BUT OF COURSE!! THE WASHINGTON POST!!!... PREPARING A FAVORABLE OUTCOME FOR GOVERNMENT CRIMINALS???
"...His investigation has White House aides and congressional Republicans on edge as they await Fitzgerald's announcement of an indictment or the conclusion of the probe with no charges..." "...This lawyer said the most benign outcome would be Fitzgerald announcing that he completed a thorough investigation, concluded no crime was committed and would not issue a report..." "...Many lawyers in the case have been skeptical that Fitzgerald has the evidence to prove a violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, which is the complicated crime he first set out to investigate, and which requires showing that government officials knew an operative had covert status and intentionally leaked the operative's identity..."
TELL THAT TO 'CITIZENSPOOK'!!!... ( BUT YOU ALREADY KNOW HIS ANSWER TO THIS WHITE WASH BS!! )
TREASONGATE: Total Media BLACK OUT of 18 USC 794, Federal Espionage Statute
http://citizenspook.blogspot.com/2005/08/treasongate-total-media-black-out-of.html
"...In my two part series, TREASONGATE: The Controlling Law, Part 1 Part 2 I discussed the fact that the Intelligence Identities Protection Act is virtually irrelevant as to the Valerie Plame CIA leak investigation. I focussed on the applicability to this fact pattern of 18 USC 793 and 794, the espionage statutes of the United States Code..."
Subject: Role of Rove, Libby in CIA Leak Case Clearer
#
White House Finally caught using Taxpayer $ to Buy Media —Cheryl Seal, Sat Oct 1 17:53
Washington Post Staff Writers
Role of Rove, Libby in CIA Leak Case Clearer
Sun Oct 2, 2005 02:22
http://www.apfn.net/messageboard/10-06-05/discussion.cgi.15.html
Role of Rove, Libby in CIA Leak Case Clearer
Bush and Cheney Aides' Testimony Contradicts Earlier White House Statement
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/01/AR2005100101317.html
Thursday, July 28, 2005
TREASONGATE: The Controlling Law - Big Trouble For The White House Staff.
The controlling law for Treasongate has been greatly ignored by the main stream media and the blogosphere. This article seeks to clarify the controlling law.
To determine the controlling law, all one needs to do is read the non-disclosure agreement Karl Rove and all of the members of the Bush administration with security clearance signed which included the following statement:
"I have been advised that any unauthorized disclosure of classified information by me may constitute a violation, or violations, of United States criminal laws, including the provisions of Sections 641, 793, 794, 798, 952 and 1924, Title 18, United States Code, the provisions of Section 783(b), Title 50, United States Code, and the provisions of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982."
Sanctions for a breach of the non-disclosure agreement are provided for by Executive Order, but those sanctions are ancillary to the United States Code provisions cited in the paragraph above which stand alone.
Please notice that the Title 18 United States Code statutes are separate statutes that precede the first mention of the "Intelligence Identities Protection Act". The complicated "Intelligence Identities Protection Act" of 1982 which has been exclusively discussed by the media is not controlling. Rove and company may be guilty of violating that act, but prior United States Code statutory law and Federal case law, specifically 18 USC 793 as interpreted by United States v. Morison (and related cases) has been breached and should lead to convictions under the facts known to the public at large. 18 USC 793 provides for a maximum of ten years in prison to those convicted under this statute.
Analysis of the law and precedent regarding 18 USC 793 indicates that the facts known to the public in the Plame case may be sufficient to guarantee convictions because the statute does not require that the information leaked be "classified". Certainly, the information leaked in the Plame case was classified as "SECRET" in a State Department memo circulated from and to White House staff, but that classification is not necessary for convictions under sections of Title 18 statutes.
18 USC 793 does not require that officials responsible for disclosing information about Valerie Plame had to know she was "covert" or under cover. Discussed in great detail below, the statute only requires that the information leaked be related to the national defense and that the individual responsible for disclosing that information have a reasonable belief that the information could be used to the detriment of the USA. Ths legal test is much easier to meet than the test put forth in the Intelligence Identities Protection Act.
Furthermore, the highest courts in the USA that have studied this issue already address the defensive arguments forwarded in Treasongate. And it is clear that arguments which might stand a chance in a defense to the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, will fail as a defense to charges brought under 18 USC 793, 794 and 641.
[If 18 USC 794 has also been breached, that statute provides a maximum sentence of the death penalty for those convicted "in a time of war". Analysis of 18 USC 794 and 18 U.S.C. @ 641 will be the subject of a future article by this author. The focus of this study will center upon 18 USC 793(d), which is the statute most likely to return convictions in the Plame matter. Sections 794 and 641 may also have been violated, but those issues are slightly more difficult to prove. Please note that in 2002, the Bush administration used 18 U.S.C. @ 641 to convict Jonathan Randel for leaking to the media non-classified information about Drug Enforcement Administration files.]
It has been reported in various publications that a State Department memo was circulated among members of The White House staff indicating that the paragraph containing Valerie Plame's name was marked with an "[S]" meaning the information in that paragraph was classified as "Secret". EXECUTIVE ORDER 13292, signed by President Bush on March 25, 2003 explains the various levels of classified information:
"2) "Secret" shall be applied to information, the unauthorized
disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause serious damage to the national security that the original classification authority is able to identify or describe. "
The classified State Department memorandum central to the federal leak investigation contained information about CIA officer Valerie Plame in a paragraph marked "(S)" for secret, a certain indication that any Bush administration official who read it should have been aware the information was classified.
18 USC 793(d) states:
"d) Whoever, lawfully having possession of, access to, control over,
or being entrusted with any document, writing...or note relating to the
national defense, or information relating to the national defense which
information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, ....[s]hall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both."
Part (e) states, "Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to....", and is thereafter identical to section (d). (This section could possibly lead to a conviction of Novak as well and will be the subject of a future article.)
Please note that the statute does not require the information be "classified", it only requires that the info be related to "national defense".
Valerie Plame was working on weapons of mass destruction for the CIA. Nothing could be more related to national defense.
MUCH MORE:>>
http://citizenspook.blogspot.com/2005/07/treasongate-controlling-law-big.html
"...His investigation has White House aides and congressional Republicans on edge as they await Fitzgerald's announcement of an indictment or the conclusion of the probe with no charges..." "...This lawyer said the most benign outcome would be Fitzgerald announcing that he completed a thorough investigation, concluded no crime was committed and would not issue a report..." "...Many lawyers in the case have been skeptical that Fitzgerald has the evidence to prove a violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, which is the complicated crime he first set out to investigate, and which requires showing that government officials knew an operative had covert status and intentionally leaked the operative's identity..."
TELL THAT TO 'CITIZENSPOOK'!!!... ( BUT YOU ALREADY KNOW HIS ANSWER TO THIS WHITE WASH BS!! )
TREASONGATE: Total Media BLACK OUT of 18 USC 794, Federal Espionage Statute
http://citizenspook.blogspot.com/2005/08/treasongate-total-media-black-out-of.html
"...In my two part series, TREASONGATE: The Controlling Law, Part 1 Part 2 I discussed the fact that the Intelligence Identities Protection Act is virtually irrelevant as to the Valerie Plame CIA leak investigation. I focussed on the applicability to this fact pattern of 18 USC 793 and 794, the espionage statutes of the United States Code..."
Subject: Role of Rove, Libby in CIA Leak Case Clearer
#
White House Finally caught using Taxpayer $ to Buy Media —Cheryl Seal, Sat Oct 1 17:53
Washington Post Staff Writers
Role of Rove, Libby in CIA Leak Case Clearer
Sun Oct 2, 2005 02:22
http://www.apfn.net/messageboard/10-06-05/discussion.cgi.15.html
Role of Rove, Libby in CIA Leak Case Clearer
Bush and Cheney Aides' Testimony Contradicts Earlier White House Statement
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/01/AR2005100101317.html
Thursday, July 28, 2005
TREASONGATE: The Controlling Law - Big Trouble For The White House Staff.
The controlling law for Treasongate has been greatly ignored by the main stream media and the blogosphere. This article seeks to clarify the controlling law.
To determine the controlling law, all one needs to do is read the non-disclosure agreement Karl Rove and all of the members of the Bush administration with security clearance signed which included the following statement:
"I have been advised that any unauthorized disclosure of classified information by me may constitute a violation, or violations, of United States criminal laws, including the provisions of Sections 641, 793, 794, 798, 952 and 1924, Title 18, United States Code, the provisions of Section 783(b), Title 50, United States Code, and the provisions of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982."
Sanctions for a breach of the non-disclosure agreement are provided for by Executive Order, but those sanctions are ancillary to the United States Code provisions cited in the paragraph above which stand alone.
Please notice that the Title 18 United States Code statutes are separate statutes that precede the first mention of the "Intelligence Identities Protection Act". The complicated "Intelligence Identities Protection Act" of 1982 which has been exclusively discussed by the media is not controlling. Rove and company may be guilty of violating that act, but prior United States Code statutory law and Federal case law, specifically 18 USC 793 as interpreted by United States v. Morison (and related cases) has been breached and should lead to convictions under the facts known to the public at large. 18 USC 793 provides for a maximum of ten years in prison to those convicted under this statute.
Analysis of the law and precedent regarding 18 USC 793 indicates that the facts known to the public in the Plame case may be sufficient to guarantee convictions because the statute does not require that the information leaked be "classified". Certainly, the information leaked in the Plame case was classified as "SECRET" in a State Department memo circulated from and to White House staff, but that classification is not necessary for convictions under sections of Title 18 statutes.
18 USC 793 does not require that officials responsible for disclosing information about Valerie Plame had to know she was "covert" or under cover. Discussed in great detail below, the statute only requires that the information leaked be related to the national defense and that the individual responsible for disclosing that information have a reasonable belief that the information could be used to the detriment of the USA. Ths legal test is much easier to meet than the test put forth in the Intelligence Identities Protection Act.
Furthermore, the highest courts in the USA that have studied this issue already address the defensive arguments forwarded in Treasongate. And it is clear that arguments which might stand a chance in a defense to the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, will fail as a defense to charges brought under 18 USC 793, 794 and 641.
[If 18 USC 794 has also been breached, that statute provides a maximum sentence of the death penalty for those convicted "in a time of war". Analysis of 18 USC 794 and 18 U.S.C. @ 641 will be the subject of a future article by this author. The focus of this study will center upon 18 USC 793(d), which is the statute most likely to return convictions in the Plame matter. Sections 794 and 641 may also have been violated, but those issues are slightly more difficult to prove. Please note that in 2002, the Bush administration used 18 U.S.C. @ 641 to convict Jonathan Randel for leaking to the media non-classified information about Drug Enforcement Administration files.]
It has been reported in various publications that a State Department memo was circulated among members of The White House staff indicating that the paragraph containing Valerie Plame's name was marked with an "[S]" meaning the information in that paragraph was classified as "Secret". EXECUTIVE ORDER 13292, signed by President Bush on March 25, 2003 explains the various levels of classified information:
"2) "Secret" shall be applied to information, the unauthorized
disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause serious damage to the national security that the original classification authority is able to identify or describe. "
The classified State Department memorandum central to the federal leak investigation contained information about CIA officer Valerie Plame in a paragraph marked "(S)" for secret, a certain indication that any Bush administration official who read it should have been aware the information was classified.
18 USC 793(d) states:
"d) Whoever, lawfully having possession of, access to, control over,
or being entrusted with any document, writing...or note relating to the
national defense, or information relating to the national defense which
information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, ....[s]hall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both."
Part (e) states, "Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to....", and is thereafter identical to section (d). (This section could possibly lead to a conviction of Novak as well and will be the subject of a future article.)
Please note that the statute does not require the information be "classified", it only requires that the info be related to "national defense".
Valerie Plame was working on weapons of mass destruction for the CIA. Nothing could be more related to national defense.
MUCH MORE:>>
http://citizenspook.blogspot.com/2005/07/treasongate-controlling-law-big.html
- Who is Judy Miller Kidding? —Arianna Huffington, Sun Oct 2 18:17
- Stephanopoulos: President Bush Directly Involved In Leak —crooksandliars.com, Sun Oct 2 18:01
- Who is Scooter Libby? The Guy Behind the Guy Behind the Guy —Center for American Progress, Sun Oct 2 14:50
- DeLay named 'Big House' Majority Leader —John Breneman, Sun Oct 2 13:31
Message Board by American Patriot Friends Network [APFN]
