Citizen Spook Saturday, August 20, 2005
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.
Even greater a misdirection is that Joe Wilson and
Valerie are aggrieved parties. Examining their actions it's possible to
see their real roles in this deadly game. David Corn played gatekeeper of
the left and Bob Novak played gatekeeper of the right.
****************************
Actions speak. Words lie. Action
follows motive. Motivation is a microscope. One must think like a spook in
order to understand the totality of these crimes. This report will
challenge you to focus like a genius intelligence operative, to look a few
moves ahead...and behind.
We've been caught in a web of deceit, so intricate, so devious, so
arrogant and dark that there may actually be no escape. If "we the people"
don't make those responsible for Treasongate pay for their sins against
this country, we deserve everything they've got planned for us down the
road to perdition.
ANATOMY OF THE ALLEGED "SMEAR CAMPAIGN"
For the last two years, we've all heard about "the smear campaign" hurled
upon Joe Wilson by the Bush administration to punish him for writing the
New York Times op-ed concerning the fake Niger documents. Revenge and
political payback is the motivation universally attributed to the Bush
syndicate.
It's bullshit. Joe Wilson was not smeared. He went from relative obscurity
to national fame, book deals, talk show circuit, hero status accepting,
freedom fighting, whistleblowing, saintly coronation. None of it is
deserved.
Joe Wilson is in cahoots with the Bush Administration along with David
Corn, Bob Novak and Valerie Plame Wilson, a cast of spooks who have only
just been outed with the writing of this article. They've carefully
scripted this entire affair to shield themselves from prosecution for
monolithic treasons against US citizens and our military. Treasongate,
Rovegate, Leakgate, whatever you want to call it, is, in reality, an
intricate version of hide and seek where the "perpetraitors" have been
controlling both sides of the game.
Regardless of the crimes committed by this and past administrations, as
long as their spin can divide the people on political lines, justice, true
justice, will never be served. If the crime can be given a political spin,
the perps can literally get away with any crime, even Treason. They've
carefully crafted both sides of this national debate to give both liberal
and conservative pundits enough ammunition to keep a heated firefight
going in the media. The smokescreen generated by this firefight has
diverted our attention from examining:
1. The controlling laws applicable
to these facts.
2. The motivations of the Bush administration, Joe Wilson and his wife,
and the two news villains responsible for initiating this ruse; Bob Novak,
and David Corn.
3. The damage to our nation for writing the New York Times op-ed
concerning the fake Niger documents. Revenge and political payback is the
motivation universally attributed to the Bush syndicate.
Their media ruse has, so far, been a
complete success. Not one major publication has examined the controlling
laws, Espionage statutes found in 18 USC 793 and 794. They've steered the
country away from analyzing Plame's outing as espionage by repeating ad
nauseam that the motivation for the leak was "political payback." This
has enabled them to divide and conquer "we the people" along party lines.
Political payback can be spun, espionage cannot. This is why Joe Wilson,
David Corn and all of the liberal media have steered wide of calling this
leak exactly what it is, Treason:
The
Bush Administration, Joseph Wilson, Robert Novak, David Corn, Valerie
Plame et al have conspired to expose networks of genuine
intelligence agents and their sources who were closing in on treasonous
acts perpetrated by the White House to further an insidious agenda of
empire expansion through state-sponsored terrorism designed to create a
thirst for revenge and justice in the hearts and minds of the American
people.
The meticulous outing of Plame and the media circus that ensued was
designed as a smokescreen to cloud the truth and the law while they
exposed CIA networks operating to stop WMD proliferation. Genuine agents
and sources were left out in the cold while targets were warned and
allowed to escape.
This is not easy to comprehend. So it's imperative to suspend judgment
while you examine this. You must be an impartial juror. Listen objectively
to the facts. Analyze the application of those facts to the law. Consider
the motives of those involved and then look for MO to back it up.
WHAT LAWS ARE INVOLVED AND WHAT ARE THE PENALTIES?
The one law everybody has heard of regarding this matter is the
Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982 (IIPA). In my two part
series, TREASONGATE: The Controlling Law Part 1 Part 2, I explained that,
despite the media feeding frenzy involved with analyzing the IIPA, it is
totally irrelevant with regards to the Plame leak.
I strongly urge the reader to carefully study my previous reports
explaining these laws before continuing here.
TREASONGATE: The Controlling Law -
Big Trouble
For The White House Staff
TREASONGATE: The Controlling Law, Part 2: THE DEATH PENALTY, 18 USC 794
and the shift from GWOT to GSAVE
The IIPA is an
intricate piece of work that has a ton of wiggle room while Title 18 of
our United States Code, particularly 18 USC 793 and more importantly 794,
the Espionage statutes, have virtually no wiggle room for the
perpetraitors responsible for leaking Plame's identity (Novak) and her
covert status (Corn).
Ever since July 16, 2003, when David Corn first discussed the
applicability of the IIPA to these facts, the IIPA has been the sole focus
of discussion in the main stream media and the blogosphere.
[UPDATE: Aug. 20.2005, 10:12 a.m.
Since I first posted this report last night, reader Ron has informed me
that David Corn published, on August 8th, a watered down synthesis of
previous Citizen Spook reports on the Controlling Laws of Treasongate.
Corn did not mention, or link to, Citizen Spook. Also, comments at his
site were mysteriously disabled. DEVELOPING.]
The concept that all of these spook perpetraitors put their faith in was
that if Joe Wilson was talking about the IIPA as the controlling law, then
the IIPA would be accepted, by the media and the people, as the
controlling law, since Joe Wilson, more than anybody, would want to see
the evil Bush administration put away for outing his CIA wife. And when
Joe Wilson issued statements to the effect that conviction under the IIPA
was probably not going to happen, the rest of us could just let this blow
over while a few Bush operatives were given slaps on the wrist.
All the while, Joe Wilson was running protection for the leakers because
Wilson and his wife are Bush administration double agent operatives
who have something to hide, something big, something towering.
THE LAW
Let me give a short recap for those readers who are not aware of the
analysis for 18 USC 794(b)
18 USC 794(b) carries a maximum penalty of death or life in prison.
18 USC 794(b) mandates prosecution of anybody who, in time of war,
intentionally communicates information relating to the public defense
which might be useful to the enemy.
Question 1: Were we in a time of war when CIA operative Valerie Plame
Wilson was outed?
Answer: Yes. Despite recent attempts by the Bush administration to shift
the policy lingo from GWOT, "global war on terror", to GSAVE,"global
struggle against violent extremism", we were "in time of war" back in
June/July 2003. And our soldiers are still dying on the same battlefield
today. We are still "in time of war". If you have any doubt, just ask the
families of our soldiers who died on that battlefield. Ask them if we
were/are in a time of war. Next question.
Question 2: Was information that related to the public defense
communicated?
Answer: The information communicated to Bob Novak outed a CIA operative
who coordinated covert agents working on WMD proliferation issues. Nothing
could be more related to the "public defense". The answer is yes.
Question 3: Was the information intentionally communicated to the enemy?
Answer: Federal case law has consistently held that there is no
difference, for purposes of proving "intent", between communicating the
relevant information to a spy and communicating it to the press, since the
whole world will be notified of the information upon publication. The
answer is yes.
Question 4: "Might" the information be useful to the enemy?
Answer: A CIA operative involved with WMD proliferation and the name of a
CIA front company used for such intelligence purposes were exposed. This
law does not require that the information communicated... must be
useful... to the enemy, 18 USC 794(b) only requires that the
information... might be useful... to the enemy. The answer is yes, the
information might be useful to the enemy.
Question 5: Who is the enemy?
Answer: The terrorists.
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.
There's no wiggle room. Everybody in the Government who holds a security
clearance had to sign a non-disclosure agreement which warns that they can
be prosecuted under 18 USC 794 if they violate that agreement. Not that
794(b) requires the information communicated to be classified, it doesn't.
The non-disclosure agreement warns about violating 794(b), so let's not
pretend it's an obscure law. Everybody involved was aware of it. This is
the United States Code, federal law of the land.
Once you understand 18 USC 794(b), air tight convictions for the Plame
leakers become apparent. There's nothing to argue about. There's no wiggle
room. The law was drafted to stop espionage, to stop people from exposing
our intelligence assets. Maybe you're familiar with them; the CIA, NSA,
FBI, departments of our Government we the people pay hundreds of billions
for, to protect us from being attacked here at home, and to protect our
soldiers abroad.
18 USC 794 has been used to put traitors away for life.
It's the law of the land.
Their ruse involved spinning the Plame leak as revenge and political
payback connecting it to the decision to go to war thereby causing "we the
people" to become divided. Then they threw a complicated statute into the
mix, the IIPA, which allows convincing arguments, both for and against
conviction under these facts, so the political smokescreen expanded to an
opaque impenetrable thickness.
The national debate that went into the IIPA was intense. Focus that
same amount of media energy on 794(b), and there will be a genuine
revolution in this country. Imagine the talking head pundits stuck for
words, silenced by facts, unable to divide an educated population. Most
Americans, spanning the entire political spectrum, are capable of
understanding that these controlling federal laws, 18 USC 793 and 794,
have been broken, if those laws were sufficiently explained to them.
Following such a national debate, US citizens will demand to know why the
Bush administration risked prosecution under such punishing laws. And they
will also demand to know why Joe Wilson hasn't been calling for
prosecution under these laws.
Once we the people start asking the right questions, the Government and
media spin trance fails, they lose control of our minds, and we begin to
think for ourselves, to use our minds instead of allowing our minds be
used by the enemy.
They created "wiggle room" where there was no wiggle room by guiding your
attention, from both liberal and conservative media sources, to the
irrelevant Intelligence Identities Protection Act.
Violation of 18 USC 794(b) can lead to the death penalty or life in
prison, a much greater punishment than under the IIPA. So you would expect
that those involved with outing a CIA operative and a CIA front company
might think twice about breaking this law. And this leads to the following
questions about motivation which really get to the heart of this intricate
ruse:
1. WOULD THE
BUSH ADMINISTRATION VIOLATE 18 USC 794 KNOWING SUCH A VIOLATION COULD
LEAD TO DEATH OR LIFE IN PRISON JUST TO "SMEAR" JOE WILSON?
No. They aren't' that stupid. These are intelligent people who have
procured the Executive Branch of the US Government. 18 USC 794 has put
people like Aldrich Ames away for life. This is a very serious law.
Nobody in the Bush administration was going to break it just to bitch
slap Joe Wilson. That's the fecal toast Joe Wilson and David Corn
originally served over two years ago, a meal that has been uniformly
consumed by America, so please don't eat it anymore. It's a lie, and a
rather bad one at that.
Focus on the
penalty; death or life in prison. The motivation of a bitch slap does not
fit the crime. The Bush administration must have had a greater motivation
to risk prosecution under 794(b).
Furthermore, they had to know they were turning Joe Wilson into a star the
liberal media would canonize. They did no harm to Joe Wilson, and they did
no harm to his wife. This so called "outing" scandal is actually cover for
their conspiratorial treason, the betrayal of her network and the work it
was doing.
Valerie Plame Wilson = Double Agent
Plame and Wilson are double agents in the "Intelligence war" going on
between the treasonous Bush administration and divisions of US
Intelligence and the military.
The Plame/Wilson double agent status becomes obvious when you examine Joe
Wilson's actions under the electron microscope of motivation:
2. WHAT IS
JOE WILSON'S MOTIVATION FOR NOT RAISING THE ISSUE OF 18 USC 794?
"Naming her this way would have compromised every operation, every
relationship, every network with which she had been associated in her
entire career. This is the stuff of Kim Philby and Aldrich Ames."
That is a
direct quote given by Joseph Wilson to David Corn for the infamous (and
treasonous) report published on July 16, 2003,in The Nation;
wherein Corn leaked Plame's "undercover" status as a CIA officer.
"This is the stuff of...Aldrich Ames."
It's really quite an amazing quote which history may record as being the
smoking dung gun that toppled this administration and put Joe Wilson and
the other co-conspirators behind bars.
USA, you've been hoodwinked big time.
Aldrich Ames is serving life in prison for his violation of 18 USC 794. He
leaked the identity of several NOC CIA Officers to the Soviets. So,
Ambassador Joseph Wilson IV, if you are so outraged at the Bush
administration, why aren't you screaming for a prosecution of the people
responsible for outing your wife under the same statute? You've compared
the crimes of Aldrich Ames to those involved with the outing of your wife,
so why aren't you pounding your fist for the special prosecutor to invoke
the same law which put Ames away for life? You've never even mentioned it.
MOTIVATION
Wilson certainly can't claim ignorance of the law. He's issued detailed
analysis of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, on the record,
during a public Q&A at one of his glorious book signings, recorded by
William Kaminsky, wherein Wilson discussed the intricacies of the IIPA and
explained in great detail that convictions under that act were unlikely.
He exhibited a great knowledge of that law while forwarding the
diversionary spin started by his pal, David Corn. From Kaminsky's blog
"Meeting Joe
Wilson (Part 1 of 2)
On Thursday night, the venerable and most definitely left-leaning
Harvard Book Store held a lecture/question and answer session/book
signing event with Ambassador Joseph Wilson...
First of all, Ambassador Wilson has every confidence in the dedication
and prosecutorial skills of Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald.
However, Wilson concedes a point many of the Administration's defenders
make: it will be extremely hard to convict anyone of violating the most
serious (and most often discussed) of the applicable laws, namely the
Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982 (United States Code,
Title 50, Sections 421-426). Rather, Wilson thought that a prosecutor
wanting a winnable case would have to settle for the weaker charge of
disclosure of classified information (United States Code, Title 18,
Section 798)...While technically disclosure of classified information
can be a felony carrying the same maximum penalty of a fine and 10 years
imprisonment as violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act,
it apparently can also be prosecuted as a misdemeanor charge, and this
is what Wilson thought likely..."
Hey Joe, you're
quick on your feet whipping out that 18 USC 798 softball law along with
the IIPA, so why don't you flip a few sections back to 793 and 794?
Wilson might answer, "Well Spook, thing is, this was a smear, I tell ya. I
was shmeered, Spook. They shmeered me, man. They wanted to hurt me and my
CIA wife real bad because I'm an award winning courageous patriot who
stood up to their forgeries and told the world from the beacon of the
New York Times. It's not espionage. It's a smear campaign. I
don't think we really need to distract the population with the Espionage
act Spook, do we?"
Well, Joe, I think we do need to distract the population. I mean, after
all, you told David Corn that one of our "star" intelligence assets was
outed thereby crippling many operations, scattering agents to the four
winds and possibly the grim reaper's door, crushing national security.
"This is the stuff of Aldrich Ames". Sorry Joe, but motive, while an
excellent tool of analysis, is irrelevant to the determination of whether
the Espionage laws were broken. The law doesn't give a rats ass what the
Bush administration's motive was for breaking the law.
The law does not provide a motive defense. They can tell the judge and
jury at trial, "Yeah, so we outed her network, but we did it to shmeer Joe
Wilson, not to cause damage to national security." But the cold hard fact
remains,18 USC 794 doesn't care. There's no "motive" requirement. Sorry
Joe, this is treason. You said it yourself, "This is the stuff of Aldrich
Ames". What an amazing quote.
The cold, made of steel, unbendable law, 18 USC 794, is the reason Wilson
has been guiding American attention spans to the IIPA. As long as we were
focused on the IIPA, convictions would be very hard to come by.
Wilson was running protection.
Back to Kaminsky's report on Wilson's book signing:
"Wilson
offered two reasons for his pessimism:
1. The Intelligence Identities Protection Act explicitly says that it is
a valid defense versus prosecution to claim an operative's identity has
previously been revealed...
It is clear that the Administration's defenders intend to use this
defense...
But anyways,
when all is said and done, this isn't the main reason why Ambassador
Wilson is pessimistic about the prospects of a successful prosecution
under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. Instead, his main reason
is:
2. Right at
its outset, the Act qualifies that disclosing a covert operative's
identity is illegal only if it is done intentionally and in the
knowledge that the government is still actively maintaining a cover for
operative...
Wilson said
he believed that anyone accused under the Act thus could successfully
mount the defense that he or she knew only that Valerie Plame was
employed by the CIA and not that the CIA actively maintained a cover (or
covers) for her as a operative in the Clandestine Service who was active
in the last 5 years."
Look at Wilson
go. He's got that spin down pat. On the one hand, he's literally crying in
public over the outing of his CIA wife, "If I could give you back your
anonymity....", while on the other hand, he creates the Bush
Administration defense all in one gasp of legal puke. He exhibits a
knowledge of various US Code as well as a perfect analysis of the IIPA,
while steering the entire country away from the controlling law, 18 USC
793 and 794.
Have a look at Joe Wilson's book, The Politics of Truth, and
look for any mention of 18 USC 793 or 794. It's not there.
His books starts with a section called, "Anatomy Of A Smear":
"...a
vindictive government has used the press in order to try to destroy an
opponent." (page 2)
The Plame leak
only made the Bush Administration appear guilty as sin regarding the Niger
documents and the fraudulent reasons for going to war, and I submit to you
that this is exactly what the Bush administration and its operatives
intended. The decision to go to war was a political issue,
and the country is divided along party lines, so it's safe for them to
risk the appearance of guilt by "outing" Wilson's wife and looking guilty
as long as Wilson, Corn and everybody else repeats the mantra that it was
done for revenge, political payback, etc. But the true motivation was
to stop the agents she was working with from gathering evidence of mass
murder; past, present and future.
To smear Wilson is ridiculous considering the possible penalty for
Treason, and to smear him knowing it makes you look guilty of fixing the
intelligence is even more insane unless that's exactly what you were
trying to do...look insane.
To out Plame and smear Wilson as a smokescreen for a greater sin, a
greater Treason, a Treason of past and future murder of innocent
citizens...now that is a motivation that warranted risking their violation
of 18 USC 794.
Their gambit was centered on Wilson controlling the media circus, steering
everybody towards the IIPA, and away from 18 USC 794.
If Wilson, cast in the starring role as the husband filled with anger for
the damage and danger put on his wife, was talking about the IIPA, well
then, who could argue with him? Who had more motivation for wanting the
leakers put away than Joe Wilson?
Nobody,...if you believe this crap.
And Joe Wilson not only took the baton from David Corn regarding the IIPA,
but he further protected the Bush leakers even from prosecution under that
irrelevant law by stating his opinion that convictions were unlikely due
to the "wiggle room" written into the IIPA.
Mr. Wilson, you brought up the name Aldrich Ames, so why don't you bring
up the law he was convicted under? In the two plus years this script (and
that is exactly what he's reading from) has been played out, you haven't
mentioned the controlling law, 18 USC 793 and 794. You haven't called for
the people responsible for outing your wife and her entire CIA network to
be thrown in jail with Aldrich Ames for life. No, instead you've conspired
to fool the country into burying its head in your smokescreen.
Chris Matthews told Joe Wilson that Karl Rove said, "Wilson's wife is fair
game."
From Wilson's book, page 1:
" ' Wilson's
wife is fair game.' Those are fighting words for any man..."
And you fight
back with the lame Intelligence Identities Protection Act, Mr. Wilson?
Your actions don't back up your words. Your motivation must be lacking
since you could have responded in kind with your own fighting words. Had
you responded as follows, perhaps we could believe you, Joe Wilson. Here's
what Citizen Spook would have said:
"The people
who outed my wife are traitors, no different than Aldrich Ames who was
convicted under 18 USC 794. They deserve to be put away for life in the
same cell block for Treason."
But you didn't
say that Mr. Wilson. And if I'm wrong about you and your wife, let's see
you start saying it. Get in your Jaguar and ride, bang the drums for
Treason, Treason that exposed your wife endangering her life and the lives
of her network. Your family was cast in the spotlight by the Bush
administration who exposed your loved ones to dangerous covert agents the
world over. Why aren't you demanding justice and prosecutions under 18 USC
794(b) for such a dastardly deed?
Wilson's book references the IIPA on pages; xxxviii-xxxix, xl, 4, 346,
349, 350-351, 358-360, 384-385, 388, 395-396, and 445. Do you know how
many times 18 USC 793 and 794 are mentioned? None, nada, zero. Why do you
think that is? Because Wilson never heard of these laws? No. This CIA
couple knows the law inside out. And they know the carnage that outing her
caused to the operations and operatives she was overseeing, people that
trusted her whose lives were in her hands.
From page 446 of Wilson's book:
"We worry
about our personal security, but there is little we can do."
But nobody
dared publish a photo of Plame...until she posed with her husband for the
January '04 issue of Vanity Fair. Wasn't it bad enough that her name got
out, that her front company was exposed? Why would she follow through by
mugging for the camera in Vanity Fair? Isn't that just putting her in more
jeopardy? Isn't that making it even easier for enemy agents both here and
in foreign lands to reconcile her likeness?
You'd think, out of respect for her fellow agents she'd lay low and stay
out of the spotlight, but "Valerie was always a star in her profession".
(page 446)
Now more than ever.
It's open season on the NOCS she supervised, the NOCS out there in the
field gathering evidence on who?
Who do you think?
From page 447 of Wilson's book:
"We had
assumed that on the day the Novak article appeared, every intelligence
office in Washington, and probably all those around the world, were
running Valerie's name through their databases. Foreign intelligence
services would not attack us, but they might as well threaten any
contacts Valerie might have made in their countries, and they would
certainly be eager to unearth operations she might have been involved
in.
International terrorist organizations were a different story, however.
There was a history of international terrorists attacking exposed
officers."
So they go on
the cover of Vanity Fair like this was a bad episode of Jane Bond.
And Wilson goes on the Daily Show for jokes with Jon Stewart. From page
358:
"Jon was so
humorous that I found myself laughing heartily right along with the
audience..."
From page 384:
"An officer
had been exposed, an act that threatened many intelligence
professionals." It's hilarious, isn't it, Mr. Wilson?
In "The CIA at
War", by Ronald Kessler, the Vanity Fair photo was discussed on pages
344-345:
"Their claims
to have been victimized by the Bush white house were destroyed when they
agreed to be photographed sitting in their Jaguar for the January issue
of Vanity Fair. Wilson claimed that the fact that his forty-year old
wife wore sunglasses and a scarf disguised her. But anyone she dealt
with overseas could clearly recognize her..."
" 'They risked undermining any possible prosecution by their public
statements and appearances,' said John L. Martin who, as Chief of the
Justice Department's counterespionage section, was in charge of
supervising leak investigations. 'The scarf and the sunglasses worn in
the Vanity Fair picture was a sham.' "
"...Not only had Wilson and Plame subverted their own posturing as
victims of the Bush White House, they had undermined the integrity of
the CIA's clandestine program to collect intelligence using covert
officers. If a CIA officer took her duty to remain in a clandestine role
so lightly it could make agents leery of risking their lives to provide
intelligence to other CIA officers."
Wilson and
Plame behaved as if they were trying to make the Bush administration's
case for a defense to the IIPA. By showing up in public as they have done,
they lend credence to the Bush talking points which argue that Plame's
status at the CIA was not covert and that blowing her cover was no big
deal. Their gambit was based on the arrogant self belief they could trick
the nation into believing its laws against espionage don't exist.
Under 18 USC 794, it doesn't matter if she was covert, it only matters
whether her name and position were "related to the public defense". Don't
forget that State Department memo though. The paragraph her name appeared
in was marked "(S)" for secret, and according to a Bush Executive order,
that meant her name and job were classified info. The memo is prima
facie proof of her status.
The Instpundit (December 3, 2003) has some interesting insights about the
actions of Plame/Wilson:
"OKAY, I'M
OFFICIALLY PRONOUNCING THE PLAME SCANDAL BOGUS:
Former
ambassador Joseph Wilson has been quite protective of his wife,
Valerie Plame, in the weeks since her cover as a CIA operative was
blown.
'My wife has made it very clear that -- she has authorized me to say
this -- she would rather chop off her right arm than say anything to
the press and she will not allow herself to be photographed,' he
declared in October on 'Meet the Press'.
But that was before Vanity Fair came calling.
The January issue features a two-page photo of Wilson and the woman
the magazine calls 'the most famous female spy in America,' a 'slim
40-year-old with white-blond hair and a big, bright smile.' They are
sitting in their Jaguar...
Sorry -- if you're really an undercover spy, and really worried about
national security, you don't do this sort of thing...
Serious people don't do self-promoting spreads in Vanity Fair where
important questions of national security are involved...Not knowing
the underlying facts, I have to make my judgment by the behavior of
the parties. And judging from that, the scandal is bogus, and Wilson
is a self-promoter who can't be trusted. That's my judgment on this
matter. Yours, of course, may vary. But if you see Wilson as anything
other than a cheesy opportunist, well, then yours really varies...."
Mine really
does vary, I see him as a facilitator of Treason, the ringleader on an
intricate plot to both expose Plame's WMD network and to also protect her
and the Bush administration from serious legal scrutiny of their
collective Treason.
The Vanity Fair publicity, the book deal, the Daily Show
appearance, the awards he's accepted...all of it was designed by these
spooks to provide cover under the IIPA to distract those honest,
conservative leaning citizens and media personnel, who might have been
sympathetic to Plame being exposed.
The actions of Wilson, despite his tough words, have been calculated to
divide the left and the right. You have to give these spooks credit for
bravado and chutzpah.
More from Instapundit:
"Tom Maguire
says I told you so. He also notes that saying that Wilson is bogus isn't
quite the same as saying that the scandal is bogus. I guess that's
right, in theory. But the claim that Plame was endangered is what drove
this scandal, and it came from Wilson, who seems to be, well, bogus... I
suppose it's still theoretically possible that somebody in the White
House deliberately and illegally outed Plame as a way of getting revenge
on Wilson for his dumb -- and deeply unprofessional -- op-ed about his
"mission" to Niger. But if you assume that nothing that Wilson says can
be relied on because he's a self-promoter who'll stretch a fact to get
attention, which seems extremely plausible, then you're not left with
much evidence. And the Wilson/Plame couple certainly isn't acting like
Plame's life is in danger. They're acting like opportunists milking
their 15 minutes and hoping for a lucrative book contract. So pardon me
if I conclude that their actions speak louder than Wilson's words..."
Wilson and
Plame engaged in a course of action that was designed to discredit the
investigation.
Are you starting to get the picture?
THE TREASON OF CORN
Corn was the first person to put the IIPA in the public eye. David Corn
was now on my radar. I examined Wilson's book and found out, for the first
time, that David Corn has been a big player in Treasongate. From The
Politics of Truth, page 4:
"David Corn, from The Nation magazine, had alerted me and
later written the first article pointing out that the disclosure by way of
the Novak article might have violated the 1982 IIPA. But whether illegal
or not, it was still an unwelcome intrusion into my wife's private
life..."
So David Corn was the first pawn used to disseminate the spin that the
IIPA was the controlling law. And look at Wilson sew the subtle innuendo
"whether it was illegal or not." On page 349, Wilson explains Corn's
purpose:
"Corn then
published a detailed exploration of the law to ensure that other
journalists, as well as regular readers of The Nation, understood all of
the legalities involved."
That's some
damning evidence right there. Because we know that statement is a bold
faced lie carefully designed to continue the illusion that the IIPA was
the controlling law.
ALL OF THE LEGALITIES INVOLVED? "ALL"???
There's more to Corn and The Nation than meets the eye.
"Nobody owns The Nation" says the commercial being aired on Air America
Radio. Bullshit.
The Nation also held a special function to present Joe Wilson with the
first Ron Ridenhour award for Truth-Telling. It's just so damn
transparent.
Clifford May's article, "Who Exposed Secret Agent Plame?" published in
National Review online, July 15, 2005, makes a strong case
that, while Novak was the first person to expose "Wilson's wife", Corn is
actually the journalist responsible for first publishing Plame's
undercover/covert status:
"This just
in: Bob Novak did not reveal that Valerie Plame was an undercover agent
for the CIA.
Read - or
reread - his column from July 14, 2003. All Novak reports is that the wife
of former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson is 'an Agency operative on weapons
of mass destruction'...
So if Novak did not reveal that Valerie Plame was a secret agent, who did?
The evidence strongly suggests it was none other than Joe Wilson himself.
Let me walk you through the steps that lead to this conclusion.
The first reference to Plame being a secret agent appears in The
Nation, in an article by David Corn published July 16, 2003, just
two days after Novak's column appeared. It carried this lead: 'Did Bush
officials blow the cover of a U.S. intelligence officer working covertly
in a field of vital importance to national security - and break the law -
in order to strike at a Bush administration critic and intimidate others?'
Since Novak did not report that Plame was 'working covertly' how did Corn
know that's what she had been doing?
Corn does not tell his readers and he has responded to a query from me
only by pointing out that he was asking a question, not making a
'statement of fact.' But in the article, he asserts that Novak 'outed'
Plame 'as an undercover CIA officer.' Again, Novak did not do that.
Rather, it is Corn who is, apparently for the first time, 'outing' Plame's
'undercover' status.
Corn follows that assertion with a quote from Wilson saying, 'I will not
answer questions about my wife.' Any reporter worth his salt would
immediately wonder: Did Wilson indeed answer Corn's questions about his
wife - after Corn agreed not to quote his answers but to use them only on
background? Read the rest of Corn's piece and it's difficult to believe
anything else. Corn names no other sources for the information he provides
- and he provides much more information than Novak revealed...
On what basis could Corn 'assume' that Plame was not only working covertly
but was actually a 'top-secret' operative? And where did Corn get the idea
that Plame had been 'outed' in order to punish Wilson? That is not
suggested by anything in the Novak column...
The likely answer: The allegation that someone in the administration
leaked to Novak as a way to punish Wilson was made by Wilson - to Corn.
But Corn, rather than quote Wilson, puts the idea forward as his own.
Corn's article then goes on to provide specific details about Plame's
undercover work, her 'dicey and difficult mission of tracking parties
trying to buy or sell weapons of mass destruction or WMD material.' But
how does Corn know about that? From what source could he have learned it?"
Don't misinterpret the meaning of Corn's involvement. Novak is not off the
hook, he's responsible under 18 USC 794(b) for intentionally communicating
information, related to the public defense, to the enemy, in a time of
war, and he's also guilty of violating 18 USC 794(c) for "conspiracy" to
violate 18 USC 794(b), so he's in big trouble.
Corn's July 16th report, wherein he outed Plame's status as an "undercover
CIA officer", puts him on the hook for violation of 18 USC 794(b) and (c)
as well, since Plame's "status", that of "undercover CIA officer", was
first published by Corn, not Novak.
Corn was the media ringleader on the left. Novak held that title on the
right. And together they pulled the wool over the eyes of the Nation.
Moreover, it's no defense under 18 USC 793 and 794 that the perp have
knowledge that the information communicated was officially classified as
being "Secret" as long as the information was "related to the public
defense" and was intentionally communicated to the enemy, in a time of
war.
Also, federal case law, particularly US. V. Morison;, holds that First
Amendment "freedom of the press" arguments are not a defense for violators
of the Espionage statutes, 793 and 794. Corn and Novak are both guilty
of Treason, if not directly under 794(b), indirectly, under 794(c) for
conspiracy.
Clifford May raised another interesting question:
"Corn
concludes that Plame's career 'has been destroyed by the Bush
administration.' And here he does, finally, quote Wilson directly.
Wilson says: 'Naming her this way would have compromised every
operation, every relationship, every network with which she had been
associated in her entire career. This is the stuff of Kim Philby and
Aldrich Ames.'
Corn has
assured us several times that Wilson refused to answer questions about
his wife, refused to confirm or deny that she worked for the CIA,
refused to acknowledge whether she is a deep-cover CIA employee. But he
is willing to say on the record that 'naming her this way' was an act of
treachery? That's not talking about his wife? That's not providing
confirmation? There is only one way to interpret this: Wilson did indeed
talk about his wife, her work as a secret agent, and other matters to
Corn (and perhaps others?) on a confidential basis.
If Wilson did tell Corn that his wife was an undercover agent, did he
commit a crime? I don't claim to know. But the charge that someone
committed a crime by naming Plame as a covert agent was also made by
Corn, apparently for the first time, in this same article. No doubt, the
independent prosecutor and the grand jury will sort it out."
It's going to
be interesting to see how this all plays out. Who will turn (has turned?)
State's evidence first, second, third?
Valerie Plame will be the toughest conviction in this treason conspiracy.
I suppose a creative prosecutor, if he establishes that Plame's likeness
was information related to the public defense, could successfully
prosecute her for transmitting that information to the enemy by agreeing
to be photographed for the cover of Vanity Fair. If Fitzgerald were to
bring witnesses from the CIA to testify that they never would have given
her permission to be photographed for the cover of a major magazine, and
those witnesses could bring evidence that her likeness "might be used", or
was used, by the enemy, she could be prosecuted under 18 USC 793 and
794(b) and (c).
THE MODUS OPERANDI OF PRIOR BUSH ADMINISTRATION LEAKS
Daithí Mac Lochlainn of Melbourne Indymedia; first alerted me to the
Muhammad Naeem Noor Khan leak situation. Daithi is organizing a petition
to gather support insisting that the Government investigate this
incredible treason.
Justin Raimondo of Antiwar.com; has written a very interesting report on
that leak: Who 'Outed' Mohammad Naeem Noor Khan?:
"Khan, dubbed
a 'computer geek' on account of his technical prowess, functioned as a
one-man information hub for Al Qaeda, coordinating and forwarding
messages between the top leadership and Bin Laden's foot-soldiers
worldwide. Once captured, Khan 'flipped' and agreed to cooperate. CIA
interrogators had him sending emails to his former confederates all day
Sunday and Monday of last week, and getting back encrypted replies. On
Monday morning, however, the Times came out with its
story, naming Khan and reporting his disclosures as the real basis of
the code orange security alerts issued by Homeland Security czar Tom
Ridge. The Times cited both Pakistani and U.S. government
officials.
It is hard to know what to make of this. Either these unidentified
officials had certain knowledge that Bin Laden's New York Times
subscription had run out, or else someone deliberately sabotaged
a top secret anti-terrorist operation while it was in progress.
As is so often the case with this administration, one is faced with the
question: is it incompetence, or is it treason?"
It's treason.
Stop saying it's incompetence. Don't be naive. They hijacked the Executive
Branch. They're cold, calculated, evil geniuses.
Antiwar.com:
" '[CNN's
Wolf] Blitzer then revealed that he had discussed the Khan case with
U.S. National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice on background. He
reported that she had admitted that the Bush administration had in fact
revealed Khan's name to the press. She said she did not know if Khan was
a double agent working for the Pakistani government.'
What a profoundly weird remark...
What I'd like to know, however, is who is working as a double agent
inside our own government? Because someone has sure sabotaged the hunt
for Bin Laden and his cohorts just as effectively as if they'd been
working for the Islamists."
Rice admits
they leaked Khan's name. Leaking is their MO. By admitting the leak, she
admitted treason under 18 USC 794 (and 793).
Too bad for Condi et al that the information they leaked was
related to the public defense and might be useful to the enemy. In this
case, "might have" isn't even an issue -- it was useful to the enemy. And
it's important to highlight the fact that 18 USC 794 doesn't require the
information to be in the form of a covert operative, or anything specific,
as is required by the IIPA. It only requires "information" be
communicated.
WHAT WAS PLAME'S NETWORK WORKING ON THAT CAUSED THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION TO
RISK DEATH OR LIFE IN PRISON BY OUTING PLAME?
There are some very strong indications.
Roger Payne's Blog; of August 5th, 2005, discusses the Khan leak and
mentions a very interesting quote by Joe Klein writing for Time
Magazine:
"Joe Klein
reported; in Time Magazine, June 26, 2004 that Plame 'may
have been active in a sting operation involving the trafficking of WMD
components.'
A WMD sting? Really? Now, that's interesting."
This ties in
with Mark Shapiro's report for Mother Jones; concerning
Asher Karni's arrest and coming prosecution for trafficking in WMD
components. (Read that article before continuing here.)
The Middleman
by Mark
Shapiro, in Mother Jones | May 01, 2005
Asher Karni was "a
genius" in South Africa's military electronics trade. Now he's in jail in
Brooklyn, accused of orchestrating a nuclear black market deal.
From Shapiro's report:
"But in
March, anonymous law enforcement officials complained to the Los Angeles
Times that the State Department--afraid of offending Pakistan, its
partner in the war on terror--had blocked agents from the Commerce and
Homeland Security departments from pursuing those leads and going to
Pakistan to interview Khan and others."
Valerie
Plame, Able Danger, John O'Neil, Sibel Edmonds. The Bush Administration
has consistently stopped our intelligence departments from doing their
job.
MOTIVE? Treason.
Shapiro reports that anonymous law enforcement officials complained to
the LA Times that the State Department blocked them from
investigating
leads. But they weren't able to stop the intelligence this time.
More from Shapiro's report:
"Ultimately,
Karni was tripped up not by the system, but by an odd bit of
serendipity: a mysterious individual who, starting in the summer of
2003, guided investigators along Karni's labyrinthine trail. The
government's complaint against Karni is peppered with references to the
'anonymous source in South Africa' who clued them in to the 'possible
diversion of U.S. origin equipment'."
Wayne Madsen
(an independent investigative journalist who has covered DC politics,
national security, and intelligence issues since 1994, has written for
The Village Voice, The Progressive, Counterpunch, and more)
offered the following commentary for Morphizm.com; in an extensive report
about the Asher Karni situation:
"It is no
coincidence that FBI translator-turned-whistleblower Sibel Edmonds
uncovered nuclear material and narcotics trafficking involving Turkish
intermediaries with ties to Israel at the same time Brewster Jennings
and the CIA's Counter Proliferation Division was hot on the trail of
nuclear proliferations tied to the Israeli government of Ariel Sharon
and the A. Q. Khan network of Pakistan.
An arrest in early 2004 points to the links between Israeli agents and
Islamist groups bent on producing weapons of mass destruction, including
nuclear weapons. According to intelligence sources, this was a network
that was a major focus of Edmonds' and Valerie Plame Wilson's work...
Karni's e-mail traffic to and from Khan was being intercepted by a
covert agent in South Africa and being forwarded to U.S. authorities. It
is not known whether the covert agent was a Brewster Jennings' asset but
it would not be surprising considering Karni was an important link in
the A. Q. Khan nuclear smuggling network...
According to FBI insiders, wiretaps of phone calls in the
Giza-Bilmen-Karni smuggling ring yielded the name Douglas Feith, the
Undersecretary of Defense for Plans and Policy and one of Donald
Rumsfeld's chief advisers, and Turkish MIT intelligence members of the
Turkish American Council."
It will be
interesting to see who decides to cooperate with Patrick Fitzgerald as
heads begin to roll and testimony is traded for immunity.
http://citizenspook.blogspot.com/
by Citizen Spook
PLEASE REPOST CITIZEN SPOOK
citizenspook@hotmail.com
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
