Reply With Quote
If what he said was true, I am now.
Then nothing is going to happen.What if it's a 100% fabrication?
No . Deep Throat was unnamed as well.UNNAMMED SOURCE!
Are you in personal knowledge of what the leaker knows?
What if it's a 100% fabrication?
UNNAMMED SOURCE!
If what he said was true, I am now.
Then nothing is going to happen.What if it's a 100% fabrication?
No . Deep Throat was unnamed as well.UNNAMMED SOURCE!
I'm not sure it was her phone that was being tapped.
I am sure whoever was in a position to leak this information was better qualified than you to make that determination.I agree, but you still don't report leaks, without really knowing the facts for certain. Now I would say this is unlikely, but what if she was working on the inside to find others. We now have a blown investigation.
I thought that was WC's line.
He was always apologizing for the government until a few months ago. , he still does sometimes. I don't think he's quite shaken the habit, despite his insane antipathy for Obama.
I just try not to jump to conclusions.
Like I said, I can't divine the leakers' motivations. If the blackmail story is true, Harman and her contacts already knew about the wiretaps long ago.
I think all the article is pointing at, is that there should be a serious investigation in the matter. Unnamed sources or not. The NSA wiretaps were originally reported by the New York Times using unnamed sources, and they ended up being confirmed by the government. So, let's launch an investigation. If this is hubris, then nothing will be found.
Update on this story...
U.S. to Drop Spy Case Against Pro-Israel Lobbyists
By NEIL A. LEWIS
WASHINGTON – The Obama Justice Department moved Friday to drop all charges against two former pro-Israel lobbyists who had been charged under the Espionage Act with improperly disseminating sensitive information.
The move by the government came in a motion filed with the federal court in Alexandria, Va. which was to be the site of the trial that was scheduled to begin June 2.
The prosecution’s case against Steven J. Rosen and Keith Weissman suffered several setbacks in rulings from the trial judge. At the same time, the case was fraught with deep political dimensions, as it raised delicate issue of behind-the-scenes lobbying over Middle East policy and the role played by American Jewish supporters of Israel.
Mr. Rosen and Mr. Weissman, who were lobbyists with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, a leading pro-Israel lobby, were charged with violating the World War I-era Espionage Act. The indictment said they violated the law by disseminating to journalists, fellow Aipac employees and Israeli diplomats information they had learned in conversations with senior Bush administration officials.
Judge T.S. Ellis 3d, who was to preside over the trial rejected several government efforts to conceal classified information if the case went to trial. Moreover, he ruled that the government could only prevail if it met a high standard; he said prosecutors would have to demonstrate that Mr. Rosen and Mr. Weissman knew that their distribution of the information would harm U.S. national security.
Over government objections, Judge Ellis said that the defense could call as witnesses several senior Bush administration foreign policy officials to demonstrate that what occurred was part of the ongoing process of information trading and did not involve anything nefarious. The defense lawyers were to call as witnesses Condoleezza Rice, the former secretary of state, Stephen J. Hadley, the former national security advisers and several others. Government policymakers indicated they were clearly uncomfortable with senior officials testifying in open court over policy deliberations.
The government’s motion to dismiss filed before Judge Ellis cited some of these reasons. The motion, filed by the acting prosecutor in Alexandria, Va. and not by any senior Obama Justice Department official, said that before proceeding with the case the government was obliged to consider “the likelihood that classified information will be revealed at trial, any damage to the national security that might result from a disclosure of classified information and the likelihood the government would prevail at trial.”
Noting that the prosecutors disagreed with some of Judge Ellis’s ruling, the motion said that, “the landscape of this case has changed significantly since it was first brought.”
The motion said that, “We have re-evaluated the case based on the present context and cir stances and determined that it is in the public interest to dismiss the pending superseding indictment.”
The investigation of Mr. Rosen and Mr. Weissman also surfaced recently in news reports that Representative Jane Harman, a California Democrat long involved in intelligence matters, was overheard on a government wiretap discussing the case. Ms. Harman was overheard agreeing with an Israeli intelligence operative to try and intercede with Bush administration officials to obtain leniency for Mr. Rosen and Mr. Weissman in exchange for help in persuading Democratic leaders to name her the chairman of the House intelligence Committee.
Ms. Harman has denied interceding for the Mr. Rosen and Mr. Weissman and objected to her being wiretapped.
LINK
Boy, that's a surprise.
For anyone that's interested, the daily show had an hilarious segment about this a few days ago.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/in...nt-not-at-work
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
