PLS DELETE- DUPE

[mod mom]

TUESDAY, 20 FEBRUARY 2007
Was She Covert?
by
Larry C Johnson

Sorry to again beat what some of you may believe is a dead horse, but a reporter from a major news organization told me today that they are still arguing in his/her newsroom about whether Valerie Plame was covert. The journalist who told me this is a talented, smart person but is still confused about the terms "covert", "cover", and "non-official cover". So here's my gift to confused journalists.

Scooter Libby is not on trial for violating the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. He faces a jury because he lied about his role in giving out Valerie's name and obstructed the investigation into the leak. Can you leak the name of an overt employee? No.

The relevant section of the law relevant to the Libby investigation states:

(b) Disclosure of information by persons who learn identity of covert agents as result of having access to classified information

Whoever, as a result of having authorized access to classified information, learns the identify of a covert agent and 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 under title 18 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
So what is a "covert agent"? Here's what the Intelligence Identities Protection Act states:

(4) The term “covert agent” means— (A) a present or retired officer or employee of an intelligence agency or a present or retired member of the Armed Forces assigned to duty with an intelligence agency—
(i) whose identity as such an officer, employee, or member is classified information, and
(ii) who is serving outside the United States or has within the last five years served outside the United States; or



-snip

http://noquarter.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/02/was_she_covert.html

[BOSSHOG]

1. There is no doubt she was undercover

That's a fact. But the greatest proof of her covertness is the insistance by every lunatic, constitution hating conservative motherfucker with access to a microphone insisting she was not. The limbaugh's and hannity's of the world, cowardly chickenhawks to the bone care not about the truth or decency, just pushing forth a political position. Plame's husband told the truth about the liar george bush and that discretion could not go unpunished.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

2. I think it was last week or the week before last, I heard Tucker Carlson mouthing off that Plame

wasn't covert and I couldn't believe his stupidity. Last night, David Schuster was on with Tucker and set him straight.

The big problem is, that with no one being prosecuted for outing her, people are questioning her status. This has not been addressed in MSM.

I believe that Shrub and Cheney declassified her status before the outing.

[mod mom]

3. Yes they did declassify her but they FAILED to follow protocol for informing

effected parties that they were planning to declassify.

This Fax Bombshell that Rove and the WH knew about Novak's article 3 days before it was published PROVES INTENT. Intent is the big part of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. If Bush or CHeney declassified her name they should have notified Plame. But they did not, even though they knew.

Hohlt confirmed to NEWSWEEK that he faxed the forthcoming column to their mutual friend Karl Rove (one of Novak's sources for the Plame leak), thereby giving the White House a heads up on the bombshell to come.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17202408/site/newsweek /



This is a direct violation of the IIPA which specifically mentions "intentionally discloses":

PROTECTION OF IDENTITIES OF CERTAIN UNITED STATES UNDERCOVER INTELLIGENCE OFFICERS, AGENTS, INFORMANTS, AND SOURCES
SEC. 601. <50 U.S.C. 421> (a) 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 under title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

(b) Whoever, as a result of having authorized access to classified information, learns the identity of a covert agent and 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 under title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

(c) Whoever, in the course of a pattern of activities intended to identify and expose covert agents and with reason to believe that such activities would impair or impede the foreign intelligence activities of the United States, discloses any information that identifies an individual as a covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such individual and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such individual’s classified intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

(d) A term of imprisonment imposed under this section shall be consecutive to any other sentence of imprisonment.


DEFENSES AND EXCEPTIONS
SEC. 602. <50 U.S.C. 422> (a) It is a defense to a prosecution under section 601 that before the commission of the offense with which the defendant is charged, the United States had publicly acknowledged or revealed the intelligence relationship to the United States of the individual the disclosure of whose intelligence relationship to the United States is the basis for the prosecution.

(b)(1) Subject to paragraph (2), no person other than a person committing an offense under section 601 shall be subject to prosecution under such section by virtue of section 2 or 4 of title 18, United States Code, or shall be subject to prosecution for conspiracy to commit an offense under such section.

(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply (A) in the case of a person who acted in the course of a pattern of activities intended to identify and expose covert agents and with reason to believe that such activities would impair or impede the foreign intelligence activities of the United States, or (B) in the case of a person who has authorized access to classified information.

(c) It shall not be an offense under section 601 to transmit information described in such section directly to either congressional intelligence committee.

(d) It shall not be an offense under section 601 for an individual to disclose information that solely identifies himself as a covert agent.


In short, if Bush and/or Cheney decided to declassify a name or report, they would have to notify the CIA first as well as NOTIFY THE AGENT BEING DECLASSIFIED SO THEY COULD PROTECT THEMSELVES.

[yardwork]

4. The hypocrisy is disgusting

These people - these criminals who took over the United States of America - mouth platitudes about "patriotism" and "family values," while revealing the identity of an undercover CIA agent who was working to reduce terrorism involving weapons of mass destruction. Revealing her identity destroyed her entire operation, resulting in the likely deaths of dozens of other undercover operatives in Europe and elsewhere. This alone will make every present and future undercover operation far more difficult to set up and maintain.

How can they live with themselves for what they've done? They are monsters. All of them.

[mod mom]

5. OOPS...duplicate. Mods pls delete (I did a search)

[dogday]

6. Who asked for this investigation in the first place?

The CIA did... They believed a crime was committed... Isn't that enough?