DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> PELICANPOST.BLOGSPOT.COM: Mark Levin: On the Democrats' and WaPo's predictable reactions to CIA's firing of traitor Mary McCarthy....

Monday, April 24, 2006

Mark Levin: On the Democrats' and WaPo's predictable reactions to CIA's firing of traitor Mary McCarthy....

*****Five Star, must read critique of the Democrats' predictable reactions and synchronized responses to CIA's firing of "veteran CIA high-level official"---Democrat Mary McCarthy---is provided by Mark Levin at levin.nationalreview. A few excerpts follow, but you will want to read it all. Just click on his name.

Levin begins with an example of how the Dems are blowing off the seriousness of McCarthy's deliberate and traitorous actions. She had one of the highest levels of security clearance at the CIA and had access to extremely sensitive and highly-classified secret information. She made conscious choices to break federal law and leak some of that information on at least several occasions---totally disregarding the enormous damage and endangerment such leaks could cause. Politics comes first, doncha'know....

Levin had this to say about U.S. Representative Jane Harmon's (D-CA) remarks---as she trotted out the Democrat meme about Bush's de-classification of information about the "Valerie Plame" faux-issue and falsely-characterized "leak"to justify her reasoning that "it was all Bush's fault:"

"These cold, calculated comments, which are dismissive of an egregious act of betrayal committed against our country, are a new low even for these 1960s retreads. It also makes you wonder if McCarthy has been a source of information not only to the media, but to members of Congress....

About U.S. Senator John Kerry, D-Mass., Vietnam War anti-hero's remarks, Levin says:

"Not that the truth matters to propagandists, but Plame was not a “CIA agent” and a federal prosecutor has not charged anyone at the White House with leaking her name. Moreover, revealing her name would not have been a crime because, as is now clear, Plame was not undercover. But Kerry continues to repeat this lie because he and his ilk seek to divert attention from the very serious national-security breach committed by his contributor, Mary McCarthy.

Kerry also asserts that McCarthy was telling the truth when she leaked national-security information and that, somehow, she deserves some kind of special dispensation as a result...."

About The Washington Post's publishing a self-protective spin about the firing of CIA traitor Mary McCarthy---since it was their own journalist Dana Priest who was the recipient of the illegally-leaked information and the WaPo printed her column with the illegally-leaked information in their newspaper---Levin allows the following:

"There's something unseemly about a newspaper reporting about a story of which it is a significant part. The Washington Post not only does this here but also spins the news of its source's firing as an unprecedented administrative act. Besides, it reports, questions remain — including within the CIA — about these once secret prisons (if, in fact, they do exist). Ah, yes, the ends justifies the means argument.

Since the Post is willing to do so much talking about its source and the information she divulged, then presumably the paper won't mind its reporter Dana Priest talking to a grand jury...."

Levin concludes with this recommendation: "Free Lewis Libby. Indict Mary McCarthy."

I'm good with that. But I would include the officials at The Washington Post who received the top-secret classified illegally-leaked information, in the form of a column by one of their journalists who illegally obtained the information, and made a conscious choice to print it.

All journalists who received illegally leaked CIA classified information from Mary McCarthy---and all newspaper officials who printed it---should be hauled before a federal grand jury where, in cases of national security breaches, they would be unable to hide behind the Fifth Amendment to protect themselves or their source(s). Indictments would follow, especially since McCarthy already admitted to more than one such leak to the press. Ditto for any Congress or Commission members, if any, who received information from McCarthy---something that now screams out for investigation.

Should be a slam-dunk. No "ham-sandwich indictment" needed, thank-you-very-much!

Related articles at:
msnbc article refers to Mary McCarthy's lawyer's denial that McCarthy leaked classified information---and includes anonymous officials having said "the CIA would be filing a “crime report” with the Justice Department regarding possible leaks of classified information."

news.yahoo article includes remarks by FBI Director Robert Mueller, who said "you have instances of people taking matters into their own hands...." and cited "the need for the FBI to continue intense efforts to uncover such activity.... Justice Department officials would not comment publicly on the CIA firing or say if the matter had been referred to prosecutors for possible criminal charges."

washingtonpost article, "Democrats Suggest Double Standard on Leaks," chronicles Democrats' remarks that scream out look-at-Republicans, don't look-at-Democrats as a they-did-it-too-so-it's-OK defense for CIA analyst Mary McCarthy's having leaked CIA top-secret classified information to journalists, thereby committing serious breaches of national security.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home