Why isn't Robert Novak in jail?

I don't know why that POS Novak isn't in 7x7 cell for this outrage- dammit when are these cowards going to be held accountable?!

------------------------------------------------------------------

The Deadly Serious Crime Of Naming CIA Operatives

by John Dean
Findlaw
Friday, Aug. 15, 2003

"On July 14, in his syndicated column, Chicago Sun-Times journalist Robert Novak reported that Valerie Plame Wilson - the wife of former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, and mother of three-year-old twins - was a covert CIA agent. (She had been known to her friends as an "energy analyst at a private firm.")

Why was Novak able to learn this highly secret information? It turns out that he didn't have to dig for it. Rather, he has said, the "two senior Administration officials" he had cited as sources sought him out, eager to let him know. And in journalism, that phrase is a term of art reserved for a vice president, cabinet officers, and top White House officials."

-snip-

"No doubt the CIA, and Mrs. Wilson, have many years, and much effort, invested in her career and skills. Her future, if not her safety, are now in jeopardy.

After reading Novak's column, The Nation's Washington Editor, David Corn, asked, "Did senior Bush officials blow the cover of a US 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?"

The answer is plainly yes. Now the question is, will they get away with it?

-snip-

EDITED BY ADMIN: COPYRIGHT

Read this at: http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20030815.html

edit: Content

That could have something to do with it.

was at least a treasonous felony.
Where do you get your view of the law pray tell?

There is SPECIFIC legal exemption for *journalists* in this regard.

Journalists CAN name a CIA operative under law. There are some restrictions, but essentially they are free to name an operative.

The person or persons who leaked it to Novak committed a felony, but Novak did not.

Shouldn't Novak be put under oath and be forced to reveal his source? Is there a law that protects sources even if those sources broke the law?

Law provides that journalists have a right to protect any source they may have. There are very good reasons for this.

i.e. deep throat might never have come out if journalists had to provide his name.

This all stems off of the founders and the first amendment providing for protection against gov corruption.

So if the white house tells ME, and I get the information printed in a letter to my local paper, I go to jail but Novakula doesn't?

Please provide supporting information for your claim. Thanks.

This story was broke in The Nation. Read the original article by David Corn where he makes the law clear. Before I commmented, I checked the actual law myself. Novak did nothing wrong, and to call for his imprisonment is idiotic.

:thumbsup: to the post above.

Not only are journalists shielded generally, it seems that the specific law regarding disclosure of the identity of covert overseas intelligence agents exempts the recipients (without security clearance) of such information from being complicit. I can only surmise that this exemption is at least partly intended to remove an impediment to them reporting such a disclosure to law enforcement authorities. Sadly, Novakula (stupor-patriot) was more rabidly interested in "reporting" it via his column.

just on general principles? :silly:

Wouldn't Ashcroft and Bush throw the book against them and make them disappear?

We adopt Nazi tactics and execute journalists?

If you think "Bush does it so we should be able to as well" I suggest you vote Bush in the next election.

Please provide a link to show where a journalist is exempt from breaking this law- I guess I missed that. At the very least Novak is complicit in this crime.

I'm not trying to be personally condescending, but I don't think you fully understand the gravity of this kind of act. When Aldrich Ames gave up information to the KGB about CIA contacts in the the Soviet Union, at least 17 people died horrible deaths when their covers were blown; frineds and associates of the doomed were interrogated as only the KGB can. Many of the interrogations / executions were filmed and distributed to other Soviet Intelligence organs as an example.

Flying the Brit flag, you should know that Kim Philby and the Cambridge Five caused the death of dozens of US/British operatives- Philby killed at least one he himself.

ANYONE who has prior experience in the military or Intelligence fields (like Novak) KNOWS that exposure on this kind is a DEATH SENTENCE to some; Usually after weeks of brutal physical and psychological torture in order to extract more information.

And what happens if one of those picked up just happens to be a innocent aquaintance? The exact same thing as a active agent.

Honestly, I am sick to death of people constantly trying to marginalize the real world consequences of reckless acts like Novak's. If I were an Intelligence Officer, I'd make sure Novak was paid in full for his part in this little bit of betrayal.

to make a post regarding the same story. This story has been getting little coverage and it rarely even gets mentioned on DU anymore. I'm shocked there's such apathy about this story.

Why would Robert Novak go to jail? He's not the one who leaked the identity of Mrs. Wilson. Whoever told him she was a covert agent is the guilty party. No critical thinking. Sigh.

JC

he is at minimum a criminal accomplice.

I'm partisan in this; I hate Novaks guts and despise the * administration playing politics with the intel community
:nuke:

Sadly his actions aren't criminal in this matter. He didn't leak the information about a covert agent's identity, he was told the information and reported it under the freedom accorded to the media. Tacky? Yes. Classless? Yes. Criminal? Nope.

JC

to Time mag at the same time as Novak.

He deserves it far more than Novak. What Novak deserves is plastic surgery to wipe that sneer off his face.

My money is on Cheney.

journalists were exempt from the law. I think that's even stated in The Nation article. The persons responsible and who should be in jail are the two senior white house officials that Novak cites as his source for the information. I would love to know who these people are.

I think it's terrible that it's basically fallen off the table. Hopefully once congress gets back together something will happen. Senator Schumer has called for an investigation. We should all write him and each of our own individual Senators and congress people to remind them that we haven't forgotten about this.

edit: spelling

classified info is released or somehow summed up all the time in Bill Gertz's columns and he doesn't seem to be sitting in jail.

that's it...:shrug: and that's that:kick:

Per DU copyright rules
please post only 4
paragraphs from the
news source.

Thank you.


NYer99
DU Moderator

What he did was morally and ethically bogus, and if there was any kind of journalistic accountability in the U.S. he would be personna non grata throughout major media.

Yeah, that'll happen.

he actually did us a favor in this case!

sure, this matter is not getting the attention and outrage it deserves, but from the drip, drip, drip perspective, it's another drip that wouldn't be out there if it wasn't for novak.

having said that, i wish no personal harm befalls ms. valerie plame wilson (but i have a hard time mustering up too much sympathy for cia operatives and their career paths).

The CIA does just as much to protect this country as the military- and just like any other area of government, the potential for abuse is constant; and like any other tool it can be used for good or evil ends.

Yes, they've made some horrible situations worse- but overall they are a KEY to keeping the nation safe.

I know it's easy to blast the kind of work they do, but I normally look on those kind of remarks as uninformed blathering.

If you went to college, I'll bet you took a class from an agency analyst and didn't even know it; the CIA is predominanlty populated by academics.

Things go wrong when you have the likes of Poindexter, North and Rumsfeld queering the organization to meet an agenda.

My two cents...

guess all those cia-profs didn't get to me after all. interestingly, my right-wing leaning family never misses a chance to denounce all those commie-profs i had back in college. anyhow, getting to your statement:

The CIA does just as much to protect this country as the military

exactly, and therein lies the problem. i feel really protected by the current military action in iraq. and will continue to feel their protective effects for the next 20 years as the blow-back effects of the whole new generation of terrorists the military's actions are currently generating are realized.

just like when the carter administration used the cia to incite muslim extremists to lure the soviets into afghanistan almost 25 years ago (or is this also merely conjecture based on uninformed blathering by mr. brzezinski?

Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to
the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army
invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until
now, is completely otherwise: Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President
Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the
pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the
president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going
to induce a Soviet military intervention.

from http://www.risingsun.no/~arno/daastol/tegg/afghanistan/1998_INTERVIEW_WITH_ZBIGNIEW_BREZINSKI.html ) that eventually led to 9/11?

yup, the more i look into things, the safer i feel :eyes:

What I would like is a public resolution to the investigation that results in the indictment of at least the two senior WH officials who leaked. Yet such a resolution would confirm Novak's story and ipso facto violate the law. After all, even Wilson himself has been careful not to use confirmatory language.

BTW, thanks for posting the article. It's a good read.

... that the impact (harm done) of a violation of this law is at all ameliorated by the absence of confirmation? In other words, what more harm could be done by a confirmation, either tacit or explicit? Does anyone think that those who'd exploit such information (e.g. by retailiatory acts) would await "official confirmation" of any kind? Personally, I seriously doubt it.

I fear that public officials could use the same law as cover for not revealing the identities of the leakers. As I said, Amb. Wilson himself didn't confirm or deny it because of restrictions imposed by national security law though I'm sure he's aware that the damage is already done.

a friend of mine that just finished taking a media law class and he said Novak would likely be shielded from prosecution. However, he must name the two Administration officials if ever questioned about it.

that many other shrubites are not in jail - political influence and corruption.

our government is corrupt.

It's the only valid one that GEEK has!

......How long did Ashcroft place the female journalist in jail down in Texas???.....Also I am curious as to the "technical" differences between the two cases.....I guess it will take Congress to get any action taken since Ashcroft is more focused on his moral crusades at the expense of our constitution.......

OMG ....Incredible ...I'm going to start researching This
The Espionage Act of 1917

The Reagan Administration effectively used the Espionage Act of 1917 to prosecute a leak - to the horror of the news media. It was a case that was instituted to make a point, and establish the law, and it did just that in spades.

In July 1984, Samuel Morrison - the grandson of the eminent naval historian with the same name - leaked three classified photos to Jane's Defense Weekly. The photos were of the Soviet Union's first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, which had been taken by a U.S. spy satellite.

Although the photos compromised no national security secrets, and were not given to enemy agents, the Reagan Administration prosecuted the leak. That raised the question: Must the leaker have an evil purpose to be prosecuted?

The Administration argued that the answer was no. As with Britain's Official Secrets Acts, the leak of classified material alone was enough to trigger imprisonment for up to ten years and fines. And the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit agreed. It held that the such a leak might be prompted by "the most laudable motives, or any motive at all," and it would still be a crime. As a result, Morrison went to jail.

The Espionage Act, though thrice amended since then, continues to criminalize leaks of classified information, regardless of the reason for the leak. Accordingly, the "two senior administration officials" who leaked the classified information of Mrs. Wilson's work at the CIA to Robert Novak (and, it seems, others) have committed a federal crime. (snip)