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 : THE WHITE HOUSE -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jlallen who wrote (11376)	11/26/2007 2:12:34 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Respond to of 25737

"There was no violation of the Act" No kidding! (Asked and ALREADY ANSWERED --- with the exact same answer I might note --- about three or four or five times now.) It might sink in sometime, with enough repetition, I hope! Skating out one one particular felony charge (but being convicted of others...) because of a legal technicality: Since the law requires - one of several preconditions, I believe - that the exposed agent have been posted overseas without interruption for a preceding five year time span before the exposure is a 'crime' under it's terms... and Plame missed that 'uninterrupted five year period' by a couple of MONTHS, this one case probably came closer then any others since the law was first enacted. Missed it by 'that much'. <G> Message 24080054