Powered by TypePad

« The Duke Timeline | Main | Extraordinary Cardplay »

April 23, 2006



I like this from the Captain (re is it a sting)

commenting on this from WAPO article

Others pointed out that the information in question was known by so few people that the number of suspected leakers was fairly small, enabling investigators to work swiftly.

Captain comments

It seems to me that the series of detention centers described by Dana Priest in the article based on the McCarthy leaks would have included a not-insignificant number of support personnel, assisting in the clandestine movement of agents and detainees through secret facilities in Europe and elsewhere. The logistics of such a program would be overwhelming. Either a clandestine team would have to be created for the effort, or the resources of CIA field offices throughout Europe would have to be exploited to ensure the program remained effective and secret. The only scenario I can see where the information on the program could be contained within just a few individuals would be that the program never really existed at all -- and that's why the investigation centered so quickly on McCarthy and a few others.


Many here don't think it could be a sting, but perhaps our fearless leader decided to hell with the polls and press...let's meet the fockers

Patrick R. Sullivan

Slightly off topic, but Fox News Sunday show was in total meltdown today thanks to Juan Williams. Over Mary McCarthy, and high gasoline prices.

On the latter topic Brit Hume described Juan's incoherence in explainiing away the laws of supply and demand as 'economic glossolalia; speaking in tongues'. When Bill Kristol attempted to explain to a clearly uncomprehending Williams the camera cut to a shot of Hume covering his eyes and shaking his head.

Then came a segment on McCarthy leaking classified info and Juan was so ridiculous that even Chris Wallace and Mara Liason joined in the fun.


How many prisons were there supposed to be? I don't remember, but wasn't it 8 or something like that?

I thought it odd at the time. I've read there are only 18 or so high value prisoners. Why would the CIA be building a whole series of prisons across Eastern Europe to hold 18-25 prisoners? What a pain it would be to keep that many locations secret. And remember we already HAD a prison in Afghanistan - where we have a nice military contingent and also is the place these guys were caught.

Never did make much sense to me. Maybe ONE super secret prison in Europe. Not a whole bunch of them though.

OT sorta - does anyone have a link to or know what the organizational structure is to the CIA? I find myself very curious this morning about what our little Matahari Mary's position was on the ole org chart vis a vis Muchausen Joe's wife.


aybe we ought to run our own NTP (Not the Pulitzer) where we award the person who puts together the best bit on key thinga about the story neither the crack team at the WaPo nor that of the NYT saw fit to report to interested readers:
The full extent of her Dem contributions;
Dana Priest's husbands's connectgion to the Marxist CIP' Fenton's connection to both the CIP and IPIP;the fact that the IPIP is Wilson's speaking agent; Fenton's connection, as well to the Tides Foundation and Teresa's contributions to it. Indeed, how and why Tides was set up and why it is even allowed to serve tax free foundations as a money laundering outfit.

Ford Foundation's connection to CIP. Indeed, how we continue to give tax exempt treatment to fabulously wealthy foundations who reward this by funding every Marxist operation in sight.

That's my outline. Am I in the running?


here's what Dana Priest thinks

Dana Priest: Well, actually, the media is not breaking the law by publishing classified information. That’s still a safeguard we have in the law. The person/s who turn it over are breaking the law, technically.

But the courts and the body politic have always looked at this as the cost of democracy and that is one huge reason why reporters have not be pursued previously. It’s the trade off for having a free press. The alternative is prior censorship and government control of the media, a la Israel, China, Iran, etc.

here's Rocky

But the vice chairman of the same committee, Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), complained in a letter to the national intelligence director last month that "damaging revelations of intelligence sources and methods are generated primarily by Executive Branch officials pushing a particular policy, and not by the rank-and-file employees of the intelligence agencies."

and the DOJ

The Justice Department also argued in a court filing last month that reporters can be prosecuted under the 1917 Espionage Act for receiving and publishing classified informationThe brief was filed in support of a case against two pro-Israeli lobbyists, who are the first nongovernment officials to be prosecuted for receiving and distributing classified information…..

The Espionage Act makes it a crime for a government official with access to “national defense information” to communicate it intentionally to any unauthorized person. A 1950 amendment aimed at Soviet spying broadened the law, forbidding an unauthorized recipient of the information to pass it on, or even to keep it to himself.



Other Tom

We are already seeing, from the likes of perpetual gasbag Larry Johnson, the anticipated spin: "It's a tragedy that Mary had to go to the press to get the truth about an abuse out to the American people." This ought to be nipped smartly in the bud. McCarthy had available to her the procedures of the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act, which sets forth the actions to be taken by an employee who suspects that an abuse has occurred. The employee is to make a complaint to the Inspector General, who is then required to report it to the Director. The Director, in turn, is required to notify the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. I would be astonished if it turns out McCarthy attempted to avail herself of this statutory procedure. I would be even more astonished if we see anything about it in the media.

On the subject of the sting, it still seems highly improbable to me that, given the nature of the harm to our relations with foreign intelligence services, this story could have been planted to smoke out a leaker. Why not just find the NSA leakers, whose leaks indisputably concerned an existing program?


what if the harm to foreign intelligence services is imaginary....part of the sting...


this sting may be also aimed at NSA leakers as well


may also be?


Here's an irony. the Watergate break-in and cover-up was a pitifully small-time and amateur operation compared to the McCarthy Monstrousness. The scale of what was attempted at Watergate pales in comparison to the scale of this plot.

More irony. It is just delicious, and an objective measure of their degradation, to watch the MSM report this precisely backwards from the role they have perceived for themselves after Watergate. The brave and intrepid corps of journalists should be sniffing out the entrenched and unconstitutional powers being assumed by partisan politicians masquerading as disinterested public servants.

Truly these are perverse times. Later generations will wonder at the disjunct from reality by the press partisans, or their utter betrayal of the principles of a free press.

Other Tom

If the harm to the relations with foreign intelligence services is imaginary, and part of the sting, then Porter Goss lied in his testimony to Congress.

Other Tom

Incidentally, the lawful procedure that was available to McCarthy is set forth in Section 8H (at least I think it's H) of the Inspector General Act.


It is interesting that the press seems to have almost zero interest in the possibility - possibility I say - than unelected officials in the government were trying to influence an election by leaking classified and secret information.

Good grief, it's a sexy story. Spies, elections, classified information, politics, intrigue - it's like a Allan Drury novel (interesting that one of the themes in his Advise and Consent is that "even" liberals can do bad things in their desire for power)

Can you imagine if this had been a liberal Administration being undermined by conservatives in the CIA? By - cover your eyes Matthews in case your're reading this - neoconservatives?

But they have no interest because: (1) they like leaks and don't want the spigot to be turned off and (2) they're clearly in some cases sympathetic toward the goals of the leakers, e.g., injuring Bush, stopping policies they don't like, et cetera.



Ok, here’s the plot of a political espionage novel I’ve been working on:

Mr. X is a former high level intel guy who’s dream in life is to be National Security Advisor or DCI, or some other very top level intel job. His party lost the White House, but that’s actually not a bad thing for him, because the upcoming election will give him a chance to outshine all his competition and get a lock on the job in a new administration provided he picks the right candidate. So, he knows exactly what to do, he will build his own private intel network inside the CIA and use it to demolish the incumbent president in the press. Once the network is in place he can cause a leak to prove its value, then offer his services to the opposition front runner campaign (with the leak as proof he can deliver the goods). Part of this plan requires having people in place in the agency. He has some already, but what he needs is a good cutout who can also get access to juicy bits of info that his inside sources themselves might not see (that damn compartmentalization of information makes things harder than it should be).

So, the answer is clear, get someone into the IG’s office before the election campaign starts. The IG’s office sees all the dirt that is going on in the agency (or at least most of it) and it is a perfect conduit for information to the outside (thus protecting assets deeper in the operational and analysis shops). But turning a current member of the IG staff is a dangerous game. What to do? Well, how about find a trusted colleague (let’s call her Ms. Y) and get them to volunteer to work in the IG’s office. Once Ms. Y is in place, let the fun begin.

Unfortunately, if you replace Mr. Beers for Mr. X and Ms. McCarthy for Ms. Y, it seems my story has already been done, at least in theory.


Particularly insidious is that she was with the Inspector General. Like the fairy stories we grew up with of an objective press, and inspector general is supposed to be judge-like, above the fray.

She should hang, with Wilson, with Clarke, with Beers; and Berger should be quartered. There really isn't punishment enough for these people. Thank God the judgement of history will probably not err.


Or disemboweled. I'll bet money he's chewed up papers and swallowed them.


There was diplomatic damage done by the story of the prisons whether or not it was true.

Dave in W-S

Just to hammer one point around which many seem to be flirting: McCarthy worked in the CIA Inspector General's office, which among other things, is the designated place for "whistleblowers" to file their complaints. She would absolutely know how to report perceived abuse legally. As OtherTom points out above, there should be a paper trail available to investigators to determine whether McCarthy even availed herself of the proper channels. Not that it would absolve her if she did, but my suspicion is that she did not, which would completely remove any claim to whistleblower status.


OK, I'm reading a lot of whistleblower horsesh*t on the net and its starting to irritate me just a bit, so I'm calling bullsh*t on that one right now.

There is no such thing as a CIA employee blowing the whistle by revealing highly sensitive national security information like this. "Whistleblowers" are people that tell us when there is some plot to defraud the government.

There has never been a person that was given the awesome responsibility of access to our government's most dear secrets and then traded in that information that is accurately called a "whistleblower". There is a word for that behavior - Whistleblower isn't it.

Highly classified information is not the property of McCarthy, she had no right to give it to anyone. She stole it for personal profit - whether that was simple self aggrandizement, political gain or smug self satisfaction we don't know as yet. What we do know is it was a crime, not whistleblowing.


Juan Williams "Not even wrong".

coined, is just beginning. Hugh
better update and include the Uncles!

Looks like Joseph Goebbels began that "fake, but accurate"

Meanwhile, the article itself refers to an early believer in "fake, but accurate":
The exhibit cites a quote from Joseph Goebbels, a decade before he became Adolf Hitler's propaganda minister:

"I believe that `The Protocols of the Wise Men of Zion' are a forgery. (However) I believe in the intrinsic but not in the factual truth of the `Protocols.'"

Century-Old Nazi Propaganda Still in UseBy CARL HARTMAN, Associated Press Writer Sat Apr 22, 4:13 AM ET
Hugh Hewitt hopefully is giving us a headsup to catch this on CSPAN:

I spent the day at the Palm Springs Festival of Books, and was on a panel with the always canny Susan Estrich. (She was on my right; Susan McDougal on my left. I pleaded with the audience for a photo.)Professor Estrich believes the Dems must press the attack on Rumsfeld as the way to signal to the voting population that the Dems have a different plan. This was the only point on which we disagreed, and deeply so.

Consider that panel: Glantz, McDougal, Frank, Estrich...and me.I thought it was a fair match.So did Professor Estrich. For the first time in many weeks I felt good about the GOP's prospects in November.

There's no way to hide the Democrats' crazy aunts in the basement.There are too many of them.
And one is the Minority Leader in the U S CONGRESS!
Don't miss a look at photo of Scooter Libby at top of AP's story on Mary McCarthy at Gateway Pundit:

Today's Culture of Treason: Scooter's Back! & Dana's Pinko Hubby

Any question the LSM is in the
Season of Treason. Or that is just in their blood: A Culture of Treason and *John F*** Kerry is on Sunday shows wallowing it in!

*LifeLikePundits' Culture of Treason Logo features the (gag! gag!) young visage of JF****K!


Two on a match. To be clear, that wasn't aimed at you Dave in W-S.

Dave in W-S

Didn't take it so, Dwilkers. Both of us just hammered that meme from two different angles.

Great minds...


If I can be class lecturer for a second, I'd suggest one should be judicious with the "treason" charge. Treason is not simply revealing classified information; or even giving "aid and comfort" to the enemy.

Treason is waging war against the country or adhering to their [the United State] enemies, giving aid and comfort. [US Const., Art. III, Section 3]

Folks like Hiss and the Rosenbergs and Jane Fonda committed treason.

Nothing done so far by McCarthy, Priest et al. even remotely approaches that standard.



KosKids have a post up saying that the NYT is now changing the "secret prison" story to reflect the view of the Administration! Right, like that would so happen. But they know the original story was true because there were over 50 hours of testimony from people claiming to have been abducted (their words) by CIA agents. Now if we could only get official count of hours of testimony from those claiming to have been abducted by Aliens then we could prove, well, you get the picture.

Beto Ochoa

I agree windansea. Hey that rhymes.
Anyhoo, It would be very intersting to see if Saint McCarthy had been under suspicion for another reason and they laid out a canard and she actually spied on the US for her connections.
Jesus told a parable in Luke 16 of a servant who, when he realized he was going to be sacked, paved his way out by going around and greasing a lot of palms with his masters money by forgivng a lot of peoples' debts. Something that he was entrusted with in his role as servant.

5 So he called every one of his lord's debtors unto him, and said unto the first, How much do you owe my lord?

6 And he said, An hundred measures of oil. And he said unto him, Take your bill, and sit down quickly, and write fifty.

7 Then said he to another, And how much do you owe? And he said, An hundred measures of wheat. And he said unto him, Take your bill, and write fourscore.

8 And the lord commended the unjust steward, because he had done wisely: for the children of this world are in their generation wiser than the children of light.

9 And I say unto you, Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness; that, when ye fail, they may receive you into everlasting habitations.

"It was done for a single minded purpose with the added reward of great celebrity in the cottage industry left wing republican bashing that sells so well to it's captive audience. Write a book or tell a tale that bashes this President or the people around him and you are guaranteed major news segments, scads of greenbacks and the eternal praise of the "progressives". Then add the bonus of spin, smoke and cover fire from your MSM promoters and it becomes a "Slam Dunk"."

If Juan Williams meltdown on FNS is any example of the hysteria on the left,
the din and caterwaul is about to be racheted up several notches.


If the MSM are going to continue to quote Wacky Quacky Larry Johnson, shouldn't they also note he is part of a group that called for the very thing Mary McCarthy did? It seems relevant to the story, to me.

Beto Ochoa

Ah Sue, Relevance only pertains to their Moral Authority.


Here's a deep insight for ya as we all approach May 14: Treachery's monogram is MOM.

richard mcenroe

On the sting possibility —

The secret prison meme may not have originated with Goss. He may simply have released bogus info to take advantage of the already-existing allegations.


You are forgeting the leaking of the CIA FLIGHTS USED FOR RENDITIONS.
Any doubt the Intel services of our European "allies" were very upset and embarrassed by that leak.

Other Tom,
So Goss wasn't lying when he testified at Senate about damage done in Europe.

Make it very likely that the Euros would be happy to participate in the sting.

Not finding any evidence of the CIA PRISONS - also put egg on the face on lots of pesty LIARS - like the NGO's, PHONY HUMAN RIGHTS LEFTISTS and their politician mouthpieces.

A WIN ALL AROUND! Love to see the celebratory notes and wines, beers and hard spirits to toast,in the SPECIAL pouches delivered this week!

Beto Ochoa

Your story should at least be adapted into a short film and presented at some conservative, pro patriot film fest.



Okay, some of the other stuff I have been speculating is just that, speculation. That bit of information is fact. It was on their website. He is part of that group. It is relevant to Larry Johnson's opinion. Which they are happily quoting. It makes me go grrrrrrr....


I read somewhere that the administration had requested the WaPo not publish the secret prison story. I know this happened with the NYT NSA story and this took place prior to the election. If the request to the WaPo did occur, was that also before the election?

The reason I ask is that it seems to me quite unusual for Mary McCarthy to go back to the CIA in 2004 after leaving in 2001. Tom, you mention a White House - CIA war and maybe so, but I am wondering if McCarthy is a Kerry campaign mole sent in to get dirt and make it public. It certainly seems to have many of the circumstantial connections to Bush's enemies and her going back in 2004 is just too unusual.


PRIEST ON MSNBC trying to play down new Bin Laden tape!

"none dare call it treason"

So we should keep our gloves on? Just let the DEMS & THEIR MINIONS SPIN IT.

And our spokesmen should get on the cable stations and with the short time they are given, with all the interruptions of the other panelists, with the "hosts" not only allowing but encouraging the rudeness..........

Our people should explain the law, read out the sections - to agree with the LEFTIES that McCarthy is ________! What????

SMG, perhaps you would like to ask any of your relatives(unless they were on Uncle Joe's side) who lived thru WWII - what they think McCarthy just did.

The "Uncle Joe" mention did not refer to you or to your relatives - only used as I believe that it only be that group that would see nothing wrong in her leak. As their spawn is now doing.


Rick Ballard

Dave in W-S,

Thank you for the information on the Hatch Act on another thread. You mentioned that it was 'loosened' by amendment in '93 (the last year of weasel majority), do you know if the impetus for amendment came from Miz Clinton's Executive branch? Was this a method of making the seeding of 'party servants' rather than public servants easier to accomplish?

Perhaps a rescission of the amendment would be a task that the current Congress might address?

Rick Ballard


Going boldly forth once again, eh?


BTW: Goss and McCarthy have likely known one another for many years, given their respective roles in U.S. intelligence.



IIRC, they requested they not publish the story but when the WaPo was going to go ahead and publish, they requested they withhold the names of the countries and they did that. I think that was in the WaPo story itself.

Beto Ochoa

Sue, I was saying the MSM doesn't care if somethings relevant when it doesn't fit their template.


So we should keep our gloves on? Just let the DEMS & THEIR MINIONS SPIN IT.

Look, folks can post whatever they want here per the rules made by TM.

But this is Just One Minute, a blog run by Tom Maguire.

It's not Daily Kos, a blog run by, well, fill in the blank.

I'll not become a leftwinger in style but only with different subtance. BDS is a leftist autoimmune disease; let's not let it mutate and infect us.

Others can, obviously, choose a different path and post whatever they wish. I can't stop them.

Based on what we know, what McCarthy, Priest et al. did was not treason.

It was wrong, illegal, contemptible, unacceptable and unethical. But not treasonous.




Do you agree it was treacherous? subversive?


Just got overconfident - check all my multipled tagged posts since last evening.

Got a bit "blinded" by rage at we shouldnt be calling what they did/are doing "TREASON.

Notice how carefully the LEFT uses words. President George W Bush LEAKED?????

When the LSM takes up the CONSTITUTION, law books and dictionaries - then I will match their caution.

are apt and effective.

I won't expect GW, Gonzales or Goss to use the term. But have no problem with Joe Sixpack and the rest of the Red State YaHoos that vote R in the midterms embrace of it.

Great "discussion" to follow:

Republican are a "Culture of Corruption"!

Democrats are a "Culture of Treason" and "Corruption"

Vote Democrat - Two for the $$$$ of one!


Do you agree it was treacherous? subversive?

Yes, and yes.

It was (based on what we know now; obviously we'll know much more as this plays out) a betrayal of confidence and trust, undermining a policy and an Administration.

If she didn't like the policies, she needed to resign from her post.

Just because I don't view it as "treason" doesn't mean in any way I think it was okay.



You misunderstand me.

Let the DEMS & their mouthpieces

do the explaining why this is not


Give us a nice word that you would

use. A nice WORD that fits

into the slogan/bumpersticker

format that the DEMS are famous


Provide that WORD and I will be happy to use it.

Cecil Turner

It was wrong, illegal, contemptible, unacceptable and unethical. But not treasonous.

I don't think I'm with you on this one. Concur the only acceptable definition is:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.
However, leaking information in wartime that impairs the US ability to prosecute a war in the desired fashion (which is what the "secret prison" leak was all about, even if the motive was political), is either close to the line, or over it. That it was motivated by political considerations and not for love of Al Qaeda is irrelevant, if the effect was to help them. Finally, though I agree a conviction for treason in this case would be implausible, labeling it "treasonous" is within the bounds of acceptable political speech (even outside the fever swamps).


Thanks, Sue. Reading it again, it doesn't sound as though this leak was something that went to the WaPo before the election, based on the way the story was written and that it was published on Nov 2 '05.

I must remember that it is still supposition that the McCarthy's leaks are of the secret prisons info and not other info (or other info, too.) Hey, it could be that the prison info was leaked because the NYT was dragging it's feet on the NSA story.

It would be nice to know when in 2004 McCarthy was rehired as well as who's bright idea it was to do so.


adhering to their enemies

McCarthy was "adhering" to what enemy?


Adhering as in devoted to or supportive of?

No evidence of that so far.

If this is acceptable discourse, then you see nothing wrong with the left saying Rove, Libby et al. committed treason in the Plame case?

No. Let's save the treason charge for the Alger Hisses and Jane Fondas. It seems to me that using the term for other "lesser" situations only weakens the charge when we have real traitors. Those who had and have a real desire to injure the nation in the cause of an enemy of the country.

Look, I'm not the word policeman here or anywhere else. Others may use whatever terms they want.



Thank You Cecil!

I did not initiate the slogans and only go out to peruse respectable sites to bring back the nuggets I find.

To be compared with KOS KIDZ for quoting Lorie Byrd, GatewayPundit and Flopping Aces to name a few is to IMHO more over the line than using TREASON to describe this crime.

The Justice Department will sort it out.

Hope that SMG was as adament in criticizing the LSM for printing and saying that 'BUSH LEAKED"!


Dangerous do-do heads?


Let's see:

Wilson a part of the Kerry foreign policy advisory group in 2003? Check.

Berger a part of the Kerry foreign policy team in 2003? Check.

Dana Priest's husband a friend of the above members of the Kerry foreign policy team in 2003? Check.

McCarthy connected to all of the above? Check.

McCarthy a generous contributor to the 2004 Kerry campaign while employed by the CIA? Check.

Guilt by association or prima facie evidence of a conspiracy?

Watchathink, classmates?


warning, Scary Larry link, but he is getting unsympathetic comments...and not liking them...going at it in his comments.


Culture of "Dangerous do-do heads"!

I like it! Could work with the High School dropout crowd who have already proved that they do not know what the word teason means by voting for John F*** Kerry.

FTR - How many times have you compared posts by AB, Holycow, Hitthe Bid, or all those free thinking J's that sometimes swarm at JOM, as worthy of KOS KIDZ?

You may have implied it - but I just don't recall your actually posting it.

I think my series of comments on any thread would not stand up to your offensive characterization of me.

Old Dad


Now that you put it that way, but Occam just gave me another thought.

Maybe she is just a leftie loon trying to look good for her pals.

Maybe she and her cronies have been leaking to the Post for years. It's easy. You never get caught.

Maybe she just screwed the pooch.


As for the "sting" argument... Is it possible that this was sort of a "self-sting"? On one of the earlier threads, somebody (sorry, not sure who) pointed out that there is a whole bias-by-headline effect. Where the story says spying on al qaeda, the headline says DOMESTIC WIRETAPS!!!!!!! And maybe this is a similar case, that the "secret prisons" were simply normal, run-of-the-mill CIA safehouses in European cities which were used as transit points when they caught terrorists in Europe. And that they were inflated into SECRET PRISONS!!!!!! only in the imaginations of the BDS sufferers.

Therefore, the comment about "only a few people knew about the secret prisons" makes sense. While hundreds of agency employees would have known about how an individual terrorist passed through an individual safehouse, there would have been very few people who knew about all 8 of the safehouses which were used in this way. So the next step would be to look through that group and find the BDS sufferers. That part is usually pretty easy -- since the mark of the True Believer is the utterly honest conviction that everyone else (except for a few evil insane people) believes exactly as they do and is just too intimidated to speak honestly, the True Believers are never really very discreet.

Once they had a reasonably small group of suspects, they sent them all down for a flutter-drill, and then started leaning on the people who failed. The problem with this sort of investigation is always the needle-in-the-haystack aspects -- once you have a reasonably small number of suspects it's not hard to figure out which of them has been hanging with Dana Priest.

cathy :-)

Rick Ballard

Treasonous, treacherous, subversive are all fit adjectives to describe McCarthy - to be afraid of precision in language because of potential association with the Kossacks and their ilk is simply silly. I don't believe that I shall ever be willing to call an apple a pear for fear of disparaging apples.

"for if treason doth prosper, none dare call it treason" fits all too well in this circumstance - and the coming of this circumstance has been very easy to foretell over the past four years. Just as a fair amount of the conduct of many elected officials has amounted to their being objectivly pro-Islamofascist and deserving of the Copperhead and seditionist description, so McCarthy's behavior may be fairly described using the terms cited.

Having made her bed she cannot complain of insomnia due to discomfort.


Old Dad,
Tenet would have a)investigated
b)sent it on to Justice

c)Janet Reno would have investigated - when she wasn't running assaults on Cuban Aunts and Uncles.

Dream on.....


This old brain was telling me from Henry/Thomas Moore - but didn't trust it.

Crazy computer/AOL here likes to freeze up when I go searching for sources - and packed Bartletts off to school with grandson.

Help me out- it will play all day

"for if treason doth prosper, none dare call it treason"


I think my series of comments on any thread would not stand up to your offensive characterization of me.

I'm not sure whose posts you're reading but I'm pretty sure they're not mine.

If I wanted to challenge a post(s) from you or anyone else, I'd have your name at the top and I'd address you directly. I think if you read other posts by me that do challenge another person, I'm pretty explicit in my writing.

Shyness is not one of my qualities.


Wilson's a liar

I don't think the CIA is smart enough to put together such a plot to catch a leaker. I think the more plausible theory is that there were not really any secret prisons or even foreign safehouses, but the CIA did create an elaborate ruse to make terror suspects believe it to be so; blindfloded them and flew them around for hours and maybe even landed them in places where people spoke in foreign languages, but they never left the countries where they were apprehended and never left U.S. military custody. The purpose, of course, would be to get the suspects to fess up before facing the torture they knew they would be subjected to in places outside the jurisdiction of U.S. interrogation laws.

Mary McCarthy would not have been in a position to know the facts about an actual or fake prison program; but in the IG office, she would have heard complaints from line employees who might have been in position to know or hear about the ruse, possibly even in great and believable detail, and even with fake documentation, and believed it to be true and wrong. She bought it as true and passed it on to her pal Dana.


"hagiography of McCarthy"



in regards to the legal aspects of charging the reporters and newspapers that publish leaked classified secrets....read the following article by Gabriel Schoenfeld...he covers all the precendents (Chicago Tribune & Pearl Harbor, Pentagon Papers, Morrison case, AIPAC case, NSA case and Section 798 of the Espionage Act

it will make you smarter!


one part I liked:

One of the more extraordinary features of Section 798 is that it was drawn with the very purpose of protecting the vigorous public discussion of national-defense material. In 1946, a joint committee investigating the attack on Pearl Harbor had urged a blanket prohibition on the publication of government secrets. But Congress resisted, choosing instead to carve out an exception in the special case of cryptographic intelligence, which it described as a category “both vital and vulnerable to an almost unique degree.”

With the bill narrowly tailored in this way, and “with concern for public speech having thus been respected” (in the words of Edgar and Schmidt), Section 798 not only passed in Congress but, perhaps astonishingly in hindsight, won the support of the American Society of Newspaper Editors. At the time, the leading editors of the New York Times were active members of that society.

and this:

The Justice Department has already initiated a criminal investigation into the leak of the NSA program, focusing on which government employees may have broken the law. But the government is contending with hundreds of national-security leaks, and progress is uncertain at best. The real question that an intrepid prosecutor in the Justice Department should be asking is whether, in the aftermath of September 11, we as a nation can afford to permit the reporters and editors of a great newspaper to become the unelected authority that determines for all of us what is a legitimate secret and what is not. Like the Constitution itself, the First Amendment’s protections of freedom of the press are not a suicide pact. The laws governing what the Times has done are perfectly clear; will they be enforced?

read the whole thing!


Steve, you must have a very fast acting memory hole. Just scroll up a bit - but in case you don't want to do that, I will go forth boldly:
fit their template.

Posted by: Beto Ochoa | April 23, 2006 at 11:27 AM

So we should keep our gloves on? Just let the DEMS & THEIR MINIONS SPIN IT.

Look, folks can post whatever they want here per the rules made by TM.

But this is Just One Minute, a blog run by Tom Maguire.

It's not Daily Kos, a blog run by, well, fill in the blank.

I'll not become a leftwinger in style but only with different subtance. BDS is a leftist autoimmune disease; let's not let it mutate and infect us.

Others can, obviously, choose a different path and post whatever they wish. I can't stop them.

Based on what we know, what McCarthy, Priest et al. did was not treason.

It was wrong, illegal, contemptible, unacceptable and unethical. But not treasonous.


Posted by: SteveMG | April 23, 2006 at 11:31 AM


Do you agree it was treacherous?

At 12:35 you wrote:
"If I wanted to challenge a post(s) from you or anyone else, I'd have your name at the top and I'd address you directly. I think if you read other posts by me that do challenge another person, I'm pretty explicit in my writing."

I may be a bit sight impaired and have lost a razor sharp memory for quotes' sources - but ONE HOUR AND 4 MINUTES is a bit Emily Littel.


How priceless that Mary McCarthy lives on WILSON Lane!


SMG, et al ... so you don't like the word Treason, then call them what they are ...


and to say that these leaks and other things like persistently sending the left wing minions out to claim all kinds of vile things about the U.S. and especially the U.S. military, does give aid and comfort to the enemy. Look at the fallout after the Gitmo Koran story as an example. People died over that one.

You put Jane Fonda in the category, as would I, but not these other creeps? Makes no sense.

Someone very familiar with all these shadowy organizations needs to make a chart showing the spider web of connections. Who is in the dead center? Is it the Kerry-Heinz machine? the Clinton machine? Move-on.org? or some form of cabal that as yet we don't have a good handle on?

Cecil Turner

McCarthy was "adhering" to what enemy?


Adhering as in devoted to or supportive of?

No evidence of that so far.

Do you think leaking information that supports Al Qaeda's propaganda efforts (and spinning it for maximum effect) qualifies as "giving them Aid and Comfort"? I do. And though again, I don't see any possibility of a conviction, using an adjective like "treasonous" (which is a bit shy of "treason," anyway: "relating to, constituting, or involving treason") is not necessarily wrong. Further, it makes the point that, whilst attempting a political "gotcha," the perpetrator damaged the US war effort. I think that's a point worth making.

I don't think the CIA is smart enough to put together such a plot to catch a leaker.

Don't think so either. Besides, the standard method of springing a "canary trap," (based on my extensive reading of espionage novels) normally entails providing slightly different sets of facts to various suspect links, and tracking down which version the enemy obtains.


CIA Holds Terror Suspects in Secret Prisons
Debate Is Growing Within Agency About Legality and Morality of Overseas System Set Up After 9/11

By Dana Priest
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, November 2, 2005; A01

"I like this from the Captain (re is it a sting)

commenting on this from WAPO article

Others pointed out that the information in question was known by so few people that the number of suspected leakers was fairly small, enabling investigators to work swiftly."

I keep hearing comments like this citing the'swiftness' of the apprehension of the

What exactly is your defintion of swift?

Six months from leak to identification
is considered speedy, and adds to the
'corrobroation' that this was a sting


Recalling Janet Reno took me back to the Gateway Pundit post linked about for this bit from Babalu - linked in GP post:

Woah! Babalu is not pleased to hear about the Castro apologists...

From sticking up for Castro, to HELPING Castro by penetrating and discrediting the CIA, this really sounds like a lovely crowd over at the Washington Post.

posted by Gateway Pundit

No Treason, just a slight misunderstanding regarding the freedom of our BIG BUSINESS MEDIA stars.


My intention - poorly undertaken - was to sound a warning about not being excessively harsh in our words. Not that it had already happened.

Again, I said:
BDS is a leftist autoimmune disease; let's not let it mutate and infect us.

Future tense. Future tense.

Let's not let it mutate and infect us.

I didn't say it had infected you (or us). I was sounding a tocsin to not let it happen.

If I believed you sounded like a Kossack, I wouldn't have warned/us not to let it happen because in your case it had already happened.

If I sounded/read like I was attacking you or your posts, I apologize. It was not intended.



***aboVE****not about!


Thank you Steve,
Trying to keep up with all that is going on at my favorite sites does cut into my consideration of the future tense.
As as comments sections don't have editors - perhaps I not totally at fault for misreading your post. Perhaps if my name had not appeared on top, I would not have taken it as personal but just another opinion.
I would still have offered counters to your opinion, but would not have been offended.

Shall we begin again? With one
caveat - using treason to describe the crimes here cannot in any way shape or form be compared to what is offered at KOS & DU. Next time
please compare same to the sites of those only "touched" vs "totally insane".


Do you think leaking information that supports Al Qaeda's propaganda efforts (and spinning it for maximum effect) qualifies as "giving them Aid and Comfort"? I do.

It's interesting today that the limits of communicating through posts are being shown again.

I noted a study from about a month ago that more than 50% of posts on the internet were misunderstood by the recipient. I'm personally adding another 5-10% to that total today.

Let's see if I can mangle this only slightly less.

Yes, I agree that it is "giving aid and comfort." But I don't see any "adhering" to an enemy. As I understand what the Framers intended, they wanted a pretty high standard to be met (Madison and George Mason debated this a bit here).

One had to do more than give aid and comfort. One had to support that enemy in its goals and ideology. Adherence and assistance. Two hurdles.

Do you think McCarthy leaked this because she supported the goals of al-Qaeda?


brenda taylor

well what would you call these people who try to over throw there freely elected president.if its not treason.then what just would you call somebody with the power she had.its treason in my eyes and im mad.

steve sturm

I just posted that the fact is we don't know what was behind the contributions made in her name. were they made by/for her husband? were they made due to pressure from her then-superiors at the liberal CSIS she was working at?

for the time being, let's stick to faulting her for what we know and not jump to conclusions about what we don't know.


Trying to keep up with all that is going on at my favorite sites does cut into my consideration of the future tense.


Sometimes I think we (me, at least) write things that read quite different after we hit that Post button. Even with preview.

A number of times I've done the "Wait, stop!, I didn't mean that!" as the post was being posted.

Too late. Then you hope that no one notices it.

BTW, I don't (usually) respond to the "other" posters you noted because it's a hopeless exercise. They're not interested in an exchange of ideas; they're interested in dropping their pants and disrupting things.



Andy McCarthy at NRO makes this point as he asks why Mary McCarthy isn't in handcuffs ...

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.


Well, if I was a conspiracy theorist....ohh what the hell...I am a conspiracy theorist!

I would suggest that MCarthys' return to service in the CIA was a good position to have if the Kerry campaign was in need of some inside information with which to attack Bush.

The CIA IG would be seeing all the information on the missing WMD, all the interrogation stuff from GITMO, etc.


Normally someone who talks to the press, talks to others as well.


Steve, common usage of the word treason in a slogan does not have to match the prosecutable crime. The word "rape" gets used a lot for effect too. Many of those uses do not convey an actual accusation of the crime.


She bought it as true and passed it on to her pal Dana.

very good Wilson!

Six months from leak to identification
is considered speedy, and adds to the
'corrobroation' that this was a sting

Cleo...it's quite possible that the CIA had McCarthy pegged months ago...


Does anyone have an idea, theory, speculation on how or whether this information about McCarthy could/would/will/can affect the prosecution of Libby?



I'd bet this has been done. or will be done shortly

Cecil Turner

One had to do more than give aid and comfort. One had to support that enemy in its goals and ideology. Adherence and assistance. Two hurdles.

Personally, I read "giving them Aid and Comfort" as an explanation of the term "adhering to their Enemies." Regardless, I think there is a difference between legal jeopardy and English usage, and would contend that "treasonous" (at least in the sense of "relating to treason") is perfectly apt.

Do you think McCarthy leaked this because she supported the goals of al-Qaeda?

No, I think she's anti-Administration to the point that she doesn't care how it affects the greater US. (Much like Wilson.) And I think that sort of behavior merits "treasonous." Further, I think valid criticism of anti-war ideologues is being stifled by ridiculous charges of "McCarthyism" (more than a little humorous at the present pass). It now seems only ScrappleFace has the guts to tell it like it is:

April 22, 2006
No Prize Again in Pulitzer ‘Non-Treason’ Category
by Scott Ott

(2006-04-22) — For the fifth year in a row, the Pulitzer committee has announced it received no nominees for its journalism award in the “Named Sources, No Leaks, Non-Treason” category.


Steve, common usage of the word treason in a slogan does not have to match the prosecutable crime

Yes, good point.

I'm on my own quixotic crusade here to save the word.

Because of it's seriousness, I want to only employ the term against the real traitors to this country. Alger Hiss, the Rosenbergs, Jane Fonda.

It seems to me that if we use it more liberally, if you will, that it loses some of its sting, its power, its ability to shock.

What Hiss did was shocking. If we use the same term for what McCarthy did, it unintentionally diminishes, it seems to me, the shock that Hiss et al. did.

Windmills everywhere.


Jim Miller

"Treason" versus "treason". If I may suggest a compromise here, let me note that the definition in the Constitution is much narrower than the one you would find in most dictionaries. Those who are using the word should specify which meaning they intend so as to avoid confusion.

The Constitution would determine what legal charges can be made; the ordinary dictionary meaning tells us what is fair in political debate.

And, in answer to another question: The "none dare call it treason" comes from, according to my "Oxford Dictionary of Quotations", Sir John Harington (1561-1612). Here's his couplet:

Treason doth never prosper, what's the reason?
For if it prosper, none dare call it treason.

(And, just in case anyone is interested, I do not think that it is fair -- on the basis of what we now know -- to charge Priest and McCarthy with treason, even under the broader meaning of the word. But I can think of half a dozen things that we can, fairly, charge them with.)


FWIW: As a non-partisan, non-lawyer I agree with SMG that "treacherous" and "subversive" are apt descriptors of Ms. McCarthy's actions.

Given what she herself has admitted, the applicability of those two words is irrefutable.


And this interview recounted at Curiouser and Curiouser is VERY interesting ... (emphasis mine):

On December 1, 2005, a Liberal paper/magazine in Minnesota called Pulse Of The Twin Cities conducted an interview with Dana Priest, the apparent illegal recipient of secret information from Mary McCarthy, where she played coy about her sources. Here's part of it:

Pulse: Were you surprised when you found out about the secret gulags in Europe?

Priest: "I was surprised about the Eastern European democracy connection. Yep, I was, and the reason was that the sites would be considered illegal in the countries they are located. They have governments similar to ours with similar legal systems … where all detainees have some rights, including the right to counsel, just like they would here."

Pulse: Has there been European reaction to the story?

Priest: "There's been a firestorm of reaction among the media in Europe, not just Eastern Europe, but Western Europe also, because of the EU [European Union] connection. Europe more and more considers itself one place and wants to be sure that countries that are joining the EU [pursue] the same fundamental values that Western Europe does—the court system, human rights and that sort of thing. So it was surprising that they [the Bush administration] would put them [gulags] in democracies."

Pulse: How did you go about verifying that the gulags were actually there? Did you send someone over there or have someone already there check?

Priest: "You know, it's a tough one to answer because there are people who are alleging that they're going to try to find my sources. So, I'm reluctant to talk about how I go about doing it … because the CIA has referred the story to the Justice Department for a possible leak investigation and a couple of [Congressional] members on the Hill want to open up an inquiry—not on the facts that the sites exist, but on the fact that people talked to me about it."

Wow. She totally avoided answering the question of verification.


Why isn't John F**** Kerry on your list?

He met with the enemy twice in Paris while he was still a
member of the Military. Are you throwing Fonda out as straw man,
no one cares - she doesn't serve in our Senate and will not be running for President.

As some like to point out - only the capacity of ________Stadium made the difference.

JF*K just a misguided lad when he lied and smeared all Nam vets and when he "negotiated" in Paris!

Ah Ha! If that why you want to establish such a fine distinction.
Think I got it.


Oops, meant to include this last paragraph of conclusion from the same site as above ...

Growing. This story is growing by leaps and bounds and is very, very hard to keep up with. Even on a weekend when most people are not at work digging up more data, the minute-by-minute revelations are stunning. And everybody in the blogosphere is weighing in with information, links, and opinions. All except the lefty sites, who are trying to ignore the whole thing. But this is big. Very big. It drags in names like General Zinni, Sandy Berger, Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame, and many more. The house of cards is falling in slow motion before our eyes. What this one discovery has done is to start to reveal the breadth and scope of a vast left-wing network of people dedicated to destroying the Bush presidency even if it means to lose a war and suffer terrorist attacks.

Dana Priest's nonsense: It’s the trade off for having a free press. The alternative is prior censorship and government control of the media, a la Israel, China, Iran, etc.

She forgot Britain. BRITAIN. They have an Official Secrets Act you know! Prior censorship and government control of the media on that score.



My husband was part of the support group at the Mekong Delta and ran the Tiger Team who did salvage and rescue for the Swift Boats at the same time that Kerry was there. He was also serving another Vietnam Tour at the time Kerry gave his testimony in front of Congress a couple of years later. In addition, he was on an in-country assignment at the time of Fonda's little lovefest with the big gun in North Vietnam. In all, he served four tours in Vietnam. I can tell you unequivically that he and Moi and everyone we were associated with then and I'm sure still now consider both John Kerry and Jane Fonda TRAITORS.

My husband would not allow Jane Fonda's name to be mentioned in our home and I first heard about a cowardly LT in 1968 and he had more to say about him in 1972. I had forgotten most of that until Kerry "reported for duty" but when the Swifties went public, it all came flooding back. These two, as far as I, and my family are concerned, should have been shot as TRAITORS and frankly neither of them or anyone associated with them is exempt in my book.


I've sent a request to a friend that always uses charts and diagrams to illustrate his subject/opinion. He's going for his 2nd Masters and may not have time to get in weeds with us.

The Baron at GatesOfVienna has done an amazing world map that he's updating every month with every terrorist attack. Note just dots- but you can get info on each individual event.

Lord we really need someone with that kind of talent.

Was it WaPo or the NYT that gave us that handy chart on the CIA AIRLINES.....THINK THEY HAVE THERE GUYS ON IT????

ROTFLMAO at my own silly question!

Soylent Red

Tangential to the topic at large, but only just...

"Whistleblower"? Suuuper. That would, of course, imply that what was being leaked somehow supported the Liberal Theory of Secret Prisons. To date, not one such prison has been discovered, to my knowledge.

But of course that's irrelevant. Since the MSM can't get off their dead assets and actually uncover such a place (even with the overt aid of the status quo intel community), we will simply move along with the Leftist conventional wisdom that these places actually exist.

My point is MOM was declared a whistleblower immediately, rather than after due media follow-up to see if the metaphorical whistle actually signified anything. That right there tells you everything you need to know about how MOM trusted the spin to protect her (which I would suggest is the basis for risking her job).


Until MSM produces photos of some Godforsaken prison camp in East Jesus Romania, she's just a standard issue blabbermouth, and should be dealt with in the proscribed manner.

On the subject of "is it treason"...

As some have suggested, for the average person treason is like porn. You know it when you see it. And since polling data suggests that even in the event such mythical camps exist (and I'm admitting nothing), Americans by and large support them. Thus, a sizeable proportion of "the average man" will see treason, even if the law says otherwise.

Don't forget Jonathan Pollard got thrown in the pokey for life for giving information to one of our allies (Israel) about one of our enemies (Iran). I would suggest that giving classified information to the press is, in effect, giving classified information to everyone, including our enemies.

So maybe it's not black letter treason, but I can't see how what Pollard did could be any worse than what MOM did.

I'm not greedy. I'd settle for a life sentence.


Soylent Red: We are on the same page. I made the Pollard point yesterday and I agree with you that I can't see much difference in what McCarthy did and what he is serving life for.


My stomach turned at the MSM's treatment of the Swift Boat Vets - cannot imagine how you must have felt.

I posted this here before, but when I saw the Dem's Convention Set I had my grandson come down and asked him what he saw/thought.

"That's not America" he said. I said Why? He shook his head at me prentending that he hadn't made himself clear and used that you're a bit dense voice "that's not America's flag!"

I don't exaggerate when I refer to dry heaves etc - that is what happens when I am so repused/upset.

It supper time - but Kerry's appearance in front of the FRENCH/UN BLUE & WHITE FLAG - is
seared into my esophogus in addition to my mind.

Waiting for SMG'S response - so good to have you on board with me on this one.

Wonder how old SMG is?


And don't forget, after an extensive investigation, the EU was unable to find any trace of such prisons in Eastern/Western Europe.

Someone else made the point that it would take a rather large number of people to staff and patrol such prisons and transport the prisonsers. It should also be noted that the claim is that these prisoners were supposedly transported through European airports, so that adds a whole 'nother group of people who should have known something, even if they didn't know everything.


Oh lord Squig,
Goodfeller's "Starving in Cambodia" NYT OP ED!
Kerry is a hero!
blah blah blah!

Soylent Red

Sorry Squig...pays to watch the board.

Oh and larwyn...

Don't completely discount Jane Fonda. She was not only engaged in treason but married Tom Hayden, who as a member of the Chicago Seven openly advocated violence and armed revolution against the government. That alone should get her cast into the the house of detention.

Hayden now serving the People's Republic of California as a Representative (D).


All this is very titillating and all, and usually I'd enjoy it more. The MSM again showing their double standard/bias in reporting on whistle blowers vs leakers, and spinning based upon the political party in office. It’s just that I’m dumbstruck today (and hopefully only today), confronting how politicized our government has become. CIA, State, even the CBO. So how well served are we, when elements within our government cast aside their responsibilities, decide what policy should be or what should be classified – all to advance “their Party’s” agenda? Without the risk of imprisonment (or significant fines), the minor inconvenience of temporary job dislocation pales compared to, not answering to a higher duty, but the resulting rewards from the DNC/Media/Publishing Complex. There’s more to be reaped ($$$) here, Virginia, than in your wildest dreams. Loss of reputation? Fear not, the same Complex will take care of that. Hagiography, as posted above, is just the beginning.

Treason is a very apt description, based upon what the Founder’s had in mind, but alas, like so many other things the Left has whittled away (Living Constitution and all), it doesn’t mean today, what it meant then. So in today’s “enlightened” understanding of the term, not to mention all the new legal obstacles that have been erected, neither Priest nor McCarthy could be guilty of treason.



MaDr -

The vast majority of both federal employees and journalists are lifelong, loyal Democrats. They are scared to the point of treachery and subversion that it is all slipping away from them. It's all about power and control.

Simple as that.


MaDr -

Allow me to rephrase that slightly: It's all about FEAR of LOSING power and control.

I've been a government employee for nearly 41 years, 32 of those years in federal service. Some of my best friends ...


Not discounting Fonda (despise the B***) and she should be shot.
w/o including that fellow who only needed a full stadium's votes - and he would have been President.

SMG may be young and may have been taught per Dana's hubby, that Kerry saved Cambodians from all those nasty NIXON bombs.

SEN JANE HARTMAN just compared GW'S "LEAKS" TO McCarthy's

Only hope on that side of the aisle is Lieberman, the last sane Dem in the US CONGRESS.
Rick has shown up to clarify the
"none dare call it treason" context.
Confused, right century but is it part of Sir Thomas Moore or Thomas a Becket?
(Heston playing both has always now begun to confuse my memories of the history I've read)

Ventured to Ask.Com

Bartlett's Dictionary
of Quotations", Sir John Harington (1561-1612). Here's his couplet:

"Treason doth never prosper, what's the reason?
For if it prosper, none dare call it treason".

Note 1.
Prosperum ac felix scelus
Virtus vocatur
(Successful and fortunate crime is called virtue).
Seneca: Herc. Furens, ii. 250.

You can always count on Seneca!

The comments to this entry are closed.