Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: T L Comiskey who wrote (29162)	9/30/2003 11:55:29 AM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

If the facts and evidence warrant it, they should stand the mother up in front of a firing squad....'course if the dems were really consistent they would also seek to prosecute Leaky Leahy and other members of the Senatorial club who leak classified info....in any event, repub. or dem, if Mrs. Wilson was indeed "outed" as that pompous a--hole Wilson claims, whoever it is should suffer the consequences....

To: T L Comiskey who wrote (29162)	9/30/2003 2:21:26 PM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

Tuesday Sept. 30, 2003; 1:09 p.m. EDT Dems Stayed Silent on Illegal Clinton Leaks After watching without complaint as the Clinton administration attempted to destroy one political opponent after another by illegally leaking damaging material to the media, Democrats are now outraged that an avowed Bush administration enemy claims he received the same treatment. Dems are howling for the appointment of an independent prosecutor to investigate the dubious charge that by publicly identifying the wife of former ambassador Joe Wilson as a CIA analyst, somebody in the White House broke the law. While it's nice to see that Democrats have finally recovered their outrage over White House violations of privacy, they have a lot of catching up to do before we take up the issue of whether Mrs. Wilson was the target of an illegal political attack. Perhaps they can start with Paula Jones, whose tax returns were illegally leaked in Sept. 1997 to New York Daily News columnist Lar Erik Nelson. Nelson promptly detailed the material in his column, arguing that Jones deserved to be audited by the IRS because of the way she reported contributions to her defense fund. Nelson, who has since died, insisted at the time that Jones' returns were given to him, not by the Clinton White House, but by one of her friends. Some friend. Democrat interest in getting to the bottom of the illegal IRS leak: Zip. Then there was Linda Tripp, whose Pentagon personnel file was illegally leaked in 1998 by a Clinton Defense Department flak to New Yorker Magazine writer Jane Mayer, who promptly splashed details of Tripp's shoplifting arrest as a teenager across its pages. The Clinton Justice Department investigated the charge, and came up, not surprisingly, completely empty. Democrat outrage over the obvious cover-up: Bubkiss. And where were our self-appointed guardians of privacy when the White House decided that the best way to discredit Clinton sexual assault accuser Kathleen Willey was to release her personal correspondence to the press. U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth later ruled that the shabby manuever was a criminal violation of the Privacy Act. Democrats, however, stayed mum. And what about the mother of all White House privacy violations, Filegate. Over 1100 FBI files on Republicans were dispatched into the custody of bar bouncer-turned-White House security chief Craig Livingstone. The request for the files came on memos from the office of then-White House Counsel Bernard Nussbaum, a Hillary Clinton appointee. Nussbaum told FBI agent Dennis Sculimbrene that Livingstone had been hired on Hillary's recommendation. And according to Linda Tripp, the office of Mrs. Clinton's former law partner, William Kennedy, who served as Associate White House Counsel, was crammed with stacks of the illegally obtained files. When President Clinton proclaimed that the largest invasion of privacy in White House history was merely "a bureaucratic snafu," Democrats agreed nearly unanimously. Of course, the Bush leak scandal is much more serious, Democrats now argue. After all, if Wilson's wife was operating covertly [a fact that has yet to be established], blowing her cover could have cost lives. Leaving aside the fact that Mr. Wilson admitted Monday that he never felt his wife was in danger, it's instructive to note Democrat reaction when one of their own leakers apparently did get somebody killed. "Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, inadvertently disclosed a top secret communications intercept during a [1985] television interview," reported the San Diego Union-Tribune in a 1987 editorial criticizing Congress' penchant for partisan leaks. "The intercept, apparently of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak's telephone conversations, made possible the capture of the Arab terrorists who had hijacked the cruise ship Achille Lauro and murdered American citizens," the paper said, adding, "The reports cost the life of at least one Egyptian operative involved in the operation." If newly outraged Democrats want to do something about a national security leak that really did turn deadly, perhaps they should start with Sen. Leahy. newsmax.com