Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

David Corn (The Nation): Why AIPAC Indictment Is Bad News for Rove

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-08-05 12:58 PM
Original message
David Corn (The Nation): Why AIPAC Indictment Is Bad News for Rove


From The Nation
Dated Monday August 8


Why AIPAC Indictment Is Bad News for Rove
By David Corn

Last week, the Justice Department issued a new indictment of Lawrence Franklin, the Pentagon official accused of passing secrets to officials of AIPAC, the pro-Israel lobbying outfit. The indictment is bad news for the Bush White House and Karl Rove.

That's not only because the Franklin case is embarrassing for the administration, the Pentagon, and their neocon allies. (Franklin worked with Douglas Feith, who until recently was a senior Pentagon official close to the neocons.) The Franklin indictment is a sign that Rove and any other White House aide involved in the Plame/CIA leak might be vulnerable to prosecution under the Espionage Act.

Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald--who is not involved in the Franklin prosecution--has not had to state publicly what sort of case he is trying to build in the Plame/CIA leak matter. The most obvious one would be based on the charge that the leaker violated the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. But that law was narrowly drawn, and to win a conviction Fitzgerald would have to prove that Rove or any other leaker knew that Valerie Wilson was working under cover at the CIA. There are, however, other laws under which Fitzgerald might charge the CIA/Plame leakers. The Franklin indictment points the way. (And criminal law aside, by sharing classified information with at least two reporters--Valerie Wilson's employment at the CIA was classified--Rove committed an offense that violated various rules and would get most government workers seriously punished or dismissed.)

Read more.

The GOP noise machine has its talking points and its partisans will no doubt be repeating them.

The talking points are all red herrings. The investigation is about who blew a CIA operative's cover.

Neither in his piece in The New York Times nor anywhere else did Wilson blow his wife's cover. Robert Novak did that. The question is: where did Novak get his information? That is what Mr. Fitzgerald is investigating. That is all that is important.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
54anickel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-09-05 05:16 AM
Response to Original message
1. Why AIPAC Indictment Is Bad News for Rove
http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20050808/cm_thenation/311020

Last week, the Justice Department issued a new indictment of Lawrence Franklin, the Pentagon official accused of passing secrets to officials of AIPAC, the pro- Israel lobbying outfit. The indictment is bad news for the Bush White House and Karl Rove.

That's not only because the Franklin case is embarrassing for the administration, the Pentagon, and their neocon allies. (Franklin worked with Douglas Feith, who until recently was a senior Pentagon official close to the neocons.) The Franklin indictment is a sign that Rove and any other White House aide involved in the Plame/ CIA leak might be vulnerable to prosecution under the Espionage Act.

Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald--who is not involved in the Franklin prosecution--has not had to state publicly what sort of case he is trying to build in the Plame/CIA leak matter. The most obvious one would be based on the charge that the leaker violated the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. But that law was narrowly drawn, and to win a conviction Fitzgerald would have to prove that Rove or any other leaker knew that Valerie Wilson was working under cover at the CIA. There are, however, other laws under which Fitzgerald might charge the CIA/Plame leakers. The Franklin indictment points the way. (And criminal law aside, by sharing classified information with at least two reporters--Valerie Wilson's employment at the CIA was classified--Rove committed an offense that violated various rules and would get most government workers seriously punished or dismissed.)

more...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geek tragedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-09-05 05:16 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Corn misfires on one point--kind of.
"Willfully" within the context of a criminal statute like the Espionage Act means that the person did so knowing that it was either wrong or against the law. It means more than "intentionally."

However, form SF-312 rides to the rescue again. Everyone signing it acknowledges that leaks of classified information may violate . . . The Espionage Act!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-09-05 05:16 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. maybe, and Corn admits he's not a lawyer....but as he describes it in this
article...it does seem there's alot of legalities that could apply...and that if one can find "agressive lawyers" that cases can be made that the PlameGate and Israeli spying are really breaches of National Security no matter how "finely" one parses words? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skip fox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-09-05 05:16 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Corn's "willfully" might not be relevant
since Fitzgerald is not obligated to prosecute under a single law. There are, in fact, other laws against using classified data for personal purposes.

I think that Rove may receive at least 2 indictments and others will receive at least one apiece. The numbers of leakers (original sources) and officials needed for confirmation of the story MILITATES planning. We know that there were 6 reported contacts or original sources (John Dean says 6; we know of three: Rove, Libby, and Miller's source who will not specifically release her from her confidentiality agreement) and multiple (3-4) confirming sources, it becomes apparent what occurred. One administrative official discovered the Plame-Wilson-Niger relationship, took it to the White House Iraq Group, turned it over to Rove, who on the spot assigned tasks to different primary leakers/sources assuring no source called another source's contact (so as not to appear too eager), that no source's "pitch" was exactly the same but that their information was all given in an "off hand" manner (e.g., "Don't go too far out on this Wilson thing, I don't want you burnt").

To have 6 calls from 3 leakers is an indication of a coordinated endeavor. If there were the 6 leakers as Dean claims would make the case even more damning. But also consider the planning necessary to have enough confirming sources. Unsure of who the reporters may call to confirm, someone would have to make sure at least 2 other officials were ready and willing to confirm if called.

Therefore a master-mind would have been necessary to coordinate all these calls and confirmations (as many as 11 as was storied last week).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mnemosyne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-09-05 05:16 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. .
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SuperWonk Donating Member (355 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-09-05 10:10 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. Well...
I am still going to lay low on this matter until Fitz comes forward with something, anything.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geckosfeet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-09-05 10:23 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. Me too. I am turing blue (blue-er) from holding my breath though,,,, nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SuperWonk Donating Member (355 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-09-05 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. Amen....
When will we know anything?
This is a non-story in my book until we do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
raysr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-09-05 12:10 PM
Response to Original message
9. More on this here
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/20050809/bigger_than_aipac.php Seems that Isreal is making our middle east policies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 06:58 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC