(guest blog by Taylor Marsh)
Okay, let me get this straight. The Leaker in Chief, George W. Bush, can leak information to Lewis Libby, with no repercussions whatsoever. Deadeye can do the same. But a whistleblower, a member of the CIA’s Inspector General’s office, leaks the existence of illegal black sites to a reporter, because she feels something wrong is being done in the name of the American people, and she gets fired. Not only fired, but pulled out and identified as nothing short of a traitor. In other words, the Nixon rule really does apply. If the president does it it’s okay, but if it’s done by a whistleblower she gets fired, with humiliation and the "traitor" tag waiting for her on her departure. Even people who don’t like Mary McCarthy are saying something smells.
The case against the CIA Intelligence Officer, Mary McCarthy, fired for her alleged role in leaking information about secret prisons to the Washington Post’s Dana Priest smells a little fishy. Let me state at the outset that the officer in question, Mary McCarthy, is an old acquaintance. I hasten to add that I do not consider her a friend. She was my immediate boss in 1988-89 and was instrumental in my decision to leave the CIA and take a job at the State Department’s Office of Counter Terrorism. Mary, in my experience, was a terrible manager. I left the CIA in 1989 despite having received two exceptional performance awards during my last eight months on the job because I could not stand working under her.
That said, I take no delight in the news that she was fired. In fact, there are some things about the case that puzzle me. For starters, Mary never worked on the Operations side of the house. In other words, she never worked a job where she would have had first hand operational knowledge about secret prisons. She worked the analytical side of the CIA and served with the National Intelligence Council. According to press reports, she subsequently worked at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) from 2001 thru 2005. That is a type of academic/policy wonk position and, again, would not put her in a position to know anything first hand about secret prisons.
Sometime within the last year she returned to CIA on a terminal assignment. I’ve heard through the grapevine that she was attending the seminar for officers who are retiring while working with the Inspector General (IG). Now things get interesting. She could find out about secret prisons if Intelligence Officers involved with that program had filed a complaint with the IG or if there was some incident that compelled senior CIA officials to determine an investigation was warranted. In other words, this program did not come to Mary’s attention (if the allegations are true) because she worked on it as an ops officer. Instead, it appears an investigation of the practice had been proposed or was underway. That’s another story reporters probably ought to be tracking down.
As John Dean said on "Countdown" last night, Mary McCarthy has broken the law by disavowing documents she signed to keep classified information secret. No doubt she will pay a price for her actions. But a whistleblower sharing information he or she knows in order to inform the public that something wrong, maybe even illegal or criminal is going on within the U.S. government, certainly mitigates the wrongful act of having leaked information in the first place. That is if you believe the United States is still a democracy and that the president and his people owe us more than they own themselves.
There is nothing more important than protecting national security secrets.
There are few things more important to the American people than the president telling us the truth.
However, when President Bush decided to use national security as a political tool, cherry picking intelligence to go to war, co-opting an entire federal bureaucracy for his own private war plans, as well as ignoring analysts, analysis and even the facts that didn’t support his case for war, we all started down a road that now has no honorable end. But when George W. Bush, Deadeye Dick and Donald Rumsfeld, with the help of the top cop in the land, Alberto Gonzales, decided to sanction torture through law and presidential signing statements, honorable people working in the government were put in untenable moral positions.
Mary McCarthy found out about the black sites, what was going on in them, possibly through complaints from CIA officers, so she decided it was worth the cause to make the information public.
The question is, do you look the other way when the President of the United States and his administration are breaking international and U.S. law, or do you stand up and tell the truth, willing to pay the price for breaking the law? Because make no mistake about it, whether it’s noble or not, Mary McCarthy broke the law in order for the American public and the world to know the truth. If she’s not given whistleblower status the penalty will not be sweet.
Oddly enough, however, the wingnuts think the nabbing of McCarthy might actually be a sting. A few weeks ago, I was on C-SPAN debating Rick Moran (clips available here), so I found it interesting that he offers that Dana Priest’s Pulitzer Prize winning story on the black sites was a set up. He’s also got an excellent wingnut round-up of what the Republicans think the firing of McCarthy means. Malkin is at her wingnuttiest best, as she scoops that McCarthy donated to John Kerry. Aha! She also makes sure to link to a screed coming from the print version of wingnut central. But I ask you, has the Bush administration ever been that organized or effective?
Senator Pat Roberts uses the McCarthy incident to squeal like a stuck pig.
The effort has been widely seen among members of the media, and some legal experts, as the most extensive and overt campaign against leaks in a generation, and has worsened the already-tense relationship between mainstream news organizations and the White House.
Dozens of employees at the CIA, the National Security Agency and other intelligence agencies have been interviewed by agents from the FBI’s Washington field office. Others have been prohibited, in writing, from discussing even unclassified issues related to the domestic surveillance program. Some GOP lawmakers are also considering tougher penalties for leaking.
Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), who chairs the Senate intelligence panel, welcomed the CIA’s actions. In a statement, he said leaks had "hindered our efforts in the war against al Qaeda," although he did not say how.
"I am pleased that the Central Intelligence Agency has identified the source of certain unauthorized disclosures, and I hope that the agency, and the [intelligence] community as a whole, will continue to vigorously investigate other outstanding leak cases," Roberts said.
CIA Officer Is Fired for Media Leaks
The Post Was Among Outlets That Gained Classified Data
Secrecy just got a little deeper and broader under Bush, our ability to know the truth a little tougher. But the campaign against whistleblowers has just begun.
UPDATE: Rick Moran made a comment over at where this piece is cross-posted on my blog. He notified me that he’s walked back from his post yesterday re: a sting. Here’s his morning walk back. … Oh, and one more thing. Rick comments on my blog that his "sting" idea was "pure speculation." With all due respect to him, because he seems like a very nice guy, I find this an excuse for putting forth information that was not worthy of discussion without more evidence, frankly. This is especially true in light of the reporter involved, Dana Priest, who is methodical and has incredible integrity. The free press is the only thing that stands between us and a deep black hole. To offer up such a detailed post that included such fantastical components goes far beyond "pure speculation." It was unfortunate to say the least, but not surprising, given the depths to which most Republicans stoop these days.
Related posts:





Spotlight








Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

fitzzzzzzzzzz.
Fitz!
To Pat Roberts;
Leaks did’nt hinder our fight against Al Qaeda,turning from it to fight a war we did’nt need to did.(Here I struggle against decending into a name calling rant).There are none so blind as those that will not see.Or make a buck off not seeing.
Fitzo de Mayo!
So does McCarthy lose her pension?
Plame retribution was to kill off Valerie Plame Wilson’s career.
I think Mary McCarthy is a hero….putting one’s freedom and basically your whole life on the line to stand up for something important like this. Being a whistelblower is no picnic. It’s people like her that are the firewall between us and dictatorship…I sitll wonder what remains of our democracy
WaPoCritic – I would say it’s very likely she kissed her pension good-bye.
This isn’t swiftboating. This is MaryMagdelinizing. Hitting the mary spot, if you will. I hope more whistle blowers come out of the woodwork now. Be a good time for them to all come out en-masse.
When Congress abdicates its oversight roll, then the only recourse is to depend on the ethics and honor of American Whistleblowers.
After reading Larry Johnson’s post, Mary McCarthy does not sound like someone who is a natural whistleblower. Anyone who has interviewed or heard interviews of whistleblowers and their life after the event is an eye opener. Whistleblowers lose their jobs, are unhirable, many end up in bankruptsy and divorce. Government employees in all areas know what hell their life will become if they “go public”.
I am a strong advocate of Whistleblower protections! It is like monitoring a hive of killer bees.
Until Congress steps up and performs its oversight roll, we have no hope of monitoring what IS occuring under BushCo.
EPU’d:
re: Canadian singer alleged flip-flop:
http://www.thrasherswheat.org/fot/ohio.htm
Made SOMETHING clear, a while back…
My eyebrows always go up when someone fires a whistleblower. I suspect that she may have a lot more left to say.
The whole idea of charging her with a crime is smoke, of course. If they charge her, they’ll have to own up to the secret prisons, which isn’t going to happen.
Speaking of John Dean, did you all see this?:
President George W. Bush’s presidency is a disaster – one that’s still unfolding. In a mid-2004 column, I argued that, at that point, Bush had already demonstrated that he possessed the least attractive and most troubling traits among those that political scientist James Dave Barber has cataloged in his study of Presidents’ personality types.
Now, in early 2006, Bush has continued to sink lower in his public approval ratings, as the result of a series of events that have sapped the public of confidence in its President, and for which he is directly responsible. This Administration goes through scandals like a compulsive eater does candy bars; the wrapper is barely off one before we’ve moved on to another.
Currently, President Bush is busy reshuffling his staff to reinvigorate his presidency. But if Dr. Barber’s work holds true for this president — as it has for others – the hiring and firing of subordinates will not touch the core problems that have plagued Bush’s tenure.
That is because the problems belong to the President – not his staff. And they are problems that go to character, not to strategy.
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20060421.html
FYI-
BRUSSELS, April 20 — The European Union’s antiterrorism chief told a hearing on Thursday that he had not been able to prove that secret C.I.A. prisons existed in Europe.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04…..ition.html
In addition, if McCarthy is a whistleblower, so is Libby. Double standards are a no-no.
Re-#10 If Neil’s seen the light,great!Neo-con nut jobs are the ones I can’t deal whith.(Newt and freinds)
So here we go again in the world of spin. We wind up talking about whether or not Mary McCarthy should be fired instead of talking about whether the US should be holding prisoners in black sites abroad in violation of international treaties, laws, and common standards of decency. Hopefully this foolish firing will bring the actual issue forward again and we can start moving toward a resolution of it. This is one really important reason for the Dems to take control of congress, and we can only hope that they will be up to the task. It is truly imperative, in my mind, for the secret prison, Baghram, and Guantanamo situations to be resolved during the Bush presidency. To hand these messes off to the next administration is unthinkably irresponsible. I am hoping that the Supreme Court will make some statement in the Hamdan v. Rumsfeld case that Bush needs to get this situation worked out. How interested will any future congresses or presidents be in straightening out this crap? Not very, is my guess, which means that we could still be keeping these guys in cages 10 or 20 years from now if we don’t keep the pressure on the administration to solve this problem!
peace,
jim
Mary may need a defense fund.Anyone working on this yet?
The price paid by the whistleblower is incalculable, as mentioned above. You must be very strong within yourself to withstand the tremendous pressures that come to play when you are either outed or go public. I wish Ms. McCarthy the best and hope that she can cope with the firestorm, for herself and for our country’s sake. We need good, strong people who are willing to put themselves on the line.
Jim,
We know these’black sites’ are illeagal and just plain wrong.They represent everything our founding fathers were against.
When Condi does it, and Bush does it, and Rove does it, and Libby does it, and Cheney does it -das just fine!
I hope this gets LOTS of press.
I don’t think you literally mean there is “nothing” more inportant than protecting national security secrets. Nationally, adherence to the Constitution would trump even that.
Hold it. Everyone seems to be assuming Mary McCarthy blew the whistle on the secret prisons but I have not heard that Mrs. McCarthy has verified that. What about “alleged” whistleblower? As someone said, if Senator Roberts and his colleagues were doing their oversight job, government employees would not be jeopardizing themselves by patriotically speaking out against the Administration goons and their illegal activities. Maybe Mr. Tenet will get off his duff and protect the Agency people he has ignobly let down in the past, starting with Mrs. McCarthy.
Its only a matter of time before these tactics are used on us citizens.Yeah I know,its already happening,how long before those of us commenting,blogging and orginizing are given labels and shipped off.Wait a minute,let me grab my tinfoil hat,ah there,all better.
Jim Preston – The black site story of Priest’s has been covered. The story today is the firing of a whistleblower, which is damned important. It has nothing to do with spin. It has to do with the American people’s ability to know what the feds are doing in our name. If we don’t protect the whistleblowers, the next time, in the next administration, we won’t find out about the black sites or whatever else might be going on. They are related, but today’s story is about the firing of a whistleblower by the name of Mary McCarthy.
Excellent, excellent post, Taylor.
God DAMN I hate these fascist bastards.
Ms. McCarthy is an American hero. Where can I send her some love/money?
Frank in 11, I think as you do that the government will not be very forthcoming about the secret prisons. But Taylor’s suggestion of a “sting” operation, could allow more government lies and poor Mary McCarthy could be hung out to dry. She will either need to reveal additional information she may know or may depend on someone else in the know coming to her defense. Where are all the heroes when we need them? Somebody else out there knows she’s telling the truth. Putting your career and pension on the line is a huge risk. Mary took that risk believing, I’m sure, that the truth would then be known.
I remember right after the leak that when asked a direct question about the prisons, Condoleeza Rice gave a non-answer that left the matter wide open. Condi was covering up. There is more to learn here.
But a whistleblower sharing information he or she knows in order to inform the public that something wrong, maybe even illegal or criminal is going on within the U.S. government, certainly mitigates the wrongful act of having leaked information in the first place.
Of course it doesn’t. Whistleblowing does not include leaking to the press. The Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act of 1998 sets out exactly how those in the intelligence community are to proceed when they have conerns with a secret program. They go to their agency IG, and if not satisfied, they can appeal to the Congressional Intelligence Committee.
This woman needs to be locked up for a good long time. I would even make the case that the country is at war and the penalty should be much steeper than that.
I hope they smoke the rest of them out soon. These are people who honestly believe that they know what is best, but they cross a line when they decide they are right to attempt to influence policy by leaking to the press. And yes politics is involved. You can hate this administration, but when it clouds your judgement this badly it is time for a nice long vacation somewhere warm and some umbrella drinks.
Hope she backed up her work computer files to an iPod or other USB-type device.
How many other ‘eyes’ would be privy to IG cases and files? As in, who ELSE has access to the same info, and what are/will they do with it? If she was dealing with a complaint about abuse, who referred it?
I can’t help it, cloak and dagger gets to me.
As others point out, she in a bad place. Technically, these ratbastards (under the so-called ‘Patriot Act’ but prefer to call it the ‘Eric Blair Memorial Act’) coulda just ‘rendered’ her to, I dunno, say Brazil.
Is this credible? According to a hypothesis of the RWNuthouse link above, the CIA, concerned about leaks of classified information, sets up a sting to catch suspected whistleblowers in the very office of the CIA designed to allow “legal” whistleblowers to report illegal behavior. Why do I say suspected “whistleblowers?” Because the false leak has to be something so egregious that the public would immediately see the leak as whistleblowing, as opposed to, e.g., leaking the classified plans for defending against the next terrorist attack.
In this hypothesis, the phony “leak,” which is passed to Dana Priest, is that the US illegally kidnaps foreign nationals, renders them to some other country, holds them incommunicado, indefinitetly, in secret Soviet era prisons or other secret prisons in Europe (without the knowledge or consent of the governments), for the purpose of using torture to extract intelligence about terrorist operations.
Do you believe that the CIA, even under the current despicable leadership, would purposely run the risk of having such a story reported by the Washington Post, and risk all of the damage to US prestige and moral standing that such a story would cause? That they would do that after the Abu Ghraib stories, thus lending credence to worldwide views of the US that it condones torture and kidnapping? And that they would do this against someone in an office whose job it is to allow CIA employees to report illegal or unethical practices?
The “sting” theory seems to be implausible; and it it were true, it should result in the firing of every senior official in the CIA and WH who thought of or know about it.
The addition of guest bloggers has been a fine tweaking of the Firedoglake blog.
But whats with the malapropism “guest blog by xyz”.
A blog post by a guest blooger is not a “guest blog.”
See Wikipedia:
Authoring a blog, maintaining a blog or adding an article to an existing blog is called blogging. Individual articles on a blog are called “blog posts,” “posts” or “entries”. A person who posts these entries is called a blogger.
See also Blogebrity:
BLOGS = SITES. On these websites we call blogs, we make blog posts, blog entries, post stories, log posts, ramble, scribble, or just about anything….
We do not, however, publish blogs on our blogs.
Calling blog posts “blogs” just makes Jane and Redd look stupid. And the ladies who run FDL are anything but stupid.
This is disgusting — and on top of that, some are claiming that whistleblowing re an illegal act by the gov’t is equal to revealing an undercover agent’s identity. If I know that a cop is bad, I go to the head of police. But if he does nothing, then I know the leadership cannot be trusted.
the leadership of the CIA, FBI, WH and congress cannot be trusted. The only option left to unearth illegal (no matter what name you put to the information) activities, is to go public.
This conflating Libby with Mary is smoke to confuse. I am not confused.
Okay, let me get this straight. The Leaker in Chief, George W. Bush, can leak information to Lewis Libby, with no repercussions whatsoever. Deadeye can do the same. But a whistleblower, a member of the CIA’s Inspector General’s office, leaks the existence of illegal black sites to a reporter, because she feels something wrong is being done in the name of the American people, and she gets fired.
it’s good to be the king!
Off topic but I hear John Kerry just tore down down the house in Boston today with speech about Iraq and dissent – http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=2723
It’s the 35th anniversay of his Fulbright testimony.
I see all of these issues as different facets reflecting out of the same rotten core.So if we’re discussing Plame,Iraq,Katrina,Domestic spying,plans for Iran,voting machine fraud,intimidation of wistleblowers,etc,it all goes back to the same rotten core.The man who would be king.
I also see the struggle against terrorism as vital to our Nation,but there will always be those who have no solutions,just capacity for disruption.They must be countard with skill,determination and integrety.Could there possably be a greater tragety than killing the spirit of our Nation to save the apperence of it?
OCSteve,
There’s a new department being formed called the SonderStaffel where your views would be welcome. Maybe you should apply there.
There is a perfectly good defence for people who blow the whistle on illegal actions by the admin. Classifying illegal actions in order to conceal them is in itself illegal.
From Executive Order 12958, signed by Clinton in 1995, via Glenn Greenwald:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/clinton/eo12958.html
Sec. 1.8. Classification Prohibitions and Limitations.
(a) In no case shall information be classified in order to:
(1 conceal violations of law, inefficiency, or administrative error;
(2) prevent embarrassment to a person, organization, or agency;
(3) restrain competition; or
(4) prevent or delay the release of information that does not require protection in the interest of national security.
NSA story is definitely ‘REAL’. The Decider has confirmed and his less than 300 lb non-Samoan lawyer has lied, er, ‘testified-while-not-under-oath’ that it exists, along with oblique allusions to other non-leaked activitiies that also presumably further violate the Fourth Amendment.
Same goes for the WH (and the same lawyer mentioned above, neither of whom seems to think there is any need for a Constitution) and torture.
Sting? Not likely.
So, if she is guilty, she passed on information from internal “whistleblowers” to Dana Priest. Considering the Whitehouse response to the retired generals (why do I think of the Three Tenors) and General Pace’s response that no one said these things internally, I think this is particually telling. There are NO official channels for dissent in this administration.
Worse than Nixon. You bet.
OCSteve;
Nice idea,but Congress is stonewalling the whole issue.Please try again.
Libby gets indicted for perjury and has wingnuts providing millions of dollars for his legal defense. How much money will Liberals provide Mary for her legal defense? That says it all.
And Steve,they have been smoked out.Bush,Cheany,Rove,Libby
So, OCSteve thinks we should just execute Mary.
“This woman needs to be locked up for a good long time. I would even make the case that the country is at war and the penalty should be much steeper than that.”
Wonderful. So much for not being charged with any crime, no trial, nor jury, just go straight to the scaffolds and don’t pass the US Constitution. That’s how it works in some countries, I’m sure.
And is there any concern for the moral dilemma faced by a whistleblower? She should have reported her concerns to her superiors (Porter Goss!)and if that failed, to Senator “never had an investigation I couldn’t shove under the rug” Roberts! And then what? What does a moral person do when the law is no longer upheld by those reponsible for upholding it? What does a citizen do when his/her own government is the lawbreaker?
Amazing how a map can be so deceptive sometimes. I never thought the US was so close to this country:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt00…..ft=89;fm=1
Does anyone want to speculate on why McCarthy was fired rather than prosecuted? Of course I want her to be free, but there’s a part of me that suspects that being fired rather than tried came with a confidentiality agreement that in effect muzzles her from talking any more about the specific information she leaked (black sites) as well as how the CIA operated on Iraq intel.
My second point is that there is little doubt that she is being made into a cautionary example for anyone else who is thinking of blowing the whistle on the admin.
Third point is why she did not go through channels with her complaints, specifically to the Inspector General, or if she did, was she rebuffed?
Thanks for an excellent post Taylor. If Mary McCarthy is guilty a congressional medal of freedom or FDL T-shirt should find its way to a true hero.
“They are rewriting the constitution on an Etch-A-Sketch!”
Robin Williams
Troll
68.206.66.106
Has anyone seen this one?
L.A. Times pulls columnist’s blog over Web fake
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – The Los Angeles Times has suspended the blog of a Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist who posed as an Internet reader to defend his own column and attack his conservative foes.
The Times apparently learned of Michael Hiltzik’s multiple identities from another blogger, Patrick Frey, who was slammed by the columnist under a pseudonym. Frey, author of a blog called Patterico’s Pontifications (www.patterico.com), traced the writer back to Hiltzik’s computer.
It marked the latest salvo in the David vs. Goliath battle between bloggers and the “mainstream media” they accuse of arrogance and bias under the guise of objectivity.
“Hiltzik admitted Thursday that he posted items on the paper’s Web site, and on other Web sites, under names other than his own,” the Times said in a statement.
“That is a violation of The Times ethics guidelines, which requires editors and reporters to identify themselves in dealing with the public.”
Times spokeswoman Amy Moynihan said the paper was still investigating the matter and could take further action.
“We’re just trying to find out what happened and make sure we’re looking at all sides,” Moynihan said. “When that’s completed we’ll make any further decisions if we feel they are warranted.”
Hiltzik, a business page columnist who has sparred with Frey and other conservative bloggers, told Reuters he could not comment. A Times spokesman was not immediately available.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/200…..hdA–
UPDATE: Rick Moran has commented on my blog about the “sting” speculation he raised. He’s now walking it back. I’ve done an update above. Please check it out.
I doubt if she ever comes to trial. Just think of the witnesses the defence could call.
Libby gets indicted for perjury and has wingnuts providing millions of dollars
actually, i doubt very much that wingnuts are bankrolling libby’s defense; he’s plugged into the big money that formerly was the revenue from the u.s. taxpayer. they will protect their investment with those contributions to pay libby’s legal bills.
orangej 43 – you answer your own first question very well.
Third point is why she did not go through channels with her complaints, specifically to the Inspector General, or if she did, was she rebuffed?
A million good examples, but at the moment I think of Harrison Ford in Witness.
IMO..
I paint this overall climate with a broad stroke…..
What we are witnessing here is the bubbling cauldron of a still brewing constitutional crisis….
Every week we see more mini-eruptions
…….the pushback from the generals, the administrations legal attack on those (far too few) journalists that have exposed their crimes, the false debate amongst unitary executive theorists,.. etc….
The real war is not on terror but rather is a war going on right now within our Media, the CIA, DOJ, State, etc…… a war for the heart, soul and future direction of our Founding Fathers dreams.
Following OC Steve’s logic, the next question would be…how long should Condi be locked up?
Doesn’t this woman deserve a legal defense fund too?
If Libby can get one for leaking lies to mislead, well…
I say we take up a Hero Collection and send it to Mary. I’m in for $50 bucks if someone here at FDL can organize it.
Mary, I am humbled by your actions on behalf of the citizenry of the United States of America.
Larry – well put – many others have said that the junta just has too much bullshit going on to control or keep under wraps or ultimately not be bitten by. Me so hopin so.
Troll
68.206.66.106
kristinejoy 46 – holy crap!
Ms. Hamsher, please pick up the white courtesy phone…
Wouldn’t surprise me that BushCo would set up our own officers, or prefer to out anyone, who disagree with them on their visions (halluciations is a better word) for our national security.
They’ve done it a thousand times.
When is someone gonna complain in a way that counts?
Off topic, but probably not by much:
“The composition of the US-Azerbaijan Chamber of Commerce certainly suggests another large mafia network hasn’t neglected Baku. The “Honorary Council of Advisors” includes James Baker, Lloyd Bentson, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Dick Cheney (resigned after the Nov 2000 election), Henry Kissinger, Brent Scowcroft and John Sununu. Richard Perle is a Trustee, and Richard Armitage was on the Board until his State Department appointment. Turkish and Azerbaijani were Sibel Edmonds’ two languages in the FBI’s translation department, where she discovered the intersections of drugs, arms and oil.
So it’s with some interest I read that the US State Department has today announced the recall of Ambassador Reno Harnish, former Chief of Mission, Pristina (capital of the aforementioned hub of Kosovo) and late of the American Enterprise Institute. Why, is of particular interest.
From UPI:
The Azerbaijani media is rife with speculation that Harnish is being recalled because of a burgeoning human smuggling scandal which came to the attention of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
The Moscow newspaper Trud newspaper reported on Thursday that FBI agents began interviews with embassy officials about the smuggling of Azerbaijani prostitutes into the United States and the issuing of visas.
As the investigation proceeded, Zarifa Dzhabieva, a former translator for the American embassy was found knifed to death in her own home. Whoever killed Dzhabieva ransacked her dwelling looking for something, even though none of the victim’s valuables had been touched. Dzhabieva was under investigation for aiding and abetting the issuing of visas and forged documents to girls destined for the U.S. sex trade.”
Ha. Moran says the ’sting’ idea was ‘pure speculation’.
Is ‘pure speculation’ like extra-distilled ‘wild speculation’?
Taylor — thanks for the heads up on Rick Moran’s “walking back.” Interesting phrase. While now conceding that he might have been a wee bit hasty in his speculation, he responds to one of his commenters, who totally disses the “sting” notion and its plausibility.
Why would the CIA risk the public storm created by the supposedly “false” secret prison story? Well, Moran now says, because they were even more worried that the WaPo would be upset for being played by the CIA. What!!!!
To believe this, you’d have to conclude the WaPo and NYT had not yet figured out that they have been played by the Bush Administration wrt to intelligence matters. Hello, Judith.
Taylor writes:
“today’s story is about the firing of a whistleblower by the name of Mary McCarthy.”
Indeed, and you’ve done a great job with it. However, the fact that our country, in our name, is holding detainees indefinitely in secret prisons with no plan to resolve the situation is not a one-day story. It is every day’s story.
peace,
jim
Larry makes a very good point about a constitutional crisis brewing.
The generals’ uprising is a very significant part of that, the senior military signaling they don’t want to play along anymore with these madmen and unleash a new, unprecedented disaster in Iraq. Legitimizing first-use nukes has obviously chilled them to the core.
The Plame investigation is CIA pushback, and even Congress is rising from its corrupt stupor to realize they can’t tie their fates to these criminals.
How does it go? your curse will be to live in interesting times?
somethingsrotten,
“I doubt if she ever comes to trial. Just think of the witnesses the defense could call.”
Agree, I think this is the end of it. Termination for violation of a signed non disclosure agreement, period. Initial reports (which are often wrong) say the matter has been turned over to the DOJ. Subsequent reports by the AP and NYT say it hasn’t.
there needs to be a differant term thenn “whistle blower”, that actually has a negative sense to it
the term needs to sound more meaningfull and usefull.
something like;
“governemt sentinel”
“sentinel against abuse”
we need a contest and we need to start using a differant term
Well, I don’t have too much to add to the ethics debate. It’s getting covered here pretty well. A couple of things:
1. This guy that says it was a sting, but now apparently retracts (personal comment: what a jerk) : can’t find any euro prisons? Study the tail #’s…hehe. The lads from Langley had their aircraft tail #’s all over Europe. I don’t think they were helping out Fedex!
2. rapid response: am I correct, this story broke late yesterday afternoon? Is that right? And already we have comments from Sen. Roberts, and so forth. Hmmmm. I know the repubs are good at responses…but even with the flap over the generals, it took them 2-3 days to roll out Franks & Meyers. Some folks got tipped on this ahead of time. I have NO evidence on this idea….but my nose is twitching again!
Ghostman
There is a big distinction between the leak by Rove and Libby and the leak by McCarthy.
Karl and Irving leaked the secret identity of an American agent lawfully doing her duty for the benefit and safety of all of us.
Mary O. Leaked the existence of illegal black hole prisons, secret renditions and, by implication, a whole host of war crimes.
Perhaps she is student of history. Perhaps she remembers the Nuremberg trials. Perhaps she remembers Justice Jackson’s theory that the previously viable defense of “following orders” did not apply to orders that one cannot avoid knowing are illegal, immoral and a crime against humanity.
Mary O. is reported to have worked in an IG’s office. The federal IG system is in constant tension with the chain of command. In many state and major municipal systems, the IG system is a separate coequal agency. For example, in NYC the Department of Investigations is the parent agency of the IG system. It is a commissioner level agency just like the departments the IG’s monitor. The IG’s are “hosted” by the agencies they investigate
So, the IG for the Sanitation Department is hosted by the Sanitation Commissioner, but reports to and has his evaluations and career path determined by the DOI Commissioner. This protect and insulates him from pressure from the Sanitation Commissioner should an IG investigation reach high up or an IG audit or report be critical of DOS policies or performance. The individual IG does not have to have gonads of steel just to do his job.
In the federal system IGs are at the mercy of the cabinet secretary they report to. Sometimes you see an IG who willing to go toe to toe with their boss (the reports coming out of Homeland Security IG wow me every time. Such testicular fortitude!)
A person in her position, if presented with clear evidence of illegal activity and if she found the investigation to be stymied or the recommended remedy ignored or thwarted, would be in an impossible situation. Obey an order, to wit, to continue to observe secrecy requirements that allow higher ups to abuse their authority to conceal criminality or obey a higher order.
Our Founders held to the position that it was right and lawful for a people to rise up in obedience to natural law when it was in conflict with man made (crown made) law. This same concept informed Justice Jackson’s theories during the Nazi trials. Man made law can be trumped by natural law, by basic concepts of human rights. Tyrants throughout history have tried to misuse the rule of law to justify their actions and to prevent dissension.
sorry, how W of me. I meant Iran.
Scarecrow – Again, Jim, this story is part of the whole, which isn’t dying any time soon.
Scarecrow – Rick really blew this one. There’s just no way around it. “Pure speculation” doesn’t cover it at all. That anyone would go after Dana Priest without more info is unacceptable. Rick’s initial post is FILLED with wingnut wankery. He didn’t walk it back until I was into posting this on FDL. I’m glad he did walk it back, but to then say it was only “pure speculation” at the start doesn’t wash, especially when you offer a wingnut round-up that’s supposed to make the CIA, Dana Priest, Mary McCarthy and a host of other people fodder for some campaign to prove Bush & Co. are actually that organized and competent. It’s laughable. If Republicans like Rick can be so fooled, they’re all Bush bait.
Taylor – I think you are unconsciously buying in on, and therefore selling, the most deceptive point of all.
As John Dean said on “Countdown” last night, Mary McCarthy has broken the law by disavowing documents she signed to keep classified information secret
Says who?
Under our law, illegal government activity is not allowed to be treated as “classified” information.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/bush/eoamend.html
Sec. 1.7. Classification Prohibitions and Limitations. (a) In no case shall information be classified in order to:
(1) conceal violations of law, inefficiency, or administrative error;
(2) prevent embarrassment to a person, organization, or agency;
(3) restrain competition; or
(4) prevent or delay the release of information that does not require protection in the interest of the national security.
Why is it that foreign governments have refused to acknowledge the prisons? Does the word “illegal” come to mind? What are CIA representatives doing at the prisons? Does the word “illegal” come to mind? Is this where “ghost detainees” have ended up? Does the word “illegal” come to mind?
Everything in the Priest story is about illegal government activity. Whether under our law, of the laws of the countries trying to cover up their own involvement, illegal (any illegal activity is not allowed to be classified, whether illegal under our law or or the laws of the countries where we are operating makes no difference, and actually the War Crimes Act – oh, never mind)
In any event, if what she discussed with Priest is the secret prisons, there is no way that she “leaked classified information.” The two alternatives are that she released information about illegal government operations, if what she said is true, or she is a liar/nuts if what she said is NOT true (in which case, it would be fibbing or delusional ranting – neither of which are admirable, but both of which are distinguishable from disseminating classified info).
Any news agency who has not leaped to make this information easily and concretely available has decided that it is only a propaganda wing, IMO. I can’t say whether or not McCarthy told the truth, but I will be absolutist in saying that if what she spoke to Priest about was what was in the secret prison’s story – it was not a leak of classified info.
Rinse, repeat.
G’day, good FDL’ers.
BobbyG here, sitting in Barnes & Noble on 192 in Melbourne, Florida between hospital and nursing home next-of-kin stuff. Got here at midnight.
I been in the desert too long (14 years in Vegas). I don’t do humidity any more. Agh. Sux here.
Me Ma is OK, but looks pitiful that that gastric tube down her nose, and she’s loopy on some kind of meds.
Off to see me Pop shortly. He’ll be glad to again see “his brother” (but will again be puzzled as to why Frank named us both “Bobby” LOL!).
http://www.bgladd.com/family/M…..b2006b.JPG
Coz, thanks a lot for the really helpful comment about this.
OfT
Mary
left two really excellent post length comments on a prior thread about the evidence that Abramoff got the WH to move a DOJ prosecutor, Black, off a Guam case. If you have the time, interest, inclination, I would be interested in any thoughts you have about it.
As Mary points out, DOJ isn’t allowing a Special Prosecutor, they want to handle it, which raises the possibility that this is simply ongoing obstruction by the WH and DOJ.
Coz, linked post is “Those who can’t win fairly….cheat.”
Mary’s comments are at 128 and 130.
Mary,
“As John Dean said on “Countdown†last night, Mary McCarthy has broken the law by disavowing documents she signed to keep classified information secret
Says who?”
John Dean went out of his way to point out that there are two distinct issues here.
1) Terms of employment
2) Other ; )
Mary,
Thank you. I’m also up for sending $50 to the Mary McCarthy Defense Fund.
How do we set one up??
Mary,
You are absofuckinglutley right on the money.
If there is a god, SOMEONE will print that out and say it over and over again on a Sunday morning spinning head show.
Thanks, John!
Mary @ 70
Thanks for a great post that lays out a key issue so succinctly. From your post to the Dem’s talking heads’ ears.
Bobby G @ 71
Glad to hear things aren’t so bad. I love to hear everyone’s RL news and send thoughts your way, but I hate to clog up threads when there are 50 odd comments between someone’s news and my post. I generally don’t add my proverbial 2 cents of cheers or commiseration.
So I hope you manage well in the humidity and with your family crisis and I will continue to keep you and others in my thoughts, even if I don’t tell you.
Coz: I didn’t see his input and maybe he has been away from regular contract law, but under “terms of employment” you CAN NOT HAVE AN ENFORCEABLE CONTRACT TO BREAK THE LAW. I’m not yelling at anyone, just yelling bc I am sleep deprived and grouchy. SO under the “classified” approach, the Exec Order spells out that it cannot be classified. At law in general, you cannot contract with someone to require them to not speak about illegal activity. ABSOLUTELY Black Letter Law. You can’t “legally” contract with them to commit crimes, to cover up crimes, to conspire to commit crimes, to conspire to cover up crimes, to … if it has crimes or illegal in it – it is not enforceable period.
I may be ranting along and not addressing what he actually said, but I see no way in God’s Green Earth to say that any employment terms that require someone to keep silent about illegal activity would ever be enforceable.
Also – the bigger point – it IS illegal, under the Classification standards, for anyone to classify illegal activity. So — if we DO have the secret illegal prisons – who took the stab at classification?
Inquiring minds. Manacles sounds more interesting than handcuffs.
Help… Would someone dole out a link to the “Pure Speculation” story ?
Thanks, Bionic -
Man, a lot bad shit in the news today. And Torture Boy wants to distract us with a stupidass, patently unconstitutional “mandatory FTC porn website labeling” legislative proposal. Just been reading about that on HuffPo. What a complete fucking moron.
Mary,
“Coz: I didn’t see his input and maybe he has been away from regular contract law, but under “terms of employment†you CAN NOT HAVE AN ENFORCEABLE CONTRACT TO BREAK THE LAW.”
Dean framed that aspect of it as strictly an employment issue (breach of contract) without getting in to the content ; )
Mary,
Give up sleeping, cause if this is what sleep deprivaton does for you—
You are in fire today!
There is nothing more important than protecting national security secrets.
I disagree
More on Torture Boy. This is REALLY odious:
“…During his speech, Gonzales also warned that Internet service providers must begin to retain records of their customers’ activities to aid in future criminal prosecutions–a position first reported by CNET News.com–and indicated that legislation might be necessary there as well…”
There you have it. The Panoptic surveillance state cometh.
Patrick Henry, I agree with YOU. There ARE in fact more important things.
emptywheel’s latest
“Condi’s Leaks,”
uses Woodward’s “Plan of Attack” to inform our understanding of Condi’s leak:
“I don’t know whether to believe the allegations of the defendants in the AIPAC case, that Condi leaked sensitive information to them and that the leaks they did receive may have been authorized (though I gotta say, it’s sounding an awful lot like another leak case I can think of)….”
working link to emptywheel’s “Condi’s leaks,”
http://thenexthurrah.typepad.c…..l#comments
new thread: “Oil tops $75 a barrel”
Looseheadprop #67
Well said!
And you offer a most constructive proposal for administrative reform aimed at better protection of the whistleblower!
Mary – We will have to disagree on this one. She did leak classified information, though for good reasons. I appreciate your argument, but protecting national security is very critical, right up until the point the president abuses his authority, the Constitution and breaks the law, as I state in my post. I’m grateful Mary McCarthy did what she did, as I state, but make no mistake about it, she put herself in legal jeopardy. That doesn’t make her wrong, but heroic. But the legal jeopardy is why whistleblower status is so critical.
Nürnberg laws, exactly. I don’t see this as any different from the soldier who shlepped the CD out of Abu Ghraib, or Daniel Ellsberg’s service to the nation in an earlier war.
No government has the right to ask anyone to conceal crimes against humanity for “national security” reasons. Whatever they do to Mary McCarthy is being done to us, and we should act accordingly. One day, with any luck, we’ll have them — the whole miserable lot of them — in the dock to answer for their crimes. Given how far they’ve already gone, I wager we’ll have a lot more in the way of witnesses than just Mary M.
My $50 is on the way as soon as we figure out how to set it up.
I read both Clarke’s and Woodward’s books before I was really involved in blogs. I think I am going to have to reread them in light of recent events and my newly acquired knowledge of various key players both in and out of government.
Condi’s testimony before the 911 commission was what first got me looking for information beyond CNN and CBC. I couldn’t understand why the talking heads made no comment on Condi’s attitude or careful parsing of her response. So many questions that seemed obvious to me were never asked.
Politics never really interested me, though I was relatively well informed (or so I thought)! But this administration is so beyond the pale it beggars the imagination.
I limit my reading of blogs due to time constraints, but from time to time I go back to old non politically oriented haunts online. Politics rarely raised its head in these places pre 2003 beyond “Support our troops” platitudes. Now I see the battle is fully engaged among factions of Bushistas and the majority.
Funny thing is I notice even on these sites, the Right indulges in side tracking ad hominem attacks to refute issues that are presented with links and other support.
Talk about faith based politics!
Anyway. Everyone who posts here, keep up the good work. People know something is wrong and this is just the kind of place they need to find out what it is.
Mary and looseheadprop- thank you!
re #46:
It has nothing to do with blogger’s rights. Everything to do with a private war between Hiltzik, ‘Patterico’, and Hugh Hewitt. Hiltzik was stupid enough to admit (publicly) posting using multiple names at their and his own blogs (his was on business-related subjects).
Hail Mary @ 70 and beyond.
Secrets from a national security stance are poison arrows in the heart and soul of our liberty. Privacy should be for citizens not government.
Larry is of course spot on.
We are in the midst of a deep national crisis. All of the points have not been thoroughly connected, but the pencils are beginning to draw the lines and it is only a matter of time.
The time frame is roughly from now till the November elections. There are more instances where the media and members of the administration know lots and lots of things that will help to pull the Bush Statue off of its pedestal. There is a race going on…just like prior to the 2004 elections. The one where members of the press were complicit with the Bushco folks in keeping the body rolled-up in the rug and not stinking too much–Hello Ms. Judy Shiller-Miller, and friends.
Will Bush/Cheney and Rove and their willing dupes in all facets of the propaganda propulsion machinery be able to keep that body in the parlor from stinking up the whole house party until AFTER the 2006 elections with their concerted campaign of character assassination, smoke screens, false issues like flag burning, gay men kissing and abortion quackery along with the elevated terrors of Muslims and head choopers and the endless threat posed by “Islamo-fascists”..
Or will the steady drip of folks on the inside of the government, the growing awareness and vigilence of the corporate media–Dave Shuster and the Mighty Keith Olbermann and even John Stewart and of course the varied assortments of the folks in the newest watchdog medium, the world wide web assembled into small militias bent on beating back the modern day King George and his redcoats–much like a latter day version of Ethan Allen and the Green Mountain Boys(And Girls–now).
The road out of this mess is scattered with the shattered lives, all victims of slander and attack and deliberate marginalization, of the likes of Joe and Valerie Wilson, Mohammed El Baradei, the entire nation of France and any snack named after them, Hans Blix and the Dixie Chicks, Paul O’Neil, Sibel Edmunds, General Shinseki, Anthony Zinni and 6 other Generals, Howard Dean, Dan Rather, Bill Maher, Jack Murtha, John Kerry, Christie Whitman, James Jeffords, John Conyers and the list goes on. They are as we have been told, liars, cowards, traitors and malcontents one and all, for daring to question The Great Decider and his evangelical Manifest Destiny.
The answer to any critique offered by Bush and Rasputin Rove is the destruction of the enemy by any means necessary.
But the list of enemies has gotten too large, they are the Democrats, the moderate Republicans, gays, Latinos, the press, athiests, agnostics, the military that has the temerity to ask a question, and the many hard working folks inside the beaurocracy that see the nation slipping into the abyss and marching headlong, at a furious pace, in a lemminglike fashion straight off the cliff. There are too many enemies and not enough believers now, so more desperate measures may be in the offing to prevent a loss.
So if Bush/Cheney and Rove can keep those dots from being connected and consolidate their base and hold the line just one more time, that me be the final victory for Rove and of course the final defeat for those who had better hopes and dreams for this once great nation.
Let’s hope that time is on our side.
-GSD
Patrick H 84
I think they meant: “There is nothing more important than protecting where the bodies are buried.”
LHP and Sunny – I’m sorry, I didn’t digest that you had both already partly posted the same ideas. I am so tired and could not sleep last night.
I very much would like to see who steps up to the plate to say that they are the one that classified the illegal prisons information. Or if it is untrue, why they would lie to the public and tell us that McCarthy released classified information instead of calling her a liar or delusional.
Back threads I thought it sounded like her info may have come as a result of the IG position and linked to an article that explained how the five “security” agencies (including CIA and DOD) are allowed to treat their IG differently than other agencies and the Dept head can pre-emptively shut down any investigation.
Coz – contracts is where I won’t sit back and defer to hordes of people. ;-) When I was still with my Richmond firm, this is where I got kidnapped by the litigators for appellate briefing. I even got roped into a contract dispute (which I did try to keep our client, a national chain, from purusing) that was lost, but still managed to collect fees and expenses (cross country flights, expert fees, our firm, LA local counsel etc.) from the “winners”.
I’m not a leading expert in the country and I am rusty in some areas, but I am pretty darn comfortable with contract law in all shapes and sizes and originations (excepting Napoleonic code stuff, and I even have a bit of that down – like enforceability of future gifts).
It’s just not enforceable to require someone to remain silent over illegal activity. In the minerals world where I spend time, everyone would do it if only you COULD do it. Spill? What spill?
Granted, I’m sleep deprived, but that one I could give you IN my sleep.
Taylor, I’m sorry to have to say this, but if it isn’t already obvious from my previous post, I agree with Mary #70 and Patrick Henry #84 and BobbyG #86.
The rule of law is important, but at this point it’s far more important to “declare the causes that impel” us “to the separation.” In fact, it’s not just important, it’s our sacred duty.
Punaise alert:
Condi Leaker.
-GSD
Taylor 91 – I agree that protecting national security is important so I’m not sure where we disagree. What I have seen says that McCarthy was a source for the Priest story. The Priest story is about illegal activity (actually – the fact that they are talking about illegal or wrongful activiity is what makes a “whistleblower” a whistleblower– if they leak legal, “rightful” info – they are not a whistleblower)
When you say, ” right up until the point the president abuses his authority, the Constitution and breaks the law, ” that is what I have said. The secret rendition prisons program, if true, IS illegal. It violates our laws (actual statutes) it violates our treaties and conventions, it violates internation laws, and it violates the laws (treaties and conventions) of the countries that would be hosting the sites.
As a result, by definition and by law, it cannot be classified information. Now, if there are other things she is accused of – those may be issues of classified info. But the secret prisons program could never, again by legal definition, be “classified” bc it is illegal.
??????
William Timberman and others – No problem disagreeing, which has happened before and will no doubt again whenever I post. Speak up and out, I’ve heard dissent before, having been around a very long time, and it’s the sweet song of democracy wherever it is practiced.
Mary – The bottom line is that Mary McCarthy does not have the authority to declassify documents. Bush’s “illegal” prisons is something we agree upon, but there has been no legal opinion, trial and adjudication that found the U.S. government and President Bush guilty in a court of law. Believe me, this is terribly annoying for me to write, but it’s the facts, which makes what McCarthy did illegal. Our defense of her actions could make all the difference to us, our country and what our democracy looks like going forward, including the health of the free press, which depends on leaks that are important to We the People.
Obviously, Ms. Marsh believes that illegal activity is O.K. to be kept secret.
FDL”ers, count me in as one who’s willing to donate to mary’s defense fund. if wingers can support a libby fund its incumbent upon those of us in the progressive community to help those who try to be accountable to u.s. ideals.
GrandmaJ – I’m all for making illegal activity part of a legal action against the Administration, but it’s not been done yet, unfortunately. That’s the problem.
How can you equate Libby with McCarthy. Libby and the WH had a political agenda and selectively leaked classified information to mislead the public.
McCarthy leaked information about crimes being comitted by our government. How can that even be classified? If our government or anyone in it is acting illegally, it is against the public good to protect that information with the veil of classification. How can a the law be used to cover up crimes? Sure there are procedures, but those procedures don’t work when the ones admistering them are involved in the conspiracy to cover up the crime.
This whitehouse and half of Congress needs to be fired. And we should save on their pensions by trying them for treason and putting them in front of firing squads where they belong.
I know I’m way EPU’d on this one, but hey….
The American Revolution was illegal in exactly the same sense as Mary McCarthy’s leak was illegal. That’s why the Declaration of Independence was so concerned with “a decent respect to the opinions of mankind.”
This is a matter of conscience, which is always difficult. May I break any law I feel like? No. What laws may I break? Ah…. Daniel Ellsberg is eloquent on this subject. I don’t agree with people who disrupt abortion clinics as a matter of conscience, but I do agree that what Mary McCarthy did as a matter of conscience is OK.
As I said, difficult, yet in the end we have to do what we have to do. The law allows us pause to consider our actions, that’s all. The people are sovereign, and no law can stand which the majority has decided it cannot, for reasons off conscience, obey. Consensus isn’t always arrived at in the legislature, as witness our own Civil War, which still torments us even now.
Can anyone point me to the transcript of Dana Priest’s WaPo live chat from theis last week? For some reason, I can’t find it.
Here’s one of the problems we have, which is infuriating…
http://www.boston.com/news/wor…..ia_action/
She should have reported her concerns to her superiors (Porter Goss!)and if that failed, to Senator Roberts!
I haven’t heard that she didn’t, have you? What if she had reported her concerns to Porter Goss, and without any result there, then went to Roberts. No movement there either. Everyone is assuming, without evidence that *I’ve* seen, that she went straight to Priest.
I don’t think anyone can make that assumption.
See today’s Drudge Report at http://drudgereport.com/, positively thrilled about McCarthy’s dismissal:
BUSTED AT THE CIA: Senior director for intelligence programs under Clinton [appointed by Sandy Berger], Kerry supporter…
‘Failed polygraph, admitted giving reporter information’…
OFFICER CAUGHT LEAKING TO WASHINGTON POST
Got chime in with Mary here, again.
Shortly after i left Government service i spent a few semesters teaching contract law and related subjects. She is absolutely square on the target with her analysis.
The fact that the existance of national security executive agreements manage to bamboozle a guy like John Dean is a perfect example of how a corrupt government can abuse the rule of law.
Abuse of the rule of law is always confusing b/c it turns all our expectations on their head.
When I was a prosecutor, I investigated and prosecuted cases of public corruption and fraud against the government. Public corruption cases that do not involve paper bags full of small bills or some other REALLY REALLY obvious “quid pro quo” are next to impossible to sell to a jury. We all want to believe that our government officials are doing their level best for us. That is a strong natural, though not a legal, presumption for the prosecution to overcome.
Abuse of secrecy rules is probably THE most extreme exsample of this I can imagine. It can cause so much confusion about which is the greater good.
Our natural inclination is to want and expect that those public servants who have sworn to keep a secret a secret will do so (Hear that Irving?)
But when those at the highest levels of power illegally designate something as a secret to prevent political fallout or to prevent the public from learning of their other crimes, Mary’s contract analysis suddenly cuts through the fog and the confusion.
i don’t really do criminal defense work, got lbitten hard by the prosecution bug, but that contract analysis is the basis of a rockin’ defense strategy for Mary O.
On a related topic, I don’t know very much about setting up defense funds but what little I know inlcudes this:
1) for tax purposes you should set it up as a trust fund.
2)I don’t believe the contributions are tax deductable, the tax issues relate to Mary O . not having the contributions included in her gross income
3) you need a trustee
4) I THINK you need her permission (IIRC beneficiaries of trust can decline them)
5) the trust would need to conform to the laws concerning trusts in the state where is registered
DING DONG! The ’shooter242′ troll is baaack.
Let’s not hurt ourselves laughing at said Troll named shooter242’s double standards outrage, here. Kay?
Pobrecitititit-ooooo.
shooter242 says:
April 22nd, 2006 at 9:58 am
FYI-
BRUSSELS, April 20 — The European Union’s antiterrorism chief told a hearing on Thursday that he had not been able to prove that secret C.I.A. prisons existed in Europe.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04…..ition.html
In addition, if McCarthy is a whistleblower, so is Libby. Double standards are a no-no.
END ‘O TROLL DROPPINGS
I’m certain to get EPU’d, but Craig Murray, former UK Ambassador to Uzbekistan started posting on his website a few months back all about the torture and the extraordinary renditions to black sites there. The Blair government immediatley shut down his website, but it’s since been put back up. However, they are threatening him with all sorts of legal actions. As well, they have “swiftboated” him with allegations regarding his private life in order to destroy his credibility and shut him up. So far, it hasn’t worked out too well. And the Europeans claims last week, that there is no evidence of black sites is contradicted by people like Murray (and now McCarthy).
http://www.craigmurray.co.uk
Wait a minute, I’m just a dumb average guy but don’t we have Due Process and the Rule of Law in this country anymore?
Doesn’t Article 39 of the Magna Carta mean anything anymore?
Don’t the 5th, 6th and 7th Ammendments to the Constitution of the United States of America mean anything anymore?
Shouldn’t she be found guilty by a Jury of Her Peers? Before she’s sent off to the “hoosgow” (sp?)
I agree 1,000,000 per cent with Mary: How can the revelation of an illegal act be illegal? As MLK said in his Letter from the Birmingham Jail, paraphrasing, “Everything the Nazi’s did was legal”
Maybe she is guilty of something; but she should be given the opportunity of our accusatory sytem of law?
In today’s episode of the Madness of King George, George says, “Rool O’Law is mahn to decide. Ah’m the Decider here, an ah decide which Rools O’Law to foller. After all, I’m the Rooler. So, you’d better foller. “Heh, heh, heh…”
Tune in tomorrow as King George says to AG the AG, “As mah favorite western intellectual Quick Draw McGrawah used to say, ‘I’ll do all the thinnin around here, Baba-Looey…’” (No insult intended to the Hispanic people in the audience).
If it all wasn’t so sad, it would actually be kind of funny.
OCSteve #26: You have a real sense of humor. She should have gone to the IG! You think maybe Mary has a multiple personality disorder?
Before we start concluding that Mary broke a contract or a statute, maybe we ought to look at the job description of an IG or the statutes that regulate IG’s.
As a minimum, an IG has an ethical problem when people report illegal activity to the IG and the IG does nothing about it.
Taylor and Mary, I think perhaps you are talking about two related but different issues. The first issue is whether what Ms. McCarthy did was illegal. The second is whether it breached her employment contract. I’m not up enough on national security law to know whether a criminal defendant charged with unauthorized disclosure of classified information may defend on the grounds of improper classification. Heck, I don’t even know whether Bush has secretly amended the Clinton executive order on what constitutes improper classification! As to breach of contract — which is a civil, not criminal, issue — Mary is of course correct when she says that a contract that requires the concealment of a crime would be unenforceable. In fact, it might itself constitute misprision. However, the President and his merry band of attorney-accomplices contend that nothing he does in the exercise of his Commander in Chief powers is criminal; any statute that purports to constrain his authority is unconstitutional. I don’t think they want a court to review that claim, so they won’t give Ms. McCarthy the opportunity to raise it. They won’t sue her.
My apologies for posting this so late in the thread. I have now been well and truly EPU’d and can buy the T shirt in good conscience.
Taylor – we still talking at cross purposes I think.
Everything described in the Priest articles is illegal and you don’t need a “conviction of someone†to have a description of an illegal act. As a matter of fact, that’s what statutes do all the time – they tell us what is legal and illegal; not what some particular person has or has not done. It is against our laws, our conventions, our treaties, and international law, and the laws of every European country I can think of, and the conventions and treaties of most countries, to be on the sending or receiving end of secret prisoners brought in for secret detention and/or secret torture interrogation. That is what the article describes, so talking about that – which is a list of illegal activities – cannot be “classified†(and so it would never have to be declassified).
Proving that someone did or did not commit the illegal acts described is a different step, but what you end up with is that: 1) if someone did commit the illegal acts you (Mary O) described, then those acts could not be “classified†and 2) if no one committed the illegal acts you (Mary O) described, then you (Mary O) are a liar or nuts. In neither case is there any “classified information†disseminated. If you want to leap to the assumption that what she describes is true – then it can’t be classified. If you think it is not true, then she lied or had delusions, but she didn’t leak classified info. You don’t have to wait and see if someone is convicted to be describing illegal activity.
Let’s try an analogy. Let’s say she “leaks†information that President Bush ordered covert action that crashed Paul Wellstone’s plane (something that, like the secret prisons, would be illegal, even for this President). Same analysis. If it is true, it cannot, legally, be “classified†information, bc you may NOT legally classify illegal actions. You just can’t do it and it doesn’t matter if it has a stamp on it or not, it ain’t classified if it’s about illegal activities. Just like if someone slips up and puts a “copy†stamp on an original document – it doesn’t become a copy just bc of the stamp. If it is the original, it is.
Now, if President Bush had never done any such thing and the assertions are not true (and just a shout out to NSA — I’m only using an example, I don’t think anyone took down the plane), then she lied or had a delusion and has consequences for those matters. Those consequences might be severe. They would not, however, include a charge that she leaked classified information. So, without ever getting to the “did it happen†you can absolutely still determine that either way – her statements would not be a leak of classified information. As long as what we are talking about is the secret prisons situation.
Now, if you want to get into other territory where what is described is not illegal, but might, for example, be misleading or “wrongful†(for example, if, when the President “declassifies†one report that alleges there are mobile weapons labs, she were to leak a different report that alleges there are NOT mobile weapons labs, bc she thinks the President is not being fair to the American people in what he is selectively declassifying) then you are in a different boat. The document leaked would, at that point, be legally classified and if she released it, then she would need the “disclosure of wrongful actions†cover of a normal whistleblower protection approach.
OK — watch all these wingnuts — save their words. You will see that when a Democrat is in the White House, they will no longer say the same things. All their “values” will change.
It is like a game for them. I swear! They never got out of 5th grade. They never THINK. They merely scream.
Mary, you are a gem!
Mary McCarthy is a hero. The senate intelligence committee should hold hearings under the whistle blower statutes. I mean how often are “traitors” uncovered??
Lets shine a spot light on her. A hero or a traitor? Let the people of this country decide.
Sadly, we have become that which we are unsuccessfully fighting against. Morphing our nation from a once honored and admired country into a bannana republic,(even sanctioning lllegal immigrants to give it more of a bannanaish flavor), will be a lasting Bush legacy.
Taylor, you’re doing yeoman’s work here this weekend! THANK YOU from the bottom of my heart for your hard work. Brilliant. Bless you, Firedoglake.
President Bush and V.P. Cheney are allowed to declassify anything they want whenever they want, and then “leak” it whenever they want. They get that power by virtue of the fact that Americans elected them. Period.
Mary McCarthy wasn’t elected, didn’t have that power, and specifically signed a promise with the American people that she wouldn’t leak classified information. Period.
If McCarthy were a true whistleblower, she could have gone to Congress – where there are mechanisms built-in to disclose classified information that are entirely legal. If reports are accurate, she knowingly and willfully broke the law.
The American people gave President Bush and Vice President Cheney guardianship of American secrets. They gave McCarthy no such power.
The CIA’s firing of Ms. McCarthy for leaking classified information would seem to confirm that there is indeed a system of “black site” prisons. The contradiction which is raised by the CIA’s actions is that they are denying there is any such prison-system while punishing the whistle-blower for leaking about it! If the information she leaked concerns non-existent torture centers, then her information is based on something that doesn’t exist, if we are to trust Porter Goss & his outfit. Therefore, why would they punish her for leaking?
I’ve got an idea… why don’t some of the big progressive players, (moveon.org comes to mind), start collecting contributions for and offering “rewards” to whistleblowers so that we can have some counter-effect to this intimidation effort. Something generous enough to help defray legal costs and pension losses. We all sit back and contemplate the actions of our enemies, but how do we counteract actively? THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX!
As John Dean said on “Countdown” last night, Mary McCarthy has broken the law by disavowing documents she signed to keep classified information secret.
My recollection is: John Dean said she was guilty of a “breach of contract” because of the employment contract she signed prior to her employment.
While she can be fired for breach of contract, I don’t recall John Dean stating that she particularly violated any statute because there is a possibility she may be protected as a whistleblower.
I may be wrong, but that is my recollection.
If she felt compelled to “leak” out of conscious, she should have quit first and come forward. But, it appears to have been very sneaky on her part. You, can’t have it both ways and retain any kind of honor.
Steve is dead on with this one.
But a whistleblower sharing information he or she knows in order to inform the public that something wrong, maybe even illegal or criminal is going on within the U.S. government, certainly mitigates the wrongful act of having leaked information in the first place.
Of course it doesn’t. Whistleblowing does not include leaking to the press. The Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act of 1998 sets out exactly how those in the intelligence community are to proceed when they have conerns with a secret program. They go to their agency IG, and if not satisfied, they can appeal to the Congressional Intelligence Committee.
This woman needs to be locked up for a good long time. I would even make the case that the country is at war and the penalty should be much steeper than that.
I hope they smoke the rest of them out soon. These are people who honestly believe that they know what is best, but they cross a line when they decide they are right to attempt to influence policy by leaking to the press. And yes politics is involved. You can hate this administration, but when it clouds your judgement this badly it is time for a nice long vacation somewhere warm and some umbrella drinks.