Bush Administration caught revealing spy's indentity to smear him over Iraq

[Evil_Captor]

*Originally posted by elucidator *
**It does not rise to “treason”. That is not the word. I don’t, offhand, know what word it might be. But it is nothing to be proud of. **

Elucidator, I am disappointed in you. The leakers endangered the lives of Americans and American allies by exposing their identities to the enemy. What the hell is treason if that’s not treason?

If I had accepted $5,000 from Saddam Hussein to reveal Plame’s identity, I guess I wouldn’t have been guilty of treason, too, eh?

Jeebus, people, stop being so partisan, or so eager to appear non-partisan, and get your damn thinking caps on. Your brains are falling out all over the place here.

[Sofa_King]

How about this for a dose of strangeness. According to http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A53226-2003Oct6.htmltoday’s Washington Post:

Novak Leak Column Has Familiar Sound

By Dana Milbank
Tuesday, October 7, 2003; Page A23

Let’s review: Syndicated columnist Robert D. Novak gets a leak of classified information from foreign-policy hardliners. The column he writes causes a huge embarrassment for the Republican White House and moderates throughout the administration. Capitol Hill erupts with protests about the leak.

Sound familiar? Actually, this occurred in December 1975. Novak, with his late partner Rowland Evans, got the classified leak – that President Gerald R. Ford and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger were ready to make concessions to the Soviet Union to save the SALT II treaty. Donald H. Rumsfeld, then, as now, the secretary of defense, intervened to block Kissinger…

I was too young to fully experience the surrealism of 1970s politics; now I suddenly begin to suspect that we all might be witnessing a virtual reprise of that fell chapter of American history.

[Typo_Negative]

*Originally posted by Evil Captor *
**Elucidator, I am disappointed in you. The leakers endangered the lives of Americans and American allies by exposing their identities to the enemy. What the hell is treason if that’s not treason?

**

Espionage??

[Sofa_King]

Working to bring disco back into vogue–that would be treason.

[elucidator]

As always, sorry to disappoint, EC, but that is a word I’ve heard entirely too often for my liking. To my mind, “treason” is a very heavy, very visceral word. It should be applied only to direct assault on the nations security. Julius Rosenberg committed treason, Jane Fonda did not. Jane was deluded dipshit, Julius was a spy. Benedict Arnold was a traitor, Tokyo Rose was not. He actively assisted the British for personal gain, Toky Rose was a victim of circumstance.

I’ve heard the word flung at me and mine for failure to march in lockstep with the latest jingoistic party line. As a patriot, it is hurtful and offensive in the extreme. I insist on using it only in the most extreme of circumstances, as it is the most extreme of accusations. I make no bones about my contempt for our current crop of “leaders”. They are vainglorious, ideologically driven, and blind to thier failings. That makes them stupid. That makes them wrong. That does not make them traitors.

[El_Cid_Viscoso]

What the hell is treason if that’s not treason?

Hey, I agree with you. After all the unfounded heat I regularly take (traitor, troop hater, backer of an evil dictator) for my views on our current system, I’ve recently dusted off my tiki torch for a compensatory march on Castle Rovenstein. Heck, I’ve even schlepped down to Ace Hardware to buy Mrs. B an ergonomic pitchfork.

elucidator got me thinking about the word, though, and that maybe there’s a greater gambit in this Novak mess: our Torquemada at the DOJ may well use cries of “treason” to compel his favorite strawman columnist to pony up his sources. Besides, Rove is far too smart to get yellowcake on his J. Crew cardigan. It now appears that some junior aides will get the axe, if at all.

[pantom]

You’re letting the bastards get to you, elucidator.
This was not an instance of what the right is always doing, impugning your patriotism because you dare question their unthinking faith in the military machine. This goes beyond that.
They could have simply pointed out, quite rightly, that Wilson is now working for Kerry, and that this throws a doubt on what he says. This would be legit political debate. It would be an ad hominem attack, but that’s not exactly foreign to politics as practiced anywhere that I know about. But this goes well beyond that.
This is supposedly classified as a felony. I’m assuming the felony is beneath treason, as treason is, rightfully, extremely difficult to prove, and far too weighty a charge to throw around for nothing, as you indicate.
That said, let’s look at the facts of this case, bearing in mind that the first ideal of the country you and I inhabit is liberty.(notice that the supposed libertarians take little umbrage in this kind of thing, BTW)

1 - Wilson criticizes the Administration for its use of this bogus uranium story.
2 - Instead of criticizing Wilson, they immediately expose his wife, whom they know to be working in an extremely sensitive national security position.

This is gangsterism. There is only one reason to do it: not to criticize your position, but to make sure that anyone who even so much as thinks about dissenting from the propaganda bullshit being spewed by the worthless fucks now running this country gets the message, unequivocally, that if you fuck with us, we’re going to fuck not only with you, but with your family. Even if it affects the national security. The message is: we will stop at nothing.
Al Capone would have understood this instantly.
It may not technically be treason, but it sure as hell goes against every ideal this country was founded on, on top of endangering the national security. It’s a betrayal both of the pragmatic and material existence of the nation, and of its ideals.
Don’t think the people who did this don’t know it. This is how despotism is established: step by step, until, finally, nothing is left.
To quote from a man who would have, equally instantaneously, known the difference between Clinton’s lies about sex and Bush’s lies about Iraq, I give you Ben Franklin:

In these sentiments, Sir, I agree to this Constitution with all its faults, if they are such; because I think a general Government necessary for us, and there is no form of Government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered, and believe farther that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic Government, being incapable of any other.

The day when the final corruption comes may be inevitable, but if you don’t mind, I’d like to put it off as much as I possibly can. The people who did this will probably never be found, but if we don’t call them what they are, and what they themselves know themselves to be, we will simply hasten that final day by making it easy for them to engage in this kind of despicable intimidation.

[elf6c]

More on Novak’s history as a Neocon mouthpiece:

Evans and Novak, the National Journal wrote in 1979, were among the three “chief recipients” of classified leaks from Perle. “Several sources in Congress and the executive branch who regard Perle as an opponent said that he and his allies make masterful use of the Evans and Novak column,” The Post reported 26 years ago. “One congressional aide who tries to counter Perle’s and Jackson’s influence on arms issues said the Evans and Novak ‘connection’ helps Perle create a ‘murky, threatening atmosphere’ in his dealings with others.”

There is no indication that Perle, though a prominent administration adviser, has any connection to the current leak, that of the identity of a CIA agent. In fact, he does not fit Novak’s description of the recent leakers as “senior administration officials.” Perle, through his assistant, said that he never spoke to Novak about the matter involving former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, and that he had been unaware of the identity of Wilson’s wife, the exposed CIA agent.

Still, the history of Novak’s columns, many of them with juicy bits of presumably classified information, provides clues about his sources. Novak has often relied on foreign policy hardliners – neoconservatives, in the current parlance – for leaks that prove damaging to moderates. Novak himself is sometimes at odds with the neocons, particularly in his criticism of Israel, but has formed a longtime alliance.

And currently, those close ties continue:

In the current administration, Novak has taken particular interest in the Defense Policy Board, the Pentagon advisory board stocked with “neocons” and once chaired by Perle. In addition to the board itself, Perle is a regular fixture in Novak columns, sometimes quoted by name. Others on the 31-member unpaid board – including R. James Woolsey, Newt Gingrich, Kenneth Adelman – also appear in Novak columns.

Many on the board, in turn, have close ties to senior administration officials affiliated with the neocons and making appearances in Novak columns: Rumsfeld; his deputy, Paul D. Wolfowitz; Defense Undersecretary Douglas J. Feith; Undersecretary of State John R. Bolton; State Department adviser David Wurmser; and National Security Council officials Stephen J. Hadley, Robert Joseph and Elliott Abrams.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A53226-2003Oct6.html

Interesting.

The Onion “What do you think” side bar on this issue:

http://www.theonion.com/3939/wdyt.html

[elf6c]

Its sad when The Onion is closer to the trusth then some major media outlets:

Nevertheless, Edmonds said the Bush Administration is no closer to finding the scapegoat than they were at the start of the investigation.

“The administration is in a muddle,” Edmonds said. “They’ve changed tactics several times since the leak surfaced. First, they vehemently denied that anyone from the White House was involved. Then, they made a public show of agreeing to hand over documents and other evidence to the Justice Department. Then, Bush even suggested that Bob Novak was to blame, for using the leaked information in his column. It’s time for Bush to choose a scapegoat and commit to the decision.”

Early in the investigation, the Justice Department ruled out several top Bush advisors, including Karl Rove—news that came as a relief to many citizens.

“I’m glad to hear they ruled out Karl Rove,” said Janet Manning, a nurse from Davenport, IA. “I’d hate to have the scapegoat be someone highly placed. It should be someone of substantial position—otherwise, he won’t deflect enough blame—but on the other hand, if they cast someone too close to Bush as the scapegoat, suspicion of the administration will be raised, rather than displaced. It would do more harm than good.”

Bush has rejected Democrats’ calls for the appointment of a special counsel to find the administration official responsible for the leak, calling it “unnecessary.” The president, however, pledged to find a scapegoat.

http://www.theonion.com/3941/news1.html

Not like Bush has actually done anything like that-- oh right “those 16 words”. Carry on then.