Leak hypocrisy.
By on Apr 23rd, 2006 at 1:13 pm
Leak hypocrisy.
169: Number of days that elapsed between Dana Priest’s article on secret prisons and the firing of the supposed leaker. 1,014 and counting: Number of days that have elapsed since Valerie Plame’s identity was published without anyone having been fired.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Hannity
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
Kristol
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Maddow
McCain
Media
Military
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Public Plan
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Technology
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
$500K Seized; Strange Situation Reported At Nuclear Plant
SHIPPINGPORT, Pa. — Two workers looking for tools set off a security situation at a Beaver County nuclear power plant that drew a response from police and federal investigators, WTAE Channel 4’s Paul Van Osdol reported.
http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/news/8821721/detail.html
April 23rd, 2006 at 1:21 pmApparently leaks are bad unless the president does it. Nixon’s rule of logic in effect here.
April 23rd, 2006 at 1:28 pmAll administrations “leak” – often using it for political reasons alone, but also for diplomatic reasons, etc.; Bush&Co leak with impunity when it comes to their own agenda – they leak purely for political reasons and have jeopardized national security and credibility in doing so.
It is unfortunate that a CIA person is forced to resign for “leaking” to the press — but doesn’t the American public have a right to know that our government is operating illegal prisons in far parts of the world in our name? Surely she knew the risk she was taking for exposing the truth. Bush&Co, however, put us on a need to know only basis; they hinder our ability to gather information and make informed judgments, defying the basics of a free democratic society. Their crimes are so bad, they make me nostalgic for Nixon.
I meant to say she was fired — she did not resign.
April 23rd, 2006 at 1:28 pmGlen Greenwald has a related post called Treason by association. It has a slightly different perspective, but it brings up the point of the hypocrisy involved with noted Republicans, like Orrin Hatch, who have leaked operational intelligence without penalty.
April 23rd, 2006 at 1:42 pm#4; Here’s a clip from Greenwald:
[. . .]
“But if one’s political and professional connections to a leaker cast aspersions on the person’s integrity and patriotism, there are plenty of aspersions to be cast. Larry Franklin, for instance, is a former Department of Defense official who — unlike McCarthy — has actually been convicted of the unauthorized disclosure of classified information, to which he had access as a result of his Pentagon job, and sentenced to 12 years in prison.
Franklin was a top aide to Douglas Feith, the No. 3 official in Bush Defense Department, and had long-standing and very close ties to Paul Wolfowitz, deputy to Don Rumsfeld. He did not merely pass classified information to the American media, but to AIPAC, a group with close ties to a foreign government. Franklin has all kinds of friends in the pro-Bush media who defended him and insisted that he could not possibly be guilty, and had close ties to the highest and most powerful Bush officials.
Recently, close Bush ally, Republican Senator Richard Shelby of Alabama, was found by investigators to have leaked highly sensitive, classified information to Fox News’ Carl Cameron and CNN’s Dana Bash while Shelby served on the Senate Intelligence Committee — an unauthorized and serious leak which, for some odd reason, the Bush Justice Department refused to prosecute. No Bush followers, at least that I know of, objected to the decision to allow Sen. Shelby to leak with impunity.
Equally close Bush ally, Republican Senator Orrin Hatch, leaked some of the most classified information our government had in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks:
A senior senator’s disclosure of highly classified information about the U.S. terrorism investigation has infuriated Bush administration officials and led to a clampdown on how much the White House will share with lawmakers.
Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, told reporters hours after terrorists crashed hijacked jetliners into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon that U.S. intelligence had intercepted a telephone call from a suspect reporting to his handler that the targets in New York City and near Washington had been hit.
“They have an intercept of some information that includes people associated with[Osama] bin Laden who acknowledged a couple of targets were hit,” Hatch told The Associated Press. He made similar comments to ABC News and said the information had come from officials at the CIA and FBI.
Electronic intercepts represent some of the most sensitive intelligence possessed by the government. U.S. officials rarely discuss their content because to do so would reveal to adversaries, including foreign governments, that American intelligence had penetrated their sensitive communications.
Hatch’s disclosure, with the possibility it would tip off terrorists that their communications had been compromised, left senior officials of the administration dumbfounded and angry.
For some weird reason, the Justice Department did not prosecute Hatch’s leak either, and Bush followers did not express any objections to that decision.
And, as I detailed yesterday, there is a slew of leaks of classified information from the Bush White House — not decisions by the President to declassify information and then release it to the public, but anonymous pro-Bush disclosures by executive branch officials of information which is still classified, and which is released selectively and for plainly political ends. Leaking classified information is one of the principal tactics of the Bush White House and — as demonstrated — its closets political allies. Thus, if we are going to embrace a framework where not only the leaker but the leaker’s political comrades and professional associates are considered suspect, there aren’t many people in the Bush-loving world who will be free of suspicion.
April 23rd, 2006 at 1:47 pmI’ll tell you the difference: Cheney has a gun and isn’t afraid to use it.
April 23rd, 2006 at 3:10 pmMs McCarthy needs our help…
…had she not blown the whistle…
…we would’ve never known about Bushiva’s crimes against humanity…
…now it’s OUR TURN…
…email your congresspersons and senators to demand she be protected…
…under the Federal Whistleblowers Act…
…what kind of fu*king country do we live in?
…Bushiva leaks and lies…
…hundreds of thousands are tortured and die…
…and courageous public servants and American heroes are ruined…
…C’mon Progressives, let’s start the fire!
April 23rd, 2006 at 3:17 pmThe fault that the leakers in the White House have not been fired lies directly and wholy at the feet of Congress. Congress should have impeached ths whole rotten bunch three years ago. Queen George the Dumb emulates the infantile behaviour of all uncontrolled and uncontrolable kids. He will do everything he can get away with as he has no morals or guidance except WIIFM (What’s in it for me?). However, carrying the logic on step further, you and I must share the blame because we allowed the crooks to take office. We have six months to take the necessary actions to ensure the next Congress is elected, not bought or stolen. We also need to ensure that every candidate for the house and Senate takes an oath to impeach Bush and Cheney and force the resignation of all their associates and also to criminally pursue all the lobbyists and Corporate theives. No oath to impeach–no vote!
April 23rd, 2006 at 3:18 pmI think this is wonderful news. McCarthy is a partisan operative and should be fired and tried fro treason. Now that the left has criminalized politics, this will happen more. AND of course, the left is full of leakers who wish doom on America so this will hurt liberals more than it could ever hurt conservatives.
Marie, President Bush has the authority to declassify info. John Kerry insured that when he ran on a plank of hate and lost in 2004.
April 23rd, 2006 at 4:41 pmDo you know just how stupid you sound when you say shit like this?
April 23rd, 2006 at 4:44 pm#10 – do you know how stupid you sound when you defend a criminal like McCarthy because she is a Democrat? You’re only concern is politics – always has been. Doesn’t matter if Joe Wilson is a liar or Valerie Plame is on the cover of Vanity Fair – they are the victims to you. Now you have someone like McCarthy clearly leaking secrets for political gain that damage America and you are all for it.
You are treasonous scum.
April 23rd, 2006 at 4:49 pmThe Democrats criminalized politics. K, chalk this guy up as a walking right wing talking point.
April 23rd, 2006 at 5:22 pmDo you know how stupid you sound when you say that I sound stupid for defending somebody that I have not defended.
Asshole.
April 23rd, 2006 at 5:39 pm#12 – when all your people are in jail for doing this, call me.
April 23rd, 2006 at 6:07 pm#14
When you get a brain, come back, but don’t bother until then.
April 23rd, 2006 at 6:14 pmThere you all go again, feeding the asshole turdtrolls that have no idea what they are talking about.
When the hell you going to learn just to pass over their remarks and let them ramble on until their fingers, brains and assholes get tired.
April 23rd, 2006 at 6:24 pmYeah, it’s a shame that Fitzgerald is protecting the leaker while going after Libby. Oh wait, they can’t fire Armitage, he doesn’t work for the State Department anymore. Oh, and that whole thing about him not knowing he was leaking classified information might provide somewhat of a difference to a CIA manager knowingly revealing classified secrets.
Hypocrisy? Yes, only when you are ignorant of the facts. Keep it up boys and girls, you are doing just fine.
April 23rd, 2006 at 7:14 pm“Yeah, it’s a shame that Fitzgerald is protecting the leaker while going after Libby. Stupidone”
You’re the queen of nonsequiturs aren’t you? You seem to have so much ’special’ knowledge on all of the topics you discuss, why aren’t you working on Libby’s defense?
Your ‘arguments’ are too stupid to even rebut – they’re just nonsense like every load of crap you dump on the internet.
I saw that interchange you had with Tim Lambert on Statistics recently – for someone that ‘claims’ to be a student, you’re embarrassingly stupid.
April 23rd, 2006 at 7:26 pmRyan,
Special knowledge? Everyone who has a brain knows that someone other than Libby is the leaker. In fact, Fitzgerald’s court documents have argued that he needs to keep the identity of the leaker a secret to protect them, because they face no criminal charges because they violated no law. Have you been paying attention?
As for Tim Lambert, he misrepresented my argument from the start, and kept lying until the cows came home. I made a mistake, and I rectified it. In the end, Lambert has nothing to say about the biggest point I came with other than ignoring it. Lambert has invested too much of his own dignity in defending the Lancet study that he has compromised any chance of speaking about the topic neutrally. I have shown that the study is whacked, and if I got a hold of data from UNDP, I could show so conclusively.
Next time, come with an argument and less of your usual ad hominem BS. I mean, how many times are you going to play the “OMG you’re just so dumb that I don’t even want to bother responding to what you said” gig? Doesn’t it get tiring after the 1000th time?
April 23rd, 2006 at 8:07 pmOnly in a police state is leaking information about official criminal activity considered treasonous.
I remember when conservatives were against big government. Now they want it big, secret, and vindictive.
All I know is, George Bush has done more damage to this country than Bin Laden has. I’m all for arresting them both.
April 23rd, 2006 at 8:43 pm“Special knowledge? Everyone who has a brain knows that someone other than Libby is the leaker. Stupidone”
That explains why you make such stupid comments – no brain.
You say ‘a leaker’, but if multiple people leak at the same time, they’re ALL leakers who the court documents also show acted in a conspiracy to discredit critics you retarded little boy.
“In fact, Fitzgerald’s court documents have argued that he needs to keep the identity of the leaker a secret to protect them, because they face no criminal charges because they violated no law. Have you been paying attention? Stupidone”
You mean the FIRST leaker. And you seem to forget the reason much of the information is still not disclosed about the entire investigation is because there’s an ONGOING INVESTIGATION you retarded little child… Just because you have some ‘leaked’ information doesn’t mean you have a full grasp of the situation – that would require both facts and intellect, both of which you are consistently deficient of.
“As for Tim Lambert, he misrepresented my argument from the start, and kept lying until the cows came home. I made a mistake, and I rectified it. Stupidone”
Sorry moron, but the ‘transcript’ is still there – you’re just too stupid to realize exactly how STUPID you look.
“In the end, Lambert has nothing to say about the biggest point I came with other than ignoring it. Stupidone”
Bahaha, now THAT’s funny. Actually he TRASHED you, but you’re so RETARDED you can’t even process that basic reality. Bringing up IRRELEVANT and WRONG information based on a complete ignorance of statistical theory just showed what a rank amateur idiot you are. Your ‘objections’ remind me of the crap you wrote last week about global warming. It’s just the rantings of a stupid little boy, who thinks he’s smart, but who’s too STUPID to know what an idiot they are.
“Next time, come with an argument and less of your usual ad hominem BS. Stupidone”
You mean as opposed to the usual straw man non-sequiturs that you post, which always have the general ad hominem complaints about stupid liberals, and calling everyone else ‘kids’ while acting like a childish one yourself. Buy a dictionary and look up ‘hypocrite’ and ‘projection’ – it might help you to deal with the beginnings of some very deep ‘interpersonal’ issues you clearly need to work on little guy.
” I mean, how many times are you going to play the “OMG you’re just so dumb that I don’t even want to bother responding to what you said†gig? Doesn’t it get tiring after the 1000th time? Stupidone”
I assure you it’s not as tiring is a reading the same old REHASHED LIES AND DEBUNKED MYTHS you posted daily as facts… Your BORING ZZZzzzz, and sound like a stupid little high school nerd. Get a girlfriend, drink some beer, and grow up Nerdtron’s retarded cousin.
April 23rd, 2006 at 8:51 pm“In fact, Fitzgerald’s court documents have argued that he needs to keep the identity of the leaker a secret to protect them, because they face no criminal charges because they violated no law. Stupidone”
Hitler violated no laws when he gassed millions of Jews – it was LEGAL to do so. It’s an EXTREME version of this argument you have. Determining what laws were broken is hopefully what Fitzgerald is doing currently. It doesn’t change the fact that what the administration did – try to destroy the career and lives of critics – was WRONG. A MORAL RELATIVIST like yourself being more concerned with LEGALITY than MORALITY is exactly what I expect out of a FASCIST RETARD. Why don’t you ask some of your fellow older Norwegians about how it was dealing with german Reichwingers during that period – I’m sure they’ll tell you it’s much like a conversation with you.
April 23rd, 2006 at 9:10 pmSexion here is the link I left at our last meeting. Regardless of Joe Wilson being a liar, the final conclusion was made by the CIA on June 17, 2003 before Joe Wilson, Nick Kristoff and who ever you think was conspiring against the administration challenged that the Niger connection to Iraq was dead in the water. Impune as you may, the bottom line is what he disputed was true.
April 23rd, 2006 at 9:15 pmhttp://www.factcheck.org/article222.html
#9- Yes, he can ‘declassify’, but there is a protocol for the process of declassifying documents, just because “The Decider” wants to do so, isn’t enough of a reason. No matter what his ‘toadies’ tell him otherwise.
# 11- Perhaps you can tell us just what “political gains” she was hoping to receive, in return for ‘leaking’? I know that I am curious to find out her “real motive” here. Losing her job is hard to call a “Bonus”. Her ‘gain’ will need to include “gainful employment, because no Republican would risk everything, without being certain of the ‘reward’. NO WAY!!! Principles are for ’suckers’, according to “Righties”. They only get in the way.
OT- If John Ashcroft (former AG) hadn’t FINALLY been forced into recusing himself, due to a “Conflict of Interest” with his close ties to a potential subject of investigation, Karl Rove, there would not have even been an investigation into the leak, or they wouldn’t have “found” anything to investigate after all. Karl Rove was his campaign manager for the Senate race that he lost to a man who was killed in a small plane crash, right before the election. The same thing that happened to Paul Wellstone right before the next election.
April 24th, 2006 at 3:48 amRyan,
You say ‘a leaker’, but if multiple people leak at the same time, they’re ALL leakers who the court documents also show acted in a conspiracy to discredit critics you retarded little boy.
They didn’t leak at the same time, and you know this. All fingers point towards Richard Armitage who was at the State Department, and he leaked it completely independently of Libby, who isn’t even being charged with leaking anything. In fact, Fitzgerald claims that Libby is lying for suggesting that he and Russert even talked about it! Armitage “leaked” the info because it was given to him nonchalantly, and he didn’t know that Plame’s job was supposed to be classified. He was pissed off because Wilson was claiming to the press that the State Department received a briefing on his mission, after they had told the CIA not to send him, which led to him blowing off some steam about the whole ridiculous venture. You’d better start understanding this, instead of the drivel you keep getting served around here that doesn’t reflect the facts.
You mean the FIRST leaker. And you seem to forget the reason much of the information is still not disclosed about the entire investigation is because there’s an ONGOING INVESTIGATION you retarded little child… Just because you have some ‘leaked’ information doesn’t mean you have a full grasp of the situation – that would require both facts and intellect, both of which you are consistently deficient of.
Oh no, more ad hominem from Ryan. That’s all you’ve got, kid. Yes, the FIRST leaker, which is the entire point. When something is out, there is no longer any point of calling someone a “leaker”. If I tell someone a secret, then the secret is already out. It doesn’t matter how many other people tell the secret, because I have already told it.
Your consistent use of ad hominem shows that I am breaching the walls of your fragile mind and you cannot stand facing up to the facts, so I must be smeared at all costs. It gets really tiring, Ryan.
Sorry moron, but the ‘transcript’ is still there – you’re just too stupid to realize exactly how STUPID you look.
Transcript? Eh… Lambert misrepresented my argument from the start, and kept doing so. Of course I look foolish when Lambert keeps misrepresenting what I said. It’s called a strawman, and it is the easiest way to make your opponent look foolish. That said, I did make one mistake, where Lambert also made plenty more. What did he do about this? He started censoring every comment where I pointed out his mistakes. So you never get to see all the comments where I take Lambert head on, because he deleted all of them.
Bahaha, now THAT’s funny. Actually he TRASHED you, but you’re so RETARDED you can’t even process that basic reality. Bringing up IRRELEVANT and WRONG information based on a complete ignorance of statistical theory just showed what a rank amateur idiot you are. Your ‘objections’ remind me of the crap you wrote last week about global warming. It’s just the rantings of a stupid little boy, who thinks he’s smart, but who’s too STUPID to know what an idiot they are.
So I guess that’s why most of the commenters there said I had a point in the end, hm? Ryan, let’s face it, you have absolutely no clue about the subject, and you are just taking Lambert’s dishonest misrepresentations at face value because you seem to have something against me. I’d love to discuss the statistical theory with you, because there’s one thing that is fairly obvious: you are completely oblivious to it and have no foot to stand on in saying the things you do here.
You mean as opposed to the usual straw man non-sequiturs that you post, which always have the general ad hominem complaints about stupid liberals, and calling everyone else ‘kids’ while acting like a childish one yourself. Buy a dictionary and look up ‘hypocrite’ and ‘projection’ – it might help you to deal with the beginnings of some very deep ‘interpersonal’ issues you clearly need to work on little guy.
What strawman? Would you like to point out any strawmen I came with? No, you can’t, because I didn’t. I’m acting childish? This coming from a person who never discusses substance, but always uses ad hominem at every chance he gets. Boy, that sure is rich Ryan. You should look up hypocrit and projection yourself, because that’s exactly what you are doing. The only one acting childish here is the one with heavy usage of words such as “stupid” and “retard”.
I assure you it’s not as tiring is a reading the same old REHASHED LIES AND DEBUNKED MYTHS you posted daily as facts… Your BORING ZZZzzzz, and sound like a stupid little high school nerd. Get a girlfriend, drink some beer, and grow up Nerdtron’s retarded cousin.
I’m so boring that you feel compelled to smear me with words such as “stupid”, “retard”, “nerd”, “hypocrit”, and all sorts of other lovely words.
I think it is rather the case that you don’t want my message to be heard, so you smear me without refuting anything I say. As always. You never seek to refute, you only seek to smear. Which is funny, because you claim Bush did the same thing to Wilson.
As for calling me a nerd and all that lovely tripe, you’re the one guzzling Think Progress talking points and smearing people who are interested in having a real debate. I was out Saturday night having a good time. What were you doing? Obsessing about how much you hate George Bush? LOL.
fly-man,
Sexion here is the link I left at our last meeting. Regardless of Joe Wilson being a liar, the final conclusion was made by the CIA on June 17, 2003 before Joe Wilson, Nick Kristoff and who ever you think was conspiring against the administration challenged that the Niger connection to Iraq was dead in the water. Impune as you may, the bottom line is what he disputed was true.
Eh, Wilson leaked to the media in May and June 2003, before the CIA made this memo on June 17. As I already said, the CIA does not have access to the French intelligence that said that Iraq sought uranium from Niger, thus the CIA cannot be sure that the intelligence is solid enough to stand behind it.
And regardless of all that, this was in June 2003. That doesn’t change what was believed at the end of January 2003. The British still stand behind the claim that Iraq was seeking uranium, due to the French intelligence saying that this is so.
None of this gets Wilson off the hook for lying to the press in May and June 2003. He alleged he debunked the forgeries, and that the White House knew they were lying about uranium. None of that turned out to be true, and he lied about it to help the Kerry campaign win the election.
April 24th, 2006 at 9:47 am[...] The problem is that no matter what the truth always manages to squirm out from the Bush Administration’s iron grip of secrecy. Lord knows they’re trying to appear as though they’re shaking up the administration and that Josh Bolten will bring a new era honesty to the Office of the Preznit. Keep in mind that they still haven’t fired Karl Rove or Dick Cheney who both appear to be quite clearly involved in the leaking of the identity of Valerie Plame-Wilson, yet a CIA official caught leaking information to Dana Priest was fired 169 days after the alleged leaking. Some shake up… [...]
April 24th, 2006 at 10:04 amSeixon, you are so wrong on your version of the facts regarding Joe Wilson/Valerie Plame/Cia, you probably should just stay off that topic.
April 24th, 2006 at 8:32 pmMarie, what a compelling argument. Oh wait, you had no argument.
April 25th, 2006 at 1:47 amI enjoy reading through your blog. KarlaX
April 26th, 2006 at 2:08 am