Reply #47: That is a distinction [View All]

[yodermon]

That would be brought up at a TRIAL.
Here is what the law says:

"Whoever, having or having had authorized access to classified information that identifies a covert agent, intentionally discloses any information identifying such covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent's intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined not more than $50,000 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both."
http://thenation.com/capitalgames/index.mhtml?bid=3&pid=1586

Those who spout: "IF her name was released to disclose that she had some involvment in the selection of her husband to investigate the Iraqi-Niger suposed link then it wouldn't be a criminal act." are completely, 100%, totally WRONG.

The simple reponse to such a bald-faced assertion is, of course WHY wouldn't it be a criminal act? Where in the wording of the law is there any provision for INTENT?

Really, it'a a pathetic attempt at deflection.