CIA name leak from White House - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 10-08-2003, 11:06 AM   #31
New Yorker
 
Scarletwine's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Outside it's Amerika
Posts: 2,746
Local Time: 10:53 PM
Someone's head should roll for this. The administration is morally bankrupt on so many fronts I can't believe they still have supportersof conscience.
__________________

__________________
Scarletwine is offline  
Old 10-10-2003, 07:21 AM   #32
New Yorker
 
Scarletwine's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Outside it's Amerika
Posts: 2,746
Local Time: 10:53 PM
The latest from the Whitehouse.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/ar...option?mode=PF

Executive privilege seen as leak-case option
Shielding material is not ruled out; Democrats protest
By Wayne Washington, Globe Staff, 10/8/2003

WASHINGTON -- Despite President Bush's repeated pledges of full cooperation, administration officials yesterday refused to rule out invoking executive privilege to shield some documents from Justice Department investigators looking into whether someone in the White House illegally leaked the name of a CIA operative.

Democrats who have complained that the investigation should be handled by a special counsel instead of the Justice Department because of its connections to the White House said the prospect of executive privilege being used shows that more independence is needed.

"Asserting executive privilege would make a farce of the investigation," said US Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts. "That's why we need a special prosecutor, so that we can challenge any coverup."

The very words "executive privilege" evoke memories of scandal-plagued presidents trying to use the power of their office to hide from public view politically damaging information, and White House press secretary Scott McClellan was careful not to use the term. Still, he would not rule out the use of executive privilege, saying: "I think it's premature to even speculate about such matters."

Presidents can invoke executive privilege to shield from public view some aspects of their internal decision-making process. "It's used to shroud advice that's sometimes inflammatory or has been rejected," said Thomas Sargentich, a law professor at American University in Washington, D.C. "Executive privilege is not supposed to be a shield in criminal investigations."

Yesterday, Bush pledged "full disclosure" in the leak investigation, adding that he wants "to know the truth."

But even as the approximately 2,000 people who work for him at the White House scoured their desks for notes and e-mail to meet a 5 p.m. deadline to deliver any documents related to the alleged disclosure, Bush said the identity of the leaker might never be known.

"This is a town full of people who like to leak information," Bush said to reporters after meeting with Cabinet members. "I have no idea whether we'll find out who the leaker is partially because, in all due respect to your profession, you do a very good job of protecting the leakers."

As the 5 p.m. deadline passed, staff members scrambled to turn over relevant documents to White House Counsel Alberto R. Gonzales, who is the White House's liaison to the Justice Department during the investigation. Justice Department officials have given the White House specific deadlines to produce documents related to the investigation, though they would not make the dates public. McClellan said the deadlines are in the next couple of weeks.

McClellan said Gonzales's office set its own deadline for 5 p.m. yesterday so that it could go through the piles of information to see what information is relevant and should be turned over.

Gonzales's office will also have the opportunity to examine what information, if any, should not be turned over because the administration believes it is protected by executive privilege. The Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, which provides legal opinions on questions with constitutional dimensions, would review any White House claims.

Sargentich, who worked in the Office of Legal Counsel during the Carter and Reagan administrations, said lawyers in that office can make independent judgments, though the attorney general remains their boss and can overrule them.

If the White House asserts a claim of executive privilege, Sargentich said it would be a strong sign that the investigation is heading to the highest levels of the Bush administration, given that the claim can only be used to shield the president's decision-making process.

Former US ambassador Joseph Wilson has backed off his initial claim that Bush's top political adviser, Karl Rove, leaked the name of his CIA agent wife, Valerie Plame, as retribution for his work disputing some of the intelligence the administration used to bolster its case for war in Iraq. It is a federal crime to disclose the name of an undercover CIA agent.

Wilson now says that Rove did nothing to contain the leak.

McClellan said that neither Rove nor Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, nor Elliott Abrams, director of Mideast Affairs at the National Security Council, leaked Plame's name to the press or authorized the disclosure.

But McClellan refused to say if Rove pointed reporters to the disclosure. Yesterday, US Representative John Conyers Jr. of Michigan, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, called on Rove to resign.

"Since these initial allegations have arisen, neither the White House nor your office have denied your involvement in furthering the leak," Conyers wrote in a letter to Rove.

Administration officials have said Democrats are using the investigation to score political points and strongly back Rove. Still, the investigation has already meant some late nights for staff combing through their files to see if they have anything that should be given to investigators.

Bush's chief of staff, Andrew H. Card Jr., told White House staff in a letter yesterday that the president expects full cooperation. "The sooner we complete the search and delivery of documents, the sooner the Justice Department can complete its inquiry and the sooner we can all return our full attention to doing the work of the people that the president has entrusted to us."

Copyright 2003 Globe Newspaper Company.
__________________

__________________
Scarletwine is offline  
Old 10-10-2003, 11:09 AM   #33
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 09:53 PM
They haven't found WMD's.
They haven't found any connection between Saddam and Bin Laden.
They haven't found a way to save the economy.

Do you really think they'll find the leak? I don't, not if they're in charge.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 10-10-2003, 12:59 PM   #34
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 4,202
Local Time: 03:53 AM
They get to select what documents and evidence they hand over to the justice dept. It's just a joke. Anyone who thinks this is a proper investigation is crazy.
__________________
womanfish is offline  
Old 10-10-2003, 02:53 PM   #35
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 03:53 AM
This sucks. It's dirty politics. "Executive privilege" hell.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 10-10-2003, 07:38 PM   #36
War Child
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 754
Local Time: 10:53 PM
Quote:
>Dear MoveOn member,
>
>Today we're giving you a chance to clear your name. We're asking you
and
>tens of thousands of other MoveOn members to sign an affidavit
affirming
>that you didn't leak the identity of an undercover CIA agent to the
press
>last July.
>
>Here's why:
>
>President Bush told the press on Tuesday that he doesn't "have any
idea"
>whether the senior administration officials who blew a CIA operative's
>cover will ever be found. But if he just asked his staff to sign a
legally
>binding affidavit confirming that they weren't involved, and referred
>anyone who wouldn't to the FBI, it's possible he could flush out the
>perpetrators in a day. To date, the President hasn't even discussed
this
>matter with his staff.
>
>We've already done the President's homework for him by writing the
>affidavit. Now let's show him how easy it is for innocent people to
>legally declare their innocence. You can sign the affidavit and send
it to
>the President in under a minute by going to:
>http://moveon.org/affidavit/?id=1802...Ig1qR3kFt0Iu8g
>
>On Sunday, Reuters reported that Valerie Plame, the CIA agent whose
cover
>was blown "was probably the single highest target of any possible
terrorist
>organization or hostile intelligence service that might want to do
damage,"
>according to a former senior CIA official. It's now clear that the
leakers
>in the White House are willing to put national security and the lives
of
>CIA operatives in danger for their own ends. But President Bush seems
>unconcerned -- he hasn't even looked into who it might be.
>
>Here are a few quotes from the Bush Administration that give some
contrast
>to the task of finding the leakers.
>
>On finding Osama Bin Laden in Central Asia:
>"We're going to hunt them down one at a time. . . it doesn't matter
where
>they hide, as we work with our friends we will find them and bring
them to
>justice."
>--President George W. Bush, 11/22/02
>
>On finding Saddam Hussein in the Mideast:
>"We are continuing the pursuit and it's a matter of time before
[Saddam] is
>found and brought to justice."
>--White House spokesman McClellan, 9/17/03
>
>On finding the leaker in the close confines of the White House:
>"I don't know if we're going to find out the senior administration
>official. I don't have any idea."
>--President George W. Bush, 10/7/03
>
>President Bush can do better than that. He could start by simply
asking
>his staff to sign a legally binding affidavit. Show the President how
easy
>it is. Sign the affidavit and send it on to the President today at:
>http://www.moveon.org/affidavit/?id=...Ig1qR3kFt0Iu8g
>
>It's been three months since Valerie Plame's identity was leaked to
the
>press. The time for President Bush to take command and find the
leakers is
>long overdue.
>
>Sincerely,
>--Carrie, Eli, Joan, Noah, Peter, Wes, and Zack
> The MoveOn Team
> October 10th, 2003
>
>(Many thanks to the Center for American Progress for the research and
>quotes.)
__________________
elfyx is offline  
Old 10-11-2003, 06:52 PM   #37
Refugee
 
Klaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on a one of these small green spots at that blue planet at the end of the milky way
Posts: 2,432
Local Time: 04:53 AM
excelent comparison - seems ike mr. bush is verry forgiving to terrorist supporters and traitors in the own rows.

Klaus
__________________
Klaus is offline  
Old 10-12-2003, 11:14 AM   #38
New Yorker
 
Sherry Darling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,857
Local Time: 11:53 PM
Ahem.

I hereby and forthwith doeth declare that I did not leakth any spy names.

On this day of 10/12 and before this assembly of U2 fans,
Sherry Q. Darling
__________________
Sherry Darling is offline  
Old 10-13-2003, 07:49 AM   #39
Refugee
 
Klaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on a one of these small green spots at that blue planet at the end of the milky way
Posts: 2,432
Local Time: 04:53 AM
Sherry Darling:

good idea, everyone of us declares this - and the people who don't must be the ones who leaked the names

Klaus

i didn't leak em either
__________________
Klaus is offline  
Old 10-13-2003, 01:00 PM   #40
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 03:53 AM
I haven't leaked any names................
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 10-13-2003, 01:59 PM   #41
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 4,202
Local Time: 03:53 AM
As much as I want to see this administration investigated for this and punished accordingly, and I think the letter by MoveOn has some solid points. MoveOn is hypocritical. This group was founded as a group that was against investigating Clinton, (MoveOn... get it?) yet now they are actively drumming up support to investigate Bush. It pretty much strips their crediblity.
__________________
womanfish is offline  
Old 06-03-2004, 06:03 PM   #42
New Yorker
 
Scarletwine's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Outside it's Amerika
Posts: 2,746
Local Time: 10:53 PM
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artma...cle_4629.shtml
Bush Knew About Leak of CIA Operative's Name
By Staff and Wire Reports
Jun 3, 2004, 05:28

Witnesses told a federal grand jury President George W. Bush knew about, and took no action to stop, the release of a covert CIA operative's name to a journalist in an attempt to discredit her husband, a critic of administration policy in Iraq.

Their damning testimony has prompted Bush to contact an outside lawyer for legal advice because evidence increasingly points to his involvement in the leak of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame's name to syndicated columnist Robert Novak.
The move suggests the president anticipates being questioned by prosecutors. Sources say grand jury witnesses have implicated the President and his top advisor, Karl Rove.
__________________
Scarletwine is offline  
Old 06-03-2004, 08:10 PM   #43
Refugee
 
ThatGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Vertigo
Posts: 1,277
Local Time: 07:53 PM
It's interesting that he retained a lawyer, but I've read that Capitol Hill Blue isn't a very reliable source. But, who knows?
__________________
ThatGuy is offline  
Old 06-03-2004, 09:04 PM   #44
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 03:53 AM
Bush needs a lawyer for *something*.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 06-03-2004, 09:24 PM   #45
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 10:53 PM
Maybe we'll actually have the first real impeachment in history, in contrast to the farce that was President Johnson's impeachment (due to a law created by the 3/4 Republican Congress [and, to be fair, this was before the ideology shift in the 1870s, where liberals and Northern conservatives switched parties; hence, the GOP was liberal at this time; thus, Lincoln was, essentially, a modern Democrat] that Johnson defied, but was later declared "unconstitutional" during the Grant administration) and the farce that was President Clinton's impeachment.

And now we're dealing with a clear issue of a very serious security breach! But I'm not out for vengeance; I'm out for the truth. Thus, if the grand jury finds that Bush had something to do with this, I hope our "moral" GOP Congress does the right thing.

Melon
__________________

__________________
melon is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:53 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com