No Cuffs?
This is amazing! Why isn't Mary McCarthy in jail? Andrew McCarthy has a great piece up over at National Review Online asking this question:
There are countless questions that arise out of the CIA's dismissal of a prominent intelligence officer, Mary O. McCarthy (no relation), for leaking classified information to the media. But one in particular springs to mind right now: Why isn't she in handcuffs?
Indeed. Where are the Dems and all of their righteous indignation now that we have a legitimate traitor? Woops, that's right, she's in the "correct" party and donates to the "right" people, so it's strictly hands off. Read A. McCarthy's description of what she did and what damage was done. And Dana Priest won a Pulitzer for writing about it. Aren't Democrats wonderful?
As a result of all this, McCarthy was fired, stripped of her security clearance, and escorted from the CIA's premises last Thursday. Yet, she has not been arrested.
More alarmingly, according to government officials who spoke to the Washington Post, she may not even be the subject of a criminal investigation. Indeed, unnamed Justice Department lawyers reportedly told the Times that McCarthy's "termination could mean she would be spared criminal prosecution."
This is hard to fathom. Federal law, specifically, Section 793(d) of Title 18, United States Code, clearly makes it an offense, punishable by up to ten years' imprisonment, for anyone who lawfully has access to national defense information — including information which "the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation" — to willfully communicate that information to any person not entitled to have it.
McCarthy had access to classified information about our wartime national defense activities by virtue of her official position at the CIA. The compromise of that information appears to have been devastating to U.S. intelligence efforts — in wartime, no less. CIA Director Porter Goss testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee in February that the "damage" from leaks "has been very severe to our capabilities to carry out our mission." The unauthorized disclosures were also, patently, a boon to several foreign nations, which have used it to put immense pressure — under the guise of international law — on countries that heretofore have been willing to run the risk of helping the United States battle terrorists.
Imagine, just imagine, if she were a Republican shill who gave a large percentage of her salary to George Bush and the Republican party. Think Queen Nancy would be quiet? Think Harry Reid would give her a pass as he is Mary McCarthy? Talk about front page screaming headlines, it would be Abu Ghraib all over again, times 10.
In the same vein, head over Rush Limbaugh's site and read how he connects the dots on all of these Clintonoids and their attempts to undermine this Administration. It's an interesting read. He calls the Democrats the "Culture of Treason" and he's right. They've been proving that since our military has been fighting to protect their sorry butts and their right to do everything they can to sabotage their mission.
I really, fervently hope the Republicans wake up and start fighting back a lot harder before November rolls around. They're running out of time, and it's difficult to express how horrible it would be to have the Democrats in charge of protecting this country.
JASmius adds: Kudos to Jen for getting to this story quicker than I could. I do have some additional thoughts of my own on the matter.
For one thing, if there had ever been a right-wing mole burrowed anywhere within the Clinton administration who had done anything anywhere near what Ms. McCarthy did (say, to undermine Mr. Bill's unconscionable post-impeachment aggression against Serbia in 1999), they not only would have been fired, and denounced by the White House and its Extreme Media allies as a traitor, but would doubtless have been prosecuted as such. And Republicans, naturally, would have tripped all over their trunks fleeing for the tall grass, echoing the libs' denunciations in as panicky obsequious a fashion as humanly (or rodently) possible. And, naturally, all to no avail - remember the Oklahoma City bombing?
But no. Nothing of the sort will happen in response to what has to be dubbed "NeoMcCarthyism." Indeed, not only is this admitted felon being lionized by the same press that continues to denounce Scooter Libby (who never did anything except suffer the "memory lapses" that were a patented tactic of the Clinton crowd) as a proxie for Bush and Cheney, but Donk pols are stampeding to embrace her.
Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ):
One small problem with that "analysis": the President doesn't "leak" by definition. He can release any information he damn well chooses. Ms. McCarthy did not have that authority.
John "Patriot" Kerry:
Remember when Sandy Berger's burglary of classified documents from the National Archives caused then-presidential candidate John Kerry to quietly ax him as his national security aide? McCarthy was a contributer to Kerry's campaign, but Mr. Winter Soldier doesn't look embarrassed or skittish to me.
What concerns me most about this business is the Bushies' limp response to it. It was that whole "New Tone" idiocy that allowed all those Clintonoid holdovers to remain infested throughout the permanent bureaucracy in the first place. Once 9/11 hit it became a fait accompli that they would go into DEFCON-1 ass-covering mode for their slimewad of a boss by waging covert political war against his overly forgiving naif of a successor. If any of their operatives got caught, the Extreme Media would guarantee there'd be no public relations consequences to anything but their criminal prosecution.
And McCarthy probably isn't even going to be investigated.
How is it that George Bush can recognize our foreign enemies so clearly (other than the Iranian mullahs, that is) but be so blind to their domestic counterparts, who are the former's last, best hope of victory?
There are countless questions that arise out of the CIA's dismissal of a prominent intelligence officer, Mary O. McCarthy (no relation), for leaking classified information to the media. But one in particular springs to mind right now: Why isn't she in handcuffs?
Indeed. Where are the Dems and all of their righteous indignation now that we have a legitimate traitor? Woops, that's right, she's in the "correct" party and donates to the "right" people, so it's strictly hands off. Read A. McCarthy's description of what she did and what damage was done. And Dana Priest won a Pulitzer for writing about it. Aren't Democrats wonderful?
As a result of all this, McCarthy was fired, stripped of her security clearance, and escorted from the CIA's premises last Thursday. Yet, she has not been arrested.
More alarmingly, according to government officials who spoke to the Washington Post, she may not even be the subject of a criminal investigation. Indeed, unnamed Justice Department lawyers reportedly told the Times that McCarthy's "termination could mean she would be spared criminal prosecution."
This is hard to fathom. Federal law, specifically, Section 793(d) of Title 18, United States Code, clearly makes it an offense, punishable by up to ten years' imprisonment, for anyone who lawfully has access to national defense information — including information which "the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation" — to willfully communicate that information to any person not entitled to have it.
McCarthy had access to classified information about our wartime national defense activities by virtue of her official position at the CIA. The compromise of that information appears to have been devastating to U.S. intelligence efforts — in wartime, no less. CIA Director Porter Goss testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee in February that the "damage" from leaks "has been very severe to our capabilities to carry out our mission." The unauthorized disclosures were also, patently, a boon to several foreign nations, which have used it to put immense pressure — under the guise of international law — on countries that heretofore have been willing to run the risk of helping the United States battle terrorists.
Imagine, just imagine, if she were a Republican shill who gave a large percentage of her salary to George Bush and the Republican party. Think Queen Nancy would be quiet? Think Harry Reid would give her a pass as he is Mary McCarthy? Talk about front page screaming headlines, it would be Abu Ghraib all over again, times 10.
In the same vein, head over Rush Limbaugh's site and read how he connects the dots on all of these Clintonoids and their attempts to undermine this Administration. It's an interesting read. He calls the Democrats the "Culture of Treason" and he's right. They've been proving that since our military has been fighting to protect their sorry butts and their right to do everything they can to sabotage their mission.
I really, fervently hope the Republicans wake up and start fighting back a lot harder before November rolls around. They're running out of time, and it's difficult to express how horrible it would be to have the Democrats in charge of protecting this country.
JASmius adds: Kudos to Jen for getting to this story quicker than I could. I do have some additional thoughts of my own on the matter.
For one thing, if there had ever been a right-wing mole burrowed anywhere within the Clinton administration who had done anything anywhere near what Ms. McCarthy did (say, to undermine Mr. Bill's unconscionable post-impeachment aggression against Serbia in 1999), they not only would have been fired, and denounced by the White House and its Extreme Media allies as a traitor, but would doubtless have been prosecuted as such. And Republicans, naturally, would have tripped all over their trunks fleeing for the tall grass, echoing the libs' denunciations in as panicky obsequious a fashion as humanly (or rodently) possible. And, naturally, all to no avail - remember the Oklahoma City bombing?
But no. Nothing of the sort will happen in response to what has to be dubbed "NeoMcCarthyism." Indeed, not only is this admitted felon being lionized by the same press that continues to denounce Scooter Libby (who never did anything except suffer the "memory lapses" that were a patented tactic of the Clinton crowd) as a proxie for Bush and Cheney, but Donk pols are stampeding to embrace her.
Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ):
Senator Robert Menendez, D-NJ, called on President Bush to hold accountable
those in his Administration who leaked information about the Iraq intelligence in the run-up to the war and outed undercover CIA operative Valerie Plame. "Apparently, President Bush doesn't believe what's good for the CIA is good for the White House," Menendez said.
One small problem with that "analysis": the President doesn't "leak" by definition. He can release any information he damn well chooses. Ms. McCarthy did not have that authority.
John "Patriot" Kerry:
… Here's my fundamental view of this, that you have somebody being fired from the CIA for allegedly telling the truth, and you have no one fired from the White House for revealing a CIA agent in order to support a lie. That underscores what's really wrong in Washington, DC here. …Has John Kerry ever had a "fundamental view"? Oh, yes, he did back in 1971 when he betrayed his country. And he does it again here. Whether or not Ms. McCarthy was "telling the truth," allegedly or otherwise, it was against the f'ing law for her to reveal classified information. It was, in a word, treasonous. Whereas Valerie Wilson was not a CIA "agent," and was not "covert," and therefore had no "cover" to be revealed. And it was her husband, Yellowcake Joe, who was telling the lies. And they, McCarthy, and Dana Priest, and Sandy Berger, and a chain of human filth stretching back to ol' Sick Willie himself, ultimately, are all fellow travelers doing what comes naturally to them: doing everything in their power to ruin the country so long as they cannot rule it.
Remember when Sandy Berger's burglary of classified documents from the National Archives caused then-presidential candidate John Kerry to quietly ax him as his national security aide? McCarthy was a contributer to Kerry's campaign, but Mr. Winter Soldier doesn't look embarrassed or skittish to me.
What concerns me most about this business is the Bushies' limp response to it. It was that whole "New Tone" idiocy that allowed all those Clintonoid holdovers to remain infested throughout the permanent bureaucracy in the first place. Once 9/11 hit it became a fait accompli that they would go into DEFCON-1 ass-covering mode for their slimewad of a boss by waging covert political war against his overly forgiving naif of a successor. If any of their operatives got caught, the Extreme Media would guarantee there'd be no public relations consequences to anything but their criminal prosecution.
And McCarthy probably isn't even going to be investigated.
How is it that George Bush can recognize our foreign enemies so clearly (other than the Iranian mullahs, that is) but be so blind to their domestic counterparts, who are the former's last, best hope of victory?
posted by Jennifer at 1:26 AM
<<< Home