Individuals within the Bush Administration revealed the
identity of CIA operative, Valerie Plame in contravention of US statutes.
But there has been an intentional misdirection in claiming that the law
that was violated is
"Intelligence Identities Protection Act" of 1982. The
effective
controlling law for Treasongate has been greatly
ignored by the main stream media and the blogosphere. This article seeks
to clarify the controlling law and how the PR shift from Global War
against Terror has been recently shifted to Global Struggle against
Extremism.
The reason for the change in terminology links directly to the case of
treason that is being assembled by the Special Prosecutor and the Federal
Grand Jury in Chicago.
****************************
In
Part 1 of this report, Citizen Spook analyzed
18 USC 793, the United States Code provision which provides the most
direct route to convictions for Patrick Fitzgerald in the Treasongate/Valerie
Plame affair.
In this follow up, we are going to discuss
18 USC 794 which deals directly with Treason and the death penalty.
Before we move on to 794, please take note of the
indictments which were unsealed on August 4th, 2005, by the
court overseeing US Attorney Paul McNulty's grand jury in the AIPAC
investigation against Larry Franklin, Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman.
Counts 1-4 of those indictments were obtained using 18 USC 793(d):
Count 1: Conspiracy to
communicate national defense information to persons not entitled to
receive it. 18 USC 793 §§ (d), (e) and (g)
Count 2-4: Communication of national
defense information not entitled to receive it, 18 USC § 793(d)
No mention of the insignificant Intelligence Identities Protection Act
anywhere to be found in these indictments. Have you heard from the main
strem media, on the left or the right, about the controlling law, the
sections of the US Code these indictments were brought under? Hmm?
The Associated Press and other main stream media outlets published
stories about the AIPAC indictments today. But those accounts don't
mention that the indictments were brought under 18 USC 793.
Perhaps this has something to do with the official
press release issued by McNulty's office which does not mention 18 USC
793. This is certainly a break for the Bush administration, because a
Google news search, as of 11:38 a.m. today, August 5, 2005, using the
acronym, "AIPAC", and the number, "793" only returns
one Blogosphere hit.
Why isn't the main stream media discussing 18 USC 793 and 794? The Title
18 statutes are the most relevant statutes to Patrick Fitzgerald's grand
jury investigation.
The sheer scope of intentional ignorance on the part of the main stream
media warrants a staggering shame upon those dying institutions whose
relevance is quickly becoming marginalized to the point of complete
irrelevance. They are not "breaking" stories. They are engaged in
controlled propaganda which does not stand up to the monolithic power of
the Blogosphere. It's disgusting how they operate in a "see no evil" herd
of complicity.
INTELLIGENCE SPECULATION
Before I get to the cold hard facts of the law, I want to engage in some
speculation about the Bush administration's motivations for breaking the
law.
It's important to note that it wasn't just Valerie Plame who was outed by
Novak. Plame's entire network was also outed when Novak named Brewster
Jennings & Associates, a CIA front company, as the place she worked. The
focus of Plame's CIA work was weapons of mass destruction. Her network was
responsible for gathering information to help defend our nation against
annihilation by such weapons.
WMD is the reason Bush took us
to war with Iraq, the backbone of his foreign policy, the mantra more than
1800 of the USA's finest soldiers have met their death for. It is that
term, "weapons of mass destruction" that might actually be the calling
card of the grim reaper, should he come via court order for the men and
women of the Bush crime family.
Don't buy into the mantra that Plame was outed only as a retaliation upon
her husband, Joe Wilson. The Bush crime family wouldn't put their necks on
the chopping block for Treason just to smear Wilson, especially in light
of the fact that they knew Wilson's Niger report was accurate.
The risk reward pay off is ridiculously
insufficient.
The Bush cabal are not a stupid bunch. You can ridicule Bush, Cheney and
the gang all you like, but they're running our country, making billions
through Halliburton and the Carlisle group, getting away with torture in
open view, and rewriting the Constitution while flipping the middle finger
to the main stream media who take that finger, lick it and deposit it in
their anatomy on a daily basis...with a smile on their faces.
The only logical reason the intelligent Bush administration would expose
themselves to prosecution under the controlling laws of the United States
Code by outing Valerie Plame, Brewster Jennings and the CIA, is that they
probably had no other choice. It was either expose a major CIA operation
to the public at large through co-conspirator, Robert Novak, or allow
Plame's CIA division to complete their WMD investigations.
The Bush syndicate must have come to the conclusion that they had a better
chance of spinning the outing of Plame to petty retaliation for Wilson's
debunking of the Niger document fraud, than they had of surviving an
investigation by the CIA of their crimes against the USA and humanity at
large, for the fixing of intelligence to support a preemptive war and
possibly the facilitation of future black op patsies.
Until recently, the Bush spin machine has flawlessly controlled public
attention by concentrating it, as to the law, on the insignificant
Intelligence Identities Protection Act, and, as to their motivations, on
the Wilson smear campaign. This has been easy spin as their gambit was
centered in confidence that the media would play along.
What they could not spin, if the CIA was on to them, was mountains of
evidence Plame and her network might have uncovered, evidence which may
have been implicating the Bush syndicate in Treason.
Certainly, the State Department and the White House staff must have
considered that outing a CIA agent of any level or status, covert or non
covert, who was working on weapons of mass destruction, "in a time of
war", might lead to that work being compromised and that such actions on
their part might expose them to the provisions of 18 USC 793 and 794,
among other laws.
And that is exactly what
happened.
So their motivations must have been more than simple, petty bitch slapping
for Wilson debunking their Niger fraud documents. Keep the word
"motivation" in your mind from now on. It's the key to the whole scenario.
Were Plame's team of CIA agents getting close to some of the things Sibel
Edmonds was translating at the FBI, things which might implicate the Bush
syndicate in 911 as well as the facilitation of terrorist cells getting
their hands on components necessary to develop Nuclear weapons to be used
against the USA so that the Bush administration could retaliate by going
into Iraq, Iran, then North Korea and wherever else their imperialist buts
saw fit?
Recall the words used by
Wolfowitz just after 911 when he declared that the USA foreign policy
would "end terrorist states", a prophetic statement at a time when nobody
was suggesting, let alone had any intelligence to implicate any of those
countries in 911.
Consider this speculation in light of the "eight redacted pages" of
evidence presented by Fitzgerald to support his request that Matthew
Cooper and Judith Miller be put in jail for contempt. The issue was
thoroughly discussed by
Lawrence O'Donnell in his July 7th Huffington Post
article, wherein he
reported:
"Tatel actually found that reason
and experience 'support recognition of a privilege for reporters'
confidential sources'. But Tatel still ordered Cooper and Miller to
testify because he found that the privilege had to give way to 'the
gravity of the suspected crime'. "
Judge Tatel's opinion has eight
blank pages in the middle of it where he discusses the secret information
the prosecutor has supplied only to the judges to convince them that the
testimony he is demanding is worth sending reporters to jail to get. The
gravity of the suspected crime is presumably very well developed in those
redacted pages. Later, Tatel refers to [h]aving carefully scrutinized [the
prosecutor's] voluminous classified filings...
Tatel wrote a 41-page opinion in
which he seemed eager to make new law -- a federal reporters' shield law
-- but in the end, he couldn't bring himself to do it in this particular
case. In his final paragraph, he says he 'might have' let Cooper and
Miller off the hook '[w]ere the leak at issue in this case less harmful to
national security.'
Tatel's colleagues are at least as
impressed with the prosecutor's secret filings as he is. One simply said
'Special Counsel's showing decides the case.'
All the judges who have seen the
prosecutor's secret evidence firmly believe he is pursuing a very serious
crime, and they have done everything they can to help him get an
indictment."
So, with that background:
ANALYSIS OF 18 USC 794(a)
Bush administration officials are very familiar with this law. Each and
every one of them signed
a non disclosure agreement which says, in part:
" In addition, 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. I recognize that nothing in this Agreement
constitutes a waiver by the United States of the right to prosecute me for
any statutory violation."
There it is, in big bad English, "794".
We will examine three different sections of 794, (a), (b) and (c), each of
which contains unique criteria for conviction.
18 USC 794(a)
§ 794. Gathering or delivering
defense information to aid foreign government
"(a) Whoever, with intent or reason
to believe that it is to be used to the injury of the United States or to
the advantage of a foreign nation, communicates, delivers, or transmits,
or attempts to communicate, deliver, or transmit, to any foreign
government, or to any faction or party or military or naval force within a
foreign country, whether recognized or unrecognized by the United States,
or to any representative, officer, agent, employee, subject, or citizen
thereof, either directly or indirectly, any document, writing, code book,
signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan,
map, model, note, instrument, appliance, or information relating to the
national defense, shall be punished by death or by imprisonment for any
term of years or for life, except that the sentence of death shall not be
imposed unless the jury or, if there is no jury, the court, further finds
that the offense resulted in the identification by a foreign power (as
defined in section 101(a) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of
1978) of an individual acting as an agent of the United States and
consequently in the death of that individual, or directly concerned
nuclear weaponry, military spacecraft or satellites, early warning
systems, or other means of defense or retaliation against large-scale
attack; war plans; communications intelligence or cryptographic
information; or any other major weapons system or major element of defense
strategy."
Wow, there's a lot going on there so let's break it down.
The first requirement for conviction under 794(a) is that the perp must
have "intent or reason to believe" that "information" (or any of the other
things listed) "is to be used to the injury of the United States or to the
advantage of a foreign nation". The key word within this section equals,
"is". Any 794(a) perpetrators must have the requisite intent. "Is to be
used" is much different than "might be used".
Did Karl Rove and others, intend or have reason to believe that the
information communicated to Novak, outing Valerie Plame and her network,
would be used to injure the USA or to the advantage of any foreign nation?
Even if they thought it "might" be used as such, the standard is not met.
The law is clear. Unless the Prosecutor could present sufficient evidence
that the perp in question knew, or had reason to believe, the information
transmitted was going to be used to injure the USA, the prosecution would
fail under 794(a).
Perhaps Patrick Fitzgerald has such information, but I can't answer that.
All I can tell you is that the law sets a high hurdle.
One could argue that the information, once made available, would be used
to the "advantage of a foreign nation", and that is not as a high a
hurdle. I agree, but the prosecutor still must prove that the perps
intended or had reason to believe that the information would be used for
that purpose. Once again, "is to be used" is a higher standard than "might
be used."
And with such a specific legal requirement, the prosecutor would have to
bring evidence relating to which "foreign
nation" the information would confer an
advantage upon.
It won't be sufficient to name "Al Qaeda" or " the terrorists" because
794(a) does not recognize them as "a foreign nation" under the statute.
The statute does recognize terrorists as a "foreign power", but that is
different than a "foreign nation."
If Fitzgerald gets by these hurdles, it will be assumed that the
information was "indirectly" transmitted to every foreign nation on Earth
through Novak, the reporter who published the information to the world. In
Part 1 of this report we analyzed
the Morison decision, which stated:
"[C]ertainly injury to the United
States could be inferred from conduct of the sort charged," whether that
conduct involves photographing documents by one foreign agent or release
of national defense information to the press and public, where many
foreign agents and governments can have access to the information."
For the death penalty to apply regarding 794(a), the prosecution would
also have to prove that the information transmitted by the
perpetrator led to the
death of a United States agent.
While everything involved with Patrick Fitzgerald's grand jury is
generally to be kept secret, it's interesting to note that Rule 6 of the
Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, section (3), provides exceptions that
empower Fitzgerald to confer with others:
"(3) Exceptions.
(A) Disclosure of a grand jury
matter--other than the grand jury's deliberations or any grand juror's
vote--may be made to:
(i) an attorney for the government
for use in performing that attorney's duty;
(ii) any government
personnel--including those of a state, state subdivision, Indian tribe, or
foreign government'--that an attorney for the government considers
necessary to assist in performing that attorney's duty to enforce federal
criminal law...
(D) An attorney for the government
may disclose any grand-jury matter involving foreign intelligence,
counterintelligence (as defined in 50 U.S.C. sec. 401a), or foreign
intelligence information (as defined in Rule 6(e)(3)(D)(iii)) to any
federal law enforcement, intelligence, protective, immigration, national
defense, or national security official to assist the official receiving
the information in the performance of that official's duties..."
ANALYSIS OF 18 USC 794(b)
So, we've established that 18
USC 794(a) sets a difficult test for the prosecution, but 794(b) sets
forth a much easier test for the prosecution to meet while still providing
a maximum sentence of the death penalty when this section is breached "in
a time of war":
"(b) Whoever, in time of war,
with intent that the same shall be communicated to the enemy, collects,
records, publishes, or communicates, or attempts to elicit any information
with respect to the movement, numbers, description, condition, or
disposition of any of the Armed Forces, ships, aircraft, or war materials
of the United States, or with respect to the plans or conduct, or supposed
plans or conduct of any naval or military operations, or with respect to
any works or measures undertaken for or connected with, or intended for
the fortification or defense of any place, or any other information
relating to the public defense, which might be useful to the enemy, shall
be punished by death or by imprisonment for any term of years or for
life."
Let's simplify that.
With respect to the outing of
Valerie Plame and her CIA network, 794(b) mandates prosecution of anybody
who, in a time of war, intentionally communicates information relating to
the public defense which might be useful to the enemy. And the maximum
punishment for such a violation of 794(b) is death or life in prison.
The Bush Administration most fears 794(b). It simply requires the
perpetrators to be cognizant that the "information" being "communicated"
"might be useful to the enemy".
Furthermore, "the enemy" is a
much broader term than "foreign nation". As the President has said many
times, the enemy is the terrorists.
I think we can all agree that CIA agents and their investigations involved
with weapons of mass destruction are related to "the
public defense", so that standard is easily met as well.
That just leaves the intent requirement, which is easy to establish under
this fact pattern since the statute only requires "intent that the same
shall be communicated to the enemy."
Please note that the statute
does not require the perp to communicate directly to the enemy, 794(b)
only requires that the perp intends for the information to be communicated
to the enemy.
Since Karl Rove and others intended that the information be communicated
to Novak and other reporters, the perps will not be able to deny that they
had knowledge such information would be published to the world, a world in
which the enemy resides, an enemy that has access to Novak's report.
To prove the necessary "intent"
under 794(b), Fitzgerald only has to present sufficient evidence that Rove
and others knew the enemy would have access to the main stream media at
the time they communicated information relating to the public defense to
Novak and/or other reporters.
It's laughable to imagine the perpetrators will argue that the enemy
wouldn't have access to the information reported by Novak to the world. To
such a defensive argument the court in
Morison stated:
"Finally, the danger to the United
States is just as great when this information is released to the press as
when it is released to an agent of a foreign government. The fear in
releasing this type of information is that it gives other nations
information concerning the intelligence gathering capabilities of the
United States. That fear is realized whether the information is released
to the world at large or whether it is released only to specific spies."
THE MYSTERY OF "GSAVE" IN "TIME OF WAR"
And finally we come to the statement from 794(b), "in time of war." 794(b)
only kicks in if we are in "a time of war." According to the vote by
Congress authorizing the war in Iraq, and the Bush administration's words
and actions in projecting that war, we are certainly in a time of war at
least as far back as March 19, 2003, when we invaded Iraq, but according
to the President, war was declared by the enemy on September 11, 2001.
In light of this, "in time of war" requirement from 794(b), it's extremely
interesting to note the strange public relations circus emanating from
Washington regarding the proposed acronym
"GSAVE" which has apparently taken over for "GWOT".
GSAVE = Global Struggle Against Violent Extremism
GWOT = Global War Against Terror
Could it be that the Bush administration will start spinning that we were
not in a time of war when Rove and others in the Bush administration outed
Plame and her team so as to prepare a defense to coming indictments under
794(b) by Patrick Fitzgerald's grand jury?
If we are in a time of war, those involved with outing Valerie Plame and
her network are eligible to be prosecuted under 794(b) and therefore are
subject to the death penalty.
It's no wonder our plight has
shifted from a "war on terror" to a "struggle against violent extremism."
Look for the Bush administration to make the argument that the Iraq war
ended on or about May 1, 2003, the day Bush landed on the USS Lincoln and
declared victory over the enemy.
DEAR MR. NOVAK, TAKE A LOOK AT 794(c)
Bob Novak is in as much trouble as Rove and others. 794(c) states:
"(c) If two or more persons conspire
to violate this section, and one or more of such persons do any act to
effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such
conspiracy shall be subject to the punishment provided for the offense
which is the object of such conspiracy."
Novak wrote the report and had it published "in time of war". I don't see
any exception to the Treason he committed.
http://citizenspook.blogspot.com/2005/08/treasongate-controlling-law-part-2.html
PLEASE REPOST CITIZEN SPOOK
citizenspook@hotmail.com
AdMad said...
Thank you or publishing this legal
analysis/statutory interpretation. I'm an attorney and this is exactly
what you should do when analyzing any crime ... look at the STATUTE. Now,
an important definitional quesiton ... what is the definition of "time of
war" for the purposes of the statute? Is it when congress "declares" war?
I doubt they "declared" war on the "terrorists." While I'd love to see
Bush Crime Co. go down, here is an analysis arguing that that there is not
war. On the other side, there is the congressional text for the Iraq
campgaign, in which "war on terrorism" is referenced. Fascinating legal
quandry; can't wait for the Fitzgerald docs to become public.
http://www.jurist.law.pitt.edu/forum/oconnell1.php
The Controlling Law - Big Trouble
For The White House Staff
The Controlling Law, Part 2: THE DEATH PENALTY, 18 USC 794
and the shift from GWOT to GSAVE
Total Media BLACK OUT of 18 USC 794, Federal Espionage Statute
How The White House, Wilson, Novak,
Corn & Plame Conspired
The Federal Grand Jury, FOURTH BRANCH
of the US Government
The US Attorney General's Office AND President Bush
Have NO
LEGAL AUTHORITY To Remove Patrick Fitzgerald As Special Counsel
The Challenge of 18 USC 794...
Prior High Profile Convictions Under 18 USC 794
US Court of Appeals: Special Counsel's Showing Decides
The Case
Iraq War fraud could lead to State court prosecutions for murder of
American soldiers
NIGER DOCUMENT FRAUD --Wilson and Plame May Be on
Fitzgerald's Radar for Treason Related to the Niger Document Conspiracy
Wilson Is In Cahoots With Bush Crime Family
Project Perfect Storm:
Citizen Activism against Felony Murder Resulting
from Fraud that Led to the Iraq War
July 18th Chicago Subway/Dirksen Federal Courthouse
Bomb plot
involving British MI6 assets -Part 1:Chicago Police Implicated in Cover
up?
July 18 Chicago Subway/Dirksen Federal Courthouse
Plot
Involving British MI6-Part 2: CTA Officials Deny Chicago Police Accounts
This is a crazy world. What can be done? Amazingly, we have been mislead. We have been taught that
we can control government by voting. The founder of the Rothschild dynasty, Mayer Amschel Bauer,
told the secret of controlling the government of a nation over 200 years ago. He said, "Permit me
to issue and control the money of a nation and I care not who makes its laws." Get the picture?
Your freedom hinges first on the nation's banks and money system. Freedom is connected with Debt Elimination for each individual. Not only does
this end personal debt, it places the people first in line as creditors to the National Debt ahead
of the banks. They don't wish for you to know this. It has to do with recognizing WHO you really
are in A
New Beginning: A Practical Course in Miracles, an informational study.
Disclaimer - The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The myriad of facts, conjecture, perspectives, viewpoints, opinions, analyses, and information in the articles, stories and commentaries posted on this site range from cutting edge hard news and comment to extreme and unusual perspectives. We choose not to sweep uncomfortable material under the rug - where it can grow and fester. We choose not to censor skewed logic and uncomfortable rhetoric. These things reflect the world as it now is - for better and worse. We present multiple facts, perspectives, viewpoints, opinions, analyses, and information.
Journalism is (or used to be) the profession of gathering and presenting a broad panorama of news about the events of our times and presenting it to readers for their own consideration. We believe in the intelligence, judgment and wisdom of our readers to discern for themselves among the data which appears on this site that which is valid and worthy...or otherwise. See full legal disclaimer
I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. (attributed to Voltaire), but certainly embodies what the 1st amendment of the constitution refers to as the freedom of speech
Bill of Rights
Amendment 1
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Queen
Victoria
