, I tell them Cointelpro is back and it is obvious by how counter-productive many anti-war activists are that the movement is salted with CIA and FBI.
We know they are paranoid. Our job is to make them more paranoid.
Essex on April 25, 2006 at 1:54 AM
The blogswarm grows. The interesting part will be for how long will the MSM defend her actions as being ‘noble’ ‘whistleblowing’ as opposed to what they really were - the unauthorized release of classified information to person(s) not cleared for the information. Doing so for political purposes may not turn out to be an effective defense.
As for the linkages - well, I always thought the Vast Left Wing Conspiracy had more basis in fact than any vast right wing conspiracy.
Athos on April 25, 2006 at 2:03 AM
In what I see as an unbelievable next move, McCarthy is now denying she was the source of the stories that she admitted to just last week.
Newsweek and AP both are reporting on this now. This justy gets more and more intersting all the time.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12466719/site/newsweek/
http://famulus.msnbc.com/famulusgen/ap04-24-160243.asp?t=apnew&vts=42420062227
LewWaters on April 25, 2006 at 2:06 AM
I linked to this story with Drop Everything and Read This One
Outstanding work: clear, relevant, easy to understand. thorough. Great to have Allah back in my House.
discerningtexan on April 25, 2006 at 2:30 AM
In my opinion Bush has left the door open for such as this to happen by keeping pro-Clintonites on board. When you take over a ship you don’t make the enemy chiefs, you put them in the gallows. In other words, out the door.
NoMoreTaxes on April 25, 2006 at 3:21 AM
I give. Where did you hide the Trackback URI? Am I really that tired that I
can’t see it? Is it auto-detect only? If so, where does that leave us poor
TypePad users? I linked from
CIA
Leak: A Blog Primer (Allahpundit).
bdfaith on April 25, 2006 at 4:11 AM
Looks like we’ve been out-generaled by the left since Reagan. The problem is systematic….ie, if they go to the right schools, have the right freinds, they catapult into high management positions.
President Bush has been burned countless times by this, ie a Yale associate appointed to head the 9-11 memorial in NY only to get burned by him, the special prosecutor ( a Republican) in the Wilson Affair run amok, etc.
Ike managed to clean the system up, when he took power, via routing the bad eggs out, and replacing them systemically, but with human review and continual checks on said persons once they were in power, as well.
Porter Goss is excelling at this. He should be used as a model for the rest of the administration, in particular the State Dept., Homeland Security, FBI, etc.
paul
rightwinger on April 25, 2006 at 5:03 AM
Mary McCarthy ‘categorically denies’ being the source of the leak on agency renditions.
sugiero on April 25, 2006 at 6:00 AM
LINK:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12466719/site/newsweek
sugiero on April 25, 2006 at 6:02 AM
Bill,
Just simply add the word /trackback/ with a forward slash at the end of the permalink.
Alexandra on April 25, 2006 at 6:05 AM
None of these Clintonistas in the NSA and CIA could have done the damage they have without the help and appreciation of the mainstream media. The hypocracy and agenda of the MSM is as outrageous and dangerous to this country as any leftist we’ve seen come down the pike.
Wait until we see them bow to Hillary in ‘08.
right as rain man on April 25, 2006 at 7:15 AM
Thank you very much for the excellent summary, oh Dude of Holiness. I could have used your wisdom when I was getting my Comparative Religion degree…
I think we’re seeing the first results of Porter Goss’ work here. He has to show that breaking the oath has consequences. And when you’re talking about $2M in Gummint retirement, friend, that’s a consequence.
pratthobbies on April 25, 2006 at 8:37 AM
If she is guilty, does anyone really think she will go to jail or lose her retirement? Does anyone think she won’t be given another position with the Government in the future if the Dems come into power?
msflea on April 25, 2006 at 8:39 AM
To a degree, I can see the DOJ being gunshy on prosecuting her. I believe the DOJ decision makers are afraid of the full court press the Dims and their lapdog media will unleash if Mc Carthy is prosecuted. It wouldn’t take long for some leftoid talking head to start the meme that W is behind a conspiracy of directing his lackeys in the DOJ to hound a poor defenseless whistleblower, who was only uncovering government corruption and “speaking truth to power.” (BTW what the heck isthe meaning of “speaking truth to power?” It comes across to me as one of those trite smug leftoid revolutionary catch phrases that means nothing but sounds good to wannabe counterculture types). But I digress.
It would seem that if you told someone they were wrong about something, and that person just screamed in your face that you were a racist-homophobe-liar-right-wing-conspirator often enough, you might be a little wary of calling that person on something in the future for fear of getting that treatment again. Sometimes I think our Republicans are that way and just don’t like getting demonized for telling the truth, so they just shut up and let the Dims run roughshod over them.
That whole concept is what I believe has allowed the leftoids in government to get their way, and leads us to the type of crap we are witnessing right now.
geekrunner on April 25, 2006 at 9:38 AM
So when a Republican leaks information (which hasn’t actually occured this administration) it’s treason, but when a Democrat does it, it’s whistleblowing?
That must be from the same rulebook where Republican bloggers who point out that people who enter the country illegaly are illegals are ‘hate-mongers’; while Democrat bloggers who portray Bush as Hitler are ’speaking truth to power’.
Jason on April 25, 2006 at 9:45 AM
Superb wrap-up! Welcome back, Allah!!
docob on April 25, 2006 at 10:04 AM
Thanks, Alexandra.
bdfaith on April 25, 2006 at 10:13 AM
I will be listening to Rush today for latest on the this McCarthy mess. He had one of the best shows he every had, if anyone missed it can heared and watched on Rush 24/7.
birdman on April 25, 2006 at 11:42 AM
There are NO coincidences in spookville.
Someone needs to put this all together for prosecution.
Mouth Mccarthy must go to jail…or isn’t a firing squad the punishment for treason? Dunno, maybe they changed that.?.?.
shooter on April 25, 2006 at 1:31 PM
The worst mistake that President Bush has made,in my humble opinion, is not cleaning out the Clinton leftovers within 30 minutes of becoming president. The Clintons placed their people in sensitive positions before they left with the sole purpose of undermining the Bush Presidency. I firmly believe this to be true and it is working. There is your underground government and it is being run by the Clintons - or maybe I’m just another crazy conspiracy theorist.
OBX Pete on April 25, 2006 at 1:39 PM
Watch were this story leads many other leakers in C.I.A., Sate Dept. Sen. Jay Rockafella told Chris Wallace last Nov. that when he was in the Middle East that he told the leaders of Saudia Arabia, Jorden, and Syria “that Bush was going to invade Iraq.” At the time Sen. loud mouth was Chairman of Senate Select Commtee on Intell. This was just four months after 9-11 .This is seditious behavior.
birdman on April 25, 2006 at 1:46 PM
OBXPete, are you saying that the Clintons, knowing their days were numbered, planned for a future insurgency, and Bush’s team didn’t adequately plan for the occupation?
NellE on April 25, 2006 at 5:49 PM
OBX Pete
Hehe…Brilliantly put.
NellE absolutely correct.
Sheesh if its so easy for us to see someone please explain why it has taken 5 years to fire the first one?
PierreLegrand on April 25, 2006 at 6:48 PM
I find this entire episode utterly disgusting. I spent 27+ years in the military (but not involved with Intel). I had a Top Secret clearance. I knew the consequences of divulging classified information — not just to me (fine and imprisonment) but also to others in my line of work. I am now a civilian defense contractor with a clearance. No change if I divulge secrets. Even just mishandling can bring a 5 year sentence and a $50,000 fine.
For McCarthy to divulge classified information makes her a traitor. I’ll give her the benefit of the doubt and say that she is innocent until proven guilty, but if convicted, she should go to jail for a long time.
As for Dana Priest, whatever her source(s), she should likewise be prosecuted. Freedom of the press does not include traitorous acts that threaten national security and the lives of those who protect us. Her Pulitzer will not be withdrawn, since the organization that awards it is as left-wing as the MSM.
Having said all that, I won’t hold my breath waiting for these traitors to end up in jail. - Liberty
Liberty Call US on April 25, 2006 at 6:56 PM
If Bush was a Democrate his approval rating would be eighty percent, no matter what good bad or indifferant the MSN would gloat over it. The only agenda of pack of verman is POWER, at any cost no matter how many people get killed, they fave no God……..
birdman on April 25, 2006 at 8:35 PM
RE the DOJ prosecuting anyone involved that is not a Republican: Remember that Clinton had ALL of the U.S. attorneys resign so he could appoint his own people. How many are still with the gov’t and in senior positions and politically motivated?
ketchikan on April 26, 2006 at 3:16 AM
Since I have no trackback # for your post, I’ve linked you here:
http://myerskatt.blogspot.com/2006_04_23_myerskatt_archive.html#114606323805064796
myerskatt on April 26, 2006 at 11:03 AM
It is nothing short of astounding to hear someone like John Kerry say that McCarthy told the truth and therefore she is to be commended. There are those who will ask why it should be astounding, considering the source, and that would be a fair question, to say the least. Understood.
But let’s suppose that someone in the military had a disagreement with the war plans in Iraq in 2003, and took it upon themselves to inform the New York Times, e.g. that, “The U.S. is planning air raids from Saudi Arabia.” Well, if it’s the truth, would Senator Kerry consider that “commendable”? And to think he was almost the Commander In Chief!
Woody58 on April 27, 2006 at 10:20 AM
Kerry is a waterhead, and Billary is no better. They get so wrapped up in their own rhetoric, that they totally ignore reality. I will continue to vote Rep., if for no other reason than to deny these power-crazed Dem’s the juice that they crave so much. Fight the fight, people.
hillbillyjim on October 20, 2006 at 2:27 PM
Comment pages: [1] 2 »