Did they break the law? Why not — laws are for the little people:
DOJ regulations make it clear that the Privacy Act’s strictures apply to exactly the class of OPR records that were leaked to, and used, by the Post. (I understand that there have been some minor modifications to the regs, but none that would change the analysis here). Thus, the leaking of such documents under circumstances that violate DOJ/OPR rules would appear to be a criminal offense.
The “fairness” the Washington Post calls for is, I assume, out of the question on this issue with this administration. But is it too much to ask that the Obama-Holder Justice Department comply with the law?
It seems to me that DOJ should consider the appointment of a Special Counsel to look into this matter. Surely this is what the Democrats, and the Washington Post, would be calling for if leaks like these had occurred under a Republican adminstration.
Don’t hold your breath.
It’s not like leaking the Identity of a CIA undercover agent.
Defintely, not at all.
When did that happen? Think very carefully before answering.
Actually, it is not at all, since no law was broken there (she wasn’t covered under it). And it was done accidentally by Richard Armitage, at the State Department. Thanks for playing, though, Mr. Moron.
Funny, that accident was a violation of the 1947 national security act.
It’s a 15 year sentence to accidentally release classified information.
Her identity was not classified information, you moron.
Why do you continue this pathetic attempt to divert attention from the subject of the post?
Oh, right.
“Her identity was not classified information,”
Her job was.
As I recall, she or her husband were the ones who divulged what her job was. All anybody else ever said was she worked for the CIA.
She could have been in charge of stocking the vending machines.
“All anybody else ever said was she worked for the CIA.”
That was a classified matter, and, sufficient enough of a release, that
the Director of the CIA Asked the DoJ to investigate how that was leaked.
That Armitage, Libby and Rove were floating that fact around to the press
was sufficiently serious that Patrick Fitzgerald spent 18 months investigating it.
…was sufficiently serious that Patrick Fitzgerald spent 18 months investigating it.
And was sufficiently unserious that he brought no charges except a perjury case against Libby. So Fitzgerald disagreed with the moron that laws were broken in the “outing” of Valerie Plame.
And he continues his pathetic attempt to distract from the point of the post.
http://www.justice.gov/usao/iln/osc/documents/libby_pr_28102005.pdf
“When citizens testify before grand juries they are required to tell the truth,” Mr. Fitzgerald said. “Without the truth, our criminal justice system cannot serve our nation or its citizens. The requirement to tell the truth applies equally to all citizens, including persons who hold high positions in government. In an investigation concerning the compromise of a CIA officer’s identity, it is especially important that grand jurors learn what really happened.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/28/AR2005102801340.html
“And what we have when someone charges obstruction of justice, the umpire gets sand thrown in his eyes. He’s trying to figure what happened and somebody blocked their view.”
Libby’s lies blocked any further investigation into a national security case.
Libby’s lies blocked nothing, you moron. Fitzgerald fully investigated it, and even continued the investigation after he determined that what Libby said was irrelevant, since it was Armitage who accidentally spilled the beans.
“Libby’s lies blocked nothing,”
Well, at least you finally admit Libby was lying to the FBI and the Grand Jury.
Sort of like Bill Clinton’s lies were serious matters, to you, so shouldn’t
Libbys lies be serious matters?
And Libby’s lies were important enough Fitz Indicted him and was
able to convict him in front of a jury and no appeals court
overturned that.
Libby was convicted of Perjury and Obstruction.
jack lee, you seem upset about the Valerie Plame incident. OK, we get that.
Are you at all upset about the topic of Rand’s post, the on-the-face-of-it illegal disclosure of information from the OPR records? If you approve of Fitzgerald investigating the Plame disclosure when it wasn’t clear whether a crime had been committed, are you willing to agree that the circumstances of this leak also call for an official investigation?
Well, at least you finally admit Libby was lying to the FBI and the Grand Jury.
I’ve never denied that, you moron.
Sort of like Bill Clinton’s lies were serious matters, to you, so shouldn’t Libbys lies be serious matters?
Bill Clinton’s lies (and witness intimidation, and bribery) were to prevent a woman who he had sexually harassed from getting a fair trial. Libby’s lies were pointless, since Fitzgerald already knew that Armitage had told Novak that serial liar Joe Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA.
And Libby was convicted, so what are you whining about, and why do you continue to try to distract us from the subject at hand, of current DoJ criminal behavior?
Are you at all upset about the topic of Rand’s post, the on-the-face-of-it illegal disclosure of information from the OPR records?
He’s obviously upset that I pointed it out, to the point that he’s hijacked the comments section to attempt to distract us from it. He’s very close to joining a very exclusive club with very few members — people I’ve banned.
sounds like the final conclusion was leaked. If the report is final
but stalled, may not be a violation.