Plame, Wire-tapping and leaks

[radfringe]

been seeing a few editorials and hearing some blather heads up in arms about the Wire-tapping LEAK -- not upset about the wire- tapping but rather upset because it was leaked

one of their blather-points is asking why Dems aren't as upset about the LEAK of NSA wire-tapping as they are about the Plame leak.

afterall - a leak is a leak, right? :sarcasm:

after Plame's leak - bush* was out there vowing to find the Plame leaker. Haven't heard squat from him about "hunting down" the NSA leaker - mostly he's upset about it being reported in the MSM

so what's the difference? The motives for leaking? Plame leak was done to smear/hurt Wilson's credibility. NSA wire-tap leak was done to hurt bush* or was it a case of whistle-blowing?

Plame leak came right after Wilson wrote his op-ed piece. NY Times sat on the wire-tap story for a good year or so before publishing.

enny-whoo - where's the big WHITE HOUSE call to investigate to find the wire-tap leaker?

[ddeclue]

1. It's business as usual...

The Bush mode of operation is distract, delay, deny, confuse and diffuse...

This is an attempt to distract from the real issue and shoot the messenger who brought them the bad news.

It is NOT a crime to report a crime just because the President has decided to also obstruct justice by stamping it as "secret" to hide it from prosecution. Nixon did similar things to obstruct justice in Watergate and confuse the issue.

The heroic whistleblower who told the world that the President was violating the FISA law was actually OBEYING the law. Those who hid it were guilty of conspiracy and obstruction in addition to the underlying crimes.

In the case of Valerie Plame, there was nothing BUT a leak. Neither Valerie Plame nor Joseph Wilson had done anything illegal that needed to be revealed.

And THAT is the difference.

This is just another Republican SPIN tactic and it is rather easy to defeat with the facts.

See my posts on this at www.brainshrub.com:

http://www.brainshrub.com/president-wiretap

Listening in without a warrant isn't just impolite, it's a felony.

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (USC Title 50 Chapter 36 Subchapter 1) specifically prohibits the government from doing what the President has secretly ordered and it is a serious felony with major penalties.

The President has publicly confessed to this felony on national television. He ordered government agencies to engage in spying on thousands of American citizens without a warrant when the Congress made specific provisions in law to cover all circumstances, even emergency situations so that the government could listen in for up to 72 hours before obtaining a warrant, plenty of time to find and convince a judge.

There is no excuse for this action, yet the President has done so anyways.

That the President has colluded with others to do so, also makes this a conspiracy subject to fine and imprisonment up to 5 years per count under USC TITLE 18 PART I CHAPTER 19 § 371.

That he has chosen to hide it from the public, the Congress, law enforcement agencies, and the Courts through secret findings and secret orders may also be a case for obstruction of justice under USC TITLE 18 PART I CHAPTER 73 § 1512 paragraph (b).

The penalties for illegal wiretaps are severe, up to 5 years and $10,000 per count. The President has admitted to reauthorizing this violation of the law 30 separate times and thousands of phone calls have been intercepted.

Did anyone ever see the movie The Firm? I think we've just found the way to shut down the firm of Bendini Lambert and Locke.

The time has come for Prosecutor Fitzgerald to step forward and finally take the gloves off.

It is definitely time for the Congress to convene impeachment hearings.

More information:

FISA Act:

USC Title 50 Chapter 36 Subchapter 1

§ 1809. Criminal sanctions

Release date: 2005-03-17

(a) Prohibited activities A person is guilty of an offense if he intentionally—

(1) engages in electronic surveillance under color of law except as authorized by statute; or

(2) discloses or uses information obtained under color of law by electronic surveillance, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through electronic surveillance not authorized by statute.

(b) Defense

It is a defense to a prosecution under subsection (a) of this section that the defendant was a law enforcement or investigative officer engaged in the course of his official duties and the electronic surveillance was authorized by and conducted pursuant to a search warrant or court order of a court of competent jurisdiction.

(c) Penalties An offense described in this section is punishable by a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than five years, or both.

(d) Federal jurisdiction There is Federal jurisdiction over an offense under this section if the person committing the offense was an officer or employee of the United States at the time the offense was committed.

[Trevelyan]

6. Never forget the real outing was of Brewster Jennings leaving the US

without human intelligence on the real WMDs which was the purpose.

Citizen Spook has a blogsite and some interesting new quesions on why Fitzgerald suddenly dropped mention of motive from his online posts.

Why has FireDogLake shut down the comments?

Craig Murray's site is back up according to post on Blairwatch but Kos front page seems concerned since Murray has not contacted any UK sites since his site went down. UK Torture Memos.

[ddeclue]

2. It's business as usual...

The Bush mode of operation is distract, delay, deny, confuse and diffuse...

This is an attempt to distract from the real issue and shoot the messenger who brought them the bad news.

It is NOT a crime to report a crime just because the President has decided to also obstruct justice by stamping it as "secret" to hide it from prosecution. Nixon did similar things to obstruct justice in Watergate and confuse the issue.

The heroic whistleblower who told the world that the President was violating the FISA law was actually OBEYING the law. Those who hid it were guilty of conspiracy and obstruction in addition to the underlying crimes.

In the case of Valerie Plame, there was nothing BUT a leak. Neither Valerie Plame nor Joseph Wilson had done anything illegal that needed to be revealed.

And THAT is the difference.

This is just another Republican SPIN tactic and it is rather easy to defeat with the facts.

See my posts on this at www.brainshrub.com:

http://www.brainshrub.com/president-wiretap

Listening in without a warrant isn't just impolite, it's a felony.

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (USC Title 50 Chapter 36 Subchapter 1) specifically prohibits the government from doing what the President has secretly ordered and it is a serious felony with major penalties.

The President has publicly confessed to this felony on national television. He ordered government agencies to engage in spying on thousands of American citizens without a warrant when the Congress made specific provisions in law to cover all circumstances, even emergency situations so that the government could listen in for up to 72 hours before obtaining a warrant, plenty of time to find and convince a judge.

There is no excuse for this action, yet the President has done so anyways.

That the President has colluded with others to do so, also makes this a conspiracy subject to fine and imprisonment up to 5 years per count under USC TITLE 18 PART I CHAPTER 19 § 371.

That he has chosen to hide it from the public, the Congress, law enforcement agencies, and the Courts through secret findings and secret orders may also be a case for obstruction of justice under USC TITLE 18 PART I CHAPTER 73 § 1512 paragraph (b).

The penalties for illegal wiretaps are severe, up to 5 years and $10,000 per count. The President has admitted to reauthorizing this violation of the law 30 separate times and thousands of phone calls have been intercepted.

Did anyone ever see the movie The Firm? I think we've just found the way to shut down the firm of Bendini Lambert and Locke.

The time has come for Prosecutor Fitzgerald to step forward and finally take the gloves off.

It is definitely time for the Congress to convene impeachment hearings.

More information:

FISA Act:

USC Title 50 Chapter 36 Subchapter 1

§ 1809. Criminal sanctions

Release date: 2005-03-17

(a) Prohibited activities A person is guilty of an offense if he intentionally—

(1) engages in electronic surveillance under color of law except as authorized by statute; or

(2) discloses or uses information obtained under color of law by electronic surveillance, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through electronic surveillance not authorized by statute.

(b) Defense

It is a defense to a prosecution under subsection (a) of this section that the defendant was a law enforcement or investigative officer engaged in the course of his official duties and the electronic surveillance was authorized by and conducted pursuant to a search warrant or court order of a court of competent jurisdiction.

(c) Penalties An offense described in this section is punishable by a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than five years, or both.

(d) Federal jurisdiction There is Federal jurisdiction over an offense under this section if the person committing the offense was an officer or employee of the United States at the time the offense was committed.

[aquart]

3. No, a leak is not a leak.

In the Plame case, the government conspired to destroy an American citizen's reputation because he exposed its lies. In so doing, they leaked the name of a covert government agent. A crime.

In the NSA case, the crime was the wiretap. The whistleblower, like Wilson, exposed a government crime. An impeachable offense.

It has to do with the public interest. It is in the public interest to expose crime, lies, other deceptions and frauds. It is NOT in the public interest to protect crime or the perpetrators of crimes. At least, that was the way the judges saw it when they threatened to toss Matthew Cooper in jail.

[Hello_Kitty]

4. It's pretty simple to me

In the Plame case, the leak WAS the crime. In the NSA situation, the leaker was calling attention to a crime and there is nothing illegal about that. Quite the opposite, as people are supposedly obligated morally, ethically, and LEGALLY (in most cases) to report crimes. I do question why the NYT sat on the story for a year. They should have to answer for that. As for the White House investigating to find the wiretap leaker, I'm sure they'd like to send that person to Gitmo but other than that, the investigation will probably be as thorough and relentless as....the hunt for Osama...or efforts to determine why Katrina relief was so ineffective....:eyes:

[radfringe]

5. should have tagged on the sarcasm smiley

when I said "a leak is a leak"... sorry

the point I was trying to make is the attempt to re-frame the issue from the act of illegal wire-tapping to 'why aren't DEMs upset that the illegal wire-tapping was leaked'

to me the big difference goes to motive - Plame was leaked as a smear, not to inform or protect Americans.... NSA spying seems to be a case of whistle-blowing to protect American freedoms

Meanwhile, the "clinton did it too" argument has fallen to the wayside. In the larger picture - if wire-tapping without warrants is illegal - it's illegal no matter who did it

[BuyingThyme]

7. They're not really upset, they're just repeating the latest

Echo Machine nonsense.

This is no different than what hero Daniel Ellsberg did.