Posted on 12/30/2005 7:26:42 AM PST by Pukin Dog
By the end of the day, I will guess.
1st Ammendment will not prevent Grand Jury demand for names of leakers.
Media will circle wagons, but DC types will run for cover.
GREAT NEWS!
The Constitution is the highest law of the land. The President takes an oath "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." Violating a citizen's civil rights is a felony ...the Fourth Amendment says:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Some things need to be reported ... this is one. Using Executive Power to hide criminal offenses is against everything this country stands for ... in 2009 when President Hitlery Clinton has the FBI Mainframes moved to the White House ... and starts blackmailing everyone .... don't complain!
more info coming from the WH at 12:30est....
They may still be able to get some hard evidence to work with, assuming the DOJ is serious about this.
Does this mean a Special Prosecutor will be enrolled?
Attention all: individuals without clearance (e.g., journos) are not subject to prosecution regarding classified materials.
However, cleared leakers are subject to various terms of imprisonment and fines, depending upon the statute.
And I hope these CIA and NSA leakers are prosecuted to the max.
Rant on: 99.99 percent of cleared people respect and comply with the terms of their clearance, even to the point (in the old NSA) of not telling their families what they do for a living. The remaining .01 percent who talk to the press and whine and complain are breaking their legal and moral commitments to maintain secrecy. If they have a problem they should be going to agency counsel and not to the Wash Post or NYT. It is obscene.
Rant off.
er, enlisted.
ABOUT TIME.
The press corps should be even more hostile than usual.
Could be. Some initial thoughts:
--The MSM has been cornered into a precedent with the Valerie Plame debacle. To them, leaking classified info is now a crime on par with smoking in a vegetarian restaurant. Coming to the defense of their lackeys in government will now paint them as uber-hypocrites. IOW, their own words will be used to beat them senseless.
--What has Porter Goss been up to? His initial mission was to clean up the CIA, but we haven't seen much of that. Has he been taking names and gathering evidence all this time? We can only hope so. I think we're going to be hearing a lot from him in the next few months.
--Is this the Mother of All Bush/Rove Rope-A-Dopes? Did Bush purposely let the MSM push the envelope with the wiretap story, knowing they would cross the line? Was Bush's plea to not run the story a warning in disguise?
</random musings>
Frog-marched means someone grabs your arms and someone else grabs your legs and they take you where they want to put you whether you like it or not.
Everybody in DC is already lawyered up. It's one of the amenities in your lease, like the dishwasher.
Rockefeller had ACCESS to this highly classified info. He is part of the left wing cabal, and there are a number of liberal bureaucrats at CIA who would leak to either Rockefeller and thence to NYT or simply to the lame stream media.
I hope criminal charges are brought as well. I doubt they try them for treason. But I am sure there are serious felonies involved here that if not allowed to be plea bargained down could end up with the likes of this doofus not only removed from office but spending considerable time in a federal prison busting rocks!
To see how far down this nation has been dragged by the post-Watergate radicals, just imagine what would happen to a government official in 1943 who disclosed the existence and details of a secret program to spy on German operatives within the United States.
They would have been executed. No question about it.
Nothing...nowhere in the Constitution does it say journalists are allowed to break the law, then get some kind of immunity becasue they are journalists.
Is it unreasonable to tap phone converstations with known or suspected terrorists to protect the lives of millions of Americans. I believe it is.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.