Synchronicity

Is Mary McCarthy a scapegoat or being held to a double standard on leaking classified information? Stephen Green thinks that, if anything, she's being treated far too leniently. If he had leaked classified information, he would have been fired and tossed in jail. He thinks McCarthy deserves no different a treatment.

Meanwhile, Fitzgerald is back at the grand jury and Karl Rove even made another appearance.

The problem is that there's no way to tell who is getting this story right. The Times, Washington Post, and many of the other outlets have vested interests in the outcome of these investigations. Their journalists are deeply involved in these leak scandals, and these same journalists are often trying to get government employees to leak information all the time - both classified and unclassified information. The WSJ ran an op-ed to that very effect:

The deepest damage from these leak frenzies may yet be to the press itself, both in credibility and its ability to do its job. It was the press that unleashed anti-leak search missions aimed at the White House that have seen Judith Miller jailed and may find Ms. Priest and Mr. Risen facing subpoenas. And it was the press that promoted the probe under the rarely used Espionage Act of "neocon" Defense Department employee Lawrence Franklin, only to find that the same law may now be used against its own "whistleblower" sources. Just recently has the press begun to notice that the use of the same Espionage Act to prosecute two pro-Israel lobbyists for repeating classified information isn't much different from prosecuting someone for what the press does every day--except for a far larger audience.

We've been clear all along that we don't like leak prosecutions, especially when they involve harassing reporters who are just trying to do their job. But then that's part of the reason we didn't join Joe Wilson and the New York Times in demanding Karl Rove's head over the Plame disclosure. As for some of our media colleagues, when they stop being honest chroniclers of events and start getting into bed with bureaucrats looking to take down elected political leaders, they shouldn't be surprised if those leaders treat them like the partisans they have become.

Sweetness and Light notes that McCarthy and her mouthpieces have all denied what the CIA states:

A C.I.A. spokeswoman, Jennifer Millerwise Dyck, said: "The officer was terminated for precisely the reasons we have given: unauthorized contacts with reporters and sharing classified information with reporters. There is no question whatsoever that the officer did both. The officer personally admitted doing both."

Ty Cobb, a lawyer representing Ms. McCarthy, said again on Tuesday that she never admitted divulging sensitive material. "She did not confess, orally or in writing, to leaking classified information," Mr. Cobb said.

Someone isn't telling the truth there and my hunch is that it's McCarthy though AJ Strata points out the latest theory by Cobb and McCarthy; the was authorized to leak the information. If that pans out, that suggests someone higher up thought this information should be released. That's a very small group of people - and therefore should be easily verified.

Tom Maguire notes that the media is finally getting the issue of campaign contributions right. Took 'em long enough. I guess they finally got their opensecrets.org memberships approved (it's a free service with no registration, though there is are premium pay options).

Max Boot busts out the World War II slogans in dealing with the leakage of classified information. It's as relevant now as it was back then.

UPDATE:
Fixed link to AJ's comments above. Also blogging: Gina Cobb, Blue Crab Boulevard, and Ace of Spades (who notes that the LAT is trying not to confuse readers by providing information that would denote that McCarthy's motives were less than pure - aka being a partisan hack).

UPDATE:
Confederate Yankee takes the Washington Post to task for its claims that Porter Goss made questionable use of his power and authority to search for leakers. Sorry, but making sure that the agency doesn't leak classified information, especially during a time of war, should be the top priority of an agency dedicated to finding out what the enemies know - and making sure that they don't give away what we know about our enemies. Expose the Left and Newsbusters may be one of the few folks still watching Olbermann - he's deep and not playable.

Granddaddy Longlegs has a roundup of views on matters, including a link to Hugh Hewitt who notes:

If the CIA employee fired today for leaking highly classified material to the press had instead taken a computer and given it to a reporter, the reporter would be guilty of receiving stolen goods, right?

And if an Apple employee leaked key design and development info to a competitor, the competitor would be in the wrong, right?

So, how can the journalists recipient of the pilfered info be a hero?

Becaue the reporters' colleagues are reporting the news about the leak?

Because government needs watchdogs?

But what if the leaked information compromised an anti-terrorist operation, allowing terrorists to escape and strike U.S. interests, or the homeland, later?

Earlier coverage: McCarthy's Mess, L'Affaire McCarthy, Web of Leaks, Cronyism at the CIA, Friday Night Link Dump.

AJ Strata updates and wonders:

So, where are we? It is clear Mary McCarthy has been provided one top-notch scandal attorney for someone who did not leak anything. This story had every indication of dying from lack of attention until Rand Beers, Kerry and the DNC’s Howard Dean started jumping into the fray. And WaPo is also hurting it’s cause and keeping this alive by NOT leaking like the CIA with regards to Dana Priest’s role in all this. As Tom Maguire so aptly noted yesterday, if there is no leak of classified data and McCarthy is not a Priest source, why are we have som much fun here? Why can’t Priest come out and say we are focused on the wrong person?

MacRanger has two pieces up - one dealing with Rove's testimony once again in front of Plame investigation grand jury, and one on what's going on with McCarthy. He's pointing fingers at a couple of senators - Rockefeller, Durbin, and Schumer. I say it's idle speculation, though I agree with the fact that a lot of people are sweating over whether McCarthy will flip and make a deal with prosecutors and start naming names.

Technorati: intel, leak, cia, nsa wiretapping, porter goss, bush.