Monday, April 24, 2006

Mary McCarthy: 'I did not do it'

Mary McCarthy has denied being the Dana Priest's leak source. According to the Washington Post:

A lawyer representing fired CIA officer Mary O. McCarthy said yesterday that his client did not leak any classified information and did not disclose to Washington Post reporter Dana Priest the existence of secret CIA-run prisons in Eastern Europe for suspected terrorists.

The statement by Ty Cobb, a lawyer in the Washington office of Hogan & Hartson who said he was speaking for McCarthy, came on the same day that a senior intelligence official said the agency is not asserting that McCarthy was a key source of Priest's award-winning articles last year disclosing the agency's secret prisons.

In From the Cold wondered about the same thing before the story broke:

As we noted previously, the career of fired CIA agent Mary McCarthy apparently suffered a major setback with the end of the Clinton Administration. Until that time, Ms. McCarthy had been on the intelligence equivalent of the career fast-track; in barely a decade, she climbed from obscure analyst at CIA Headquarters to the National Intelligence Officer for Warning (NIO), a feat of bureaucratic advancement that it simply stunning. ...

But with the arrival of the Bush team, McCarthy was apparently banished back to Langley, and wound up with a rather mundane posting to boot. ... That begs some obvious questions: first of all, when McCarthy left the Clinton White House, what position did she enter at Langley? ... Which brings us to question #2: what exactly happened that led to McCarthy's posting in the CIA IG? Did she spend the last five years of her career in that backwater, or did she return to an NIO-level job, before being shifted to the IG's office? ...

The former NIO's planned retirement might also have been intended to provide legal cover for the disclosure effort. The leaker (or perhaps, leakers) apparently reasoned that the agency would be reluctant to prosecute her after she left Langley, to avoid the possible compromise of other intel programs and sources. McCarthy clearly erred in believing that she could get out of Langley before being discovered; but on the legal count, the leaker(s) may be correct.  ...

Did Mary McCarthy have any help? That's an intriguging question. Here are some thoughts that suggest she might not be the only leaker. First, it is clear that the covert prisons were a closely-held secret. That would suggest that they fell under a SAR/SAP (Special Access Required/Special Accees Program), with its own set of security rules, and (possibly) special facilities where only those "read-in" could discuss the program. Correspondingly, only a small number of agency employees knew about the prisons--until Dana Priest published her front-page expose? Was Mary McCarthy among that number? Perhaps, but that raises another important issue: why would the agency assign a departing staffer to handle IG issues relating to one of its most sensitive programs?

Unfortunately, the answers to such questions are in short supply, and it should probably stay that way.

Commentary

This is fascinating. We are watching a real, live game of Spy vs Spy. Except that in this case the players are not, or I think are not the Rooskies versus the Americans. The players are wearing different jerseys. Like In From the Cold, I wonder when this game started. What did Ariel Durant say? "A great civilization is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself from within."

Update

Right Wing Nuthouse says that Ty Cobb, Mary McCarthy's lawer has represented the Clinton Whitehouse Travel Office, was "a member of the First Lady’s staff in connection with the Congressional and Independent Counsel investigations into "Whitewater", and represented Juan Huang. A go-to guy.

117 Comments:

Blogger Boghie said...

I defended government flaks in an earlier post...

But, I have witnessed incredible stupidity as well...

I have seen folks being blown out of the Marine Corps end up in administrative units awaiting their BCD… My guess is that the IG CIA is considered backwater so that is where they sent her to pasture.

4/24/2006 08:17:00 PM  
Blogger geoffgo said...

From my previous post: Mary McCarthy, meet Jack Bauer.

4/24/2006 08:28:00 PM  
Blogger Boghie said...

I posted this after reading the 'In From the Cold' post. Am I wrong in thinking that Ms. McCarthy was an NIO until July 2001. That is, she was not transfered or demoted until a month before 9/11 (depending on what July means - kinda Clintonista, eh)...

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

The following quote from Ms. McCarthy’s biography might point to a rather more inauspicious reason for a ‘demotion’.

“Until July 2001, she served as special assistant to the president and senior director for intelligence programs on the National Security Council (NSC) Staff, under both Presidents Clinton and Bush.”

Apparently, the first reference to reach President Bush of al Qaeda attempting an attack inside America was the August 6 PDB that the Libbies squeal about. Why? Could the Administration have been less than enthused with her editing qualities as Special Assistant to the President.

Honestly, I am not familiar with these terms or the command structure in the CIA, NSA, or Executive Branch – the first time I heard of an SESer was a couple of weeks ago…

4/24/2006 08:32:00 PM  
Blogger fred said...

There is another way of looking at this, and it is rather simple. Since there apparently is not yet any federal investigation into whether or not charges will be brought against her, what her attorney's office has for material consists of what she tells him and what they've read in the papers. Thus, she can tell her attorney that she gave no such confession and that all they have on her are the polygraphs. Her attorney is filling in the gaps by assuming that, absent further word from the Feds, she is not the key source. Also, clients have been known to not tell the truth to their attorneys and many attorneys do not want to know a lot of things. There is indeed the possibility that she may indeed not be the only source. Here's why: if the CIA's IG office was given this for internal investigation, is it conceivable that this got kicked over to them from the Hill? Meaning, that someone else had gone to a committee member and spilled their guts. If that happened, then the circle is indeed wider than the limited number of CIA people involved. Now, you have committee members who know and their staffers who may have been privy to this information.

I think she's lying about the part that "I did not do it." There's a pretty good chance she was not the only one.

signed: fred, New Hampshire

4/24/2006 08:34:00 PM  
Blogger wretchard said...

Since I can speculate wildly in comments, let me put the problem thus. Treat this as a simple intelligence-counterintelligence problem. Imagine for a moment that the Secret Prison program exists -- not in the melodramatic way described by Dana Priest -- but as something more probable: a multinational program for sharing intel on terror. Everything I've read seems to suggest that whatever this program may be, it is fully supported by the Europeans. It's not secret to them -- if it exists.

Imagine further that this program is so important it can't be abandoned and hence, your job dear commenter, is to figure out a way to protect the existence of this program from a penetration you know has taken place. What would you do? And what would the hostile handlers do to continue the penetration? And how does this square with the observed facts?

4/24/2006 08:42:00 PM  
Blogger Boghie said...

There are other oddities...

The Blue Team seems to have been caught in a full court press...

'Been There, Done That', NSA Secretary under Carter Zbigniew Brzezinski

The '60 Minutes Piece' this Sunday

The Generals in Chief


The Red Team seems to be moving the ball well:

Poor Ms. McCarthy's '24' style perp walk

Government Forms in Iraq

Even the distribution of the Flight 93 movie...

Too much is happening without the hidden hand... Ah, conspiracies...

4/24/2006 08:58:00 PM  
Blogger Boghie said...

Wretchard,

This would be much more fun if the hostiles were Radical Islamists.

Why does it have to be our own media and a previously great and nourishing political party?

That makes this little exercise very unfun - is that a word?

4/24/2006 09:01:00 PM  
Blogger trish said...

"Everything I've read seems to suggest that whatever this program may be, it is fully supported by the Europeans. It's not secret to them -- if it exists."

What you've read suggests correctly.

4/24/2006 09:02:00 PM  
Blogger wretchard said...

Yeah it's "unfun". It's a drag, in fact. But it's cards everyone has been dealt. Nobody likes them but game has started and the stakes are high.

Let me try to start with some fairly safe observations:

Whoever Dana Priest's source was probably limited the scope of he leak and altered certain aspects of it to misdirect counter-intel. He/she would have told the story as if from the vantage of another person's access.

Counter-intel would start from the periphery and attempt to work their way in. Suppose Mary McCarthy was only one of the "usual suspects", being associated with the Clintons. Why would she be rousted? To spook (no pun intended) the real leaker? To narrow the circle of suspects?

Right now the problem for the penetration team handlers is whether to protect their source or keep him/her producing.

4/24/2006 09:04:00 PM  
Blogger Buddy Larsen said...

The whole tableau--the stakes, McCarthy and the spies vs spies, all the war-watching world entranced--including us here--is well nigh unbelievable, really approaching the surreal.

4/24/2006 09:20:00 PM  
Blogger Eggplant said...

Wretchard repeated the quote:

"A great civilization is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself from within."

That sums up our problem very nicely. We're between a hammer and a hard spot with Islamic fascists to the right and moonbats to the left. The President is doing his best to get us out of this sorry mess (with minimal casulties) but the moonbats through the MSM now have his popularity down to 36%. If the Republicans lose the House of Representatives this November then Bush effectively becomes powerless and we're back to the September 10 mindset. Of course, it's pretty much understood that the moonbats seek their own destruction (they're still running under their Cold War programming). Unfortunately in the process of getting themselves killed they're going to get a fair number of decent and rational people killed with them.

4/24/2006 09:30:00 PM  
Blogger Boghie said...

This is a long tale.
One written as a one off:

Wretchard, as I see it…

You are probably correct in thinking that these ‘prisons’ are not simply dank gulag cells where some terror turd awaits a bullet exploding from a slit in the wall.

I think your postulation that the Europeans are part of the show is valid – it might be a very important part they are playing in the GWOT. As we all know, European police forces are not structured like ours, and are not quite as legally bound as ours. Shall we say, they have a bit more freedom – kindof more Jack Bowerish than Adam 12ish.

So, here goes…

The American Press, harkening back to the glory days of taking down a Great Satan, sleuths about using contacts developed during the gabby Clinton era. An era of Peace and Prosperity where nothing of substance was ventured and less accomplished. But we are at war, and the nation wants to fight and win it. But who is this lousy unwashed enemy… They can’t shoot straight and they have to be lucky to get any shot in. The real enemy is the guy keeping the secrets – so let the games begin; nobody will get hurt.

The Red Team is caught flat footed. On 9/10 they were busy inking deals on school funding with the leadership of the Blue Team – very important, for a 9/10 country… Red Team starts fighting the War on Terror. Great victories. Karl Rove recommends building a Triumphal Arch, but a true triumph requires that the region be pacified, that the gap be closed.

Blue Team is reeling, but not knocked out. If Blue Team gets a ticker tape parade the game is over for the next forty years. They have sources within that can be used if any element of this chump makes any mistakes …

Move forward a few years (we all know the ranting after the ... Those are some of the leaks) Time those leaks… Yellow Cake, Memos, Al Qaaqa, etc… All small, all peripheral…

Now the full court press: We have Generals, We have Spooks, We have NSA Secretaries, We have…

But, Red Team read the rule book. When the parade of Generals starts marching from the CSIS office to the media they start poking around. They hear about the 60 Minutes piece – a piece they cannot refute without blowing our national security – a technique the Blue Team has employed in the past to ensure volume and stasis…

But, lookie here. We have an ace in the hole. A Fitzmas of our own. All wrapped in Plame Fitzmas Paper… Got the goods on someone connected with Clinton, Kerry, and CSIS… Someone that ties them all together… Someone who doesn’t think we are at war with Islamofascists… Someone who thinks her job was to ensure the success of some Global Medical Coverage plan or something. Someone that thinks she is brave, but how brave will she be with million dollar legal bills and the chance that her pension may be held up a bit and her children might see her as a ‘24’ Perp. We think she is the yak for more folks in the Puzzle Palace.

Why is the Red Team outing her:
1. She is vulnerable to ‘deals’
2. She may be the only contact that can rat out all the other contacts.
3. She is the connection between the many (the enemy within) and the many (the media) She is the joining table in a many to many connection.
4. Roll her and Port Goss goes on a Turkey Shoot and the Media gets hammered to the point that they enter a 12 Step Program begging forgiveness.

Where is Karl Rove?
Who is this Josh Bolten?

Next Step for the Blue Team:
1. Escalate, escalate, and escalate
2. Out more operations
3. Deny connections
4. Place this boring story on Page B12 (Religion)

I think the Blue Team is reeling now. There is a strong measure of political timing here. This will kill them if McCarthy is the focal point of a bunch of depressed and disgruntled Clintonistas and a bunch of self-serving, ignorant, pompus, and citizen of the world media hounds.

Hate to be them…

No more Mr. Nice Guy

This is going to be fun…

4/24/2006 09:50:00 PM  
Blogger 2164th said...

Where is the leadership? Where is the president? My God, are we going to get a "malaise speech" next? This government is in deep serious trouble. Bad things come from weak leadership. Weak leadership in bad times in a dangerous world with an incapable inarticulate president unwilling to enforce the law is putting this country at great risk. Where is this going?

4/24/2006 09:52:00 PM  
Blogger Boghie said...

2164th,

This game is likely to be blown out...

The kill shot is coming...

Leadership…

The President has been trying to work with these backstabbing malcontents for years. These clowns offer nothing. They just sit around and rant. They are untrustworthy. You cannot keep them informed on topics that are not pure white in this world of greys. They lie, leak, and scream.

Leadership will be the spanking to come. Can't you feel it. They can't squirm out of the hold...

You have an ill informed and arrogant media reporting on difficult decisions based on the 'get' from ill informed and ignorant and malevolent gamers. The media knows these sources are not ‘unimpeachable’. These sources know the media will represent them as ‘Former CIA Analysts’ – even though they are now political hacks in some stupid little activist club.

This game is over…

4/24/2006 10:11:00 PM  
Blogger Boghie said...

Oh, Wretchard…

Sorry about the story…

I misread your post as McCarthy being a stalking horse… You imply that she may be an unwitting accomplice – perhaps for both sides…

Uuuughhhh, too late – and after ‘24’.

I do not know anything about counter-intel…

If she is unwitting than this is a dangerous variant of the game… I do not think outing someone not in the leak-loop would be too effective. That IG office is probably pretty small – 3 to 5 people. The spy within would know the score quickly. But you might do so if your goal is to provide an illusion of safety for the enemy within while shaking up one or more of the enemy without.

You really have two targets: the Leaker and the Receiver. In this case, the Receiver(s) would probably be the one(s) to freak out. One (some) of them would start shaking trees for information out of the fear that their source could be nailed next – he/they would not know whether or not the perp walked chick was someone else’s source. If the CIA found the Washington Post’s source, mine could be next! This movement could be spotted – it would be unusual. And, counter-intel would have a solid read on the Receivers in play.

Imagine how that would play out for a Congress Critter Receiver during political game time…

On the other hand, the Leaker would want to go to ground – again movement that could be spotted. Maybe he/she would seek a transfer to another section. In that event, the media slug would start pressing hard for information on which to skewer the Big Chimp.

I don’t know, but it will be fun to watch.

However, I think she is likely a focal point. On her left are the many Leakers. On her right are the many Receivers. In the middle is little ol’ Mary – quite contrary, and very important to the greater good.

4/24/2006 10:55:00 PM  
Blogger Buddy Larsen said...

"I don't believe in punishment" says one of the Nuts.

4/24/2006 10:55:00 PM  
Blogger Boghie said...

Buddy Larsen,

Thanks for the Hat Tip on Alexis: The Cybersymposium

Seems to be a pretty good blog

4/24/2006 11:02:00 PM  
Blogger crosspatch said...

I believe McCarthy was the lowest hanging fruit and is just the first to fall from the tree-shaking that is going on. I suspect her dealings with Priest were more for background information. Basically confirming that IG investigations had been conducted or were ongoing. I believe this article of Priest's might be the one that really got McCarthy into trouble as being a "spokesman" for the IG office.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A2576-2005Mar2?language=printer

Read the article and notice how many times Priest mentions the IG. She wasn't trying too hard to cover McCarthy. McCarthy might have thought she had a little more leeway in talking to the media considering her history in the community. Doesn't look like Priest is making any great attempt to hide her source mentioning anonymous sources in the IG office.

I don't think McCarthy is the primary or even a major source of information. She's just the first one that has been publically delt with.

4/25/2006 12:32:00 AM  
Blogger wretchard said...

Ok, here my speculation and I emphasize the word speculation. It's a mental exercise and not meant to be fact.

Going backwards in time it will be observed that all the leaks were never randomly timed but always politically timed. The NSA wiretap and Secret Prisons stories never came up together, when there would have been public relations fratricide, but they came serially. That suggests that the leaks are not the random eruptions of conscience but are controlled by a handler.

The second observation is that the substantive target of the "secret prisons" leak must be the intelligence sharing program between the US and the Europeans themselves and not something so narrow as a perceived human rights violation. The object is probably to send the message that the CIA is insecure: that the program has been penetrated and raises doubts about how far it is penetrated.

If we assume that the NSA wiretap leaks are part of the common handler's brief, then the espionage ring is not restricted to the CIA. The revelations about the wiretapping of AQ comms has been limited. But the deeper message is the same. The NSA wiretapping program has been penetrated and how far is for you to guess. This is just a sample of what we know.

If we put all the elements together it's natural to wonder whether we aren't seeing parts of the old KGB network shifting to providing political intelligence to the press in order to undo a policy which Russia has openly opposed. Namely, OIF. Alternatively one could surmise that a professional but partisan American agent handler is running a brilliant operation to destroy the current administration.

I should say that the seriousness of these penetrations actually argues against the Democrats. If they are doing this they are destroying the willingness of allies to trust the US with anything sensitive. They are destroying the intel agencies they hope to inherit. In fact, I would argue that the CIA has already been massively damaged by events so far and can only expect to be damaged further. And there will be a further. Or maybe I'm giving partisan politicians too much credit.

I'll stop there and remark again that this is all castles in the air. Why do I bother building them? Because it will be interesting to see how emerging data fits with this hypothesis, which can be modified as details come out.

4/25/2006 12:46:00 AM  
Blogger Karridine said...

As one American still under the State Secrets Axe of 1953 (Amended), I took an oath to defend the Constitution of America to the best of my ability BY KEEPING MY MOUTH SHUT!

There was NOTHING explicit or implied in my contract, about placing MY conscience OVER the Constitution, MY conscience as a higher authority than the Constitution, MY conscience as a reasonable or rational EXCUSE for making public ANY detail, no matter how petty, of ANY MATERIAL CLASSIFIED 'Secret' or above!

Spy vs Spy? I don't givva damn! But I want justice under the Constitution, which would send ME to federal prison for 20 years and fine me $20,000 IF I WERE TO DO what Sandy Berger or Mary McCarthy appear to have done!

(Fjordman's essay, in MP3 form, await your downloading at:
Karridine.blogspot.com
and
BrainSurgeryWithSpoons.blogspot.com)

4/25/2006 01:10:00 AM  
Blogger Cedarford said...

Eggplant - The President is doing his best to get us out of this sorry mess (with minimal casulties) but the moonbats through the MSM now have his popularity down to 36%. If the Republicans lose the House of Representatives this November then Bush effectively becomes powerless and we're back to the September 10 mindset.

Bush's troubles have more to do with his bumbling, inarticulate leadership on numerous deteriorating fronts he has failed to deal with in the course of his Presidency...and critical mistakes in management and personnel selection. It is not enough to govern with 2 fixations: Find the evildoers, tax cuts for the wealthy.

Domestic stuff is biting him hard, as it should, from failure of do anything about our unguarded borders, outsourcing, failure to have an energy plan in past years, a trillion dollar debt he has run up, out of control government spending, lame appointments like Kerik and Miers..and not only horrible relations with Hill Democrats, but Hill Republicans as well.

The failure for having any plan for postwar Iraq and the shocking incompetence of the Bushies in the Katrina disaster and it's communications failures in the biggest disaster since 9/11 were disturbing to anyone that thought the security of the nation was a Bush forte. Or thought the 200 billion spent after 9/11 on disaster response had accomplished something - other than more double-dipping law enforcement retirees awarded plum Homeland Defense jobs and giving fat cops in Wheeling W Virginia a training AV Center complete with Italian leather chairs.

In foreign policy, he has ignored deteriorating conditions in Latin America, Mexico, China, Russia ----and deteriorating relations with America's Asian, Arab, and European allies to focus all energy on "evildoers".

One disaster Bush caused was many Asian allies were on the fence about becoming closer to the economy of Rising China versus their continued alignment in the American-led Pacific Rim community at the Asian summit in 2004. Bush pretended the only thing that mattered in the world was terrorism - not the changing world the power balances of Asia driven by China's Rise. Whereas Hu Jintao addressed every question every Asian country at the Summit had and promised to deal with the problems the Asian nations were most concerned about...For the Asian nations, that Bush brushoff put several closer to China and away from the US - including Thailand, S Korea, the Philippines. Even Australia, which forged closer China ties in the absence of US leadership at that Summit and told America - "chances are if there is trouble in the Taiwan Straits, we won't be with you in the fight...unlike the past...but thanks for fighting the evildoers..."

And, if you are worried about returning to a 9/10 mindset...relax.

We are already there.

Unlike other wars, Bush says this one involves no asked sacrifice...it just involves a dwindling pool of "hero kinda guys" with the rest of America asked to shop for Chinese stuff, cheer the heroes, enjoy our "wartime" tax cuts, and fire up the 15 MPG chariots.

Whats our present strategy? Beats most Americans what it is, same with the rest of the world --other than the 5 year old "smoke 'em out of their caves", "we are helping the noble Arabs learn democracy" stuff stuff. Our allies don't know either.

4/25/2006 01:11:00 AM  
Blogger Dymphna said...

For interesting castles, built on some foundations stronger than air, I suggest "In From the Cold"...I can't find the link, but you've got him somewhere...he's got the chain of command, and Mary Mc's chain of moves.

Sinister. As in hell hath no fury like a woman demoted.

4/25/2006 01:15:00 AM  
Blogger Dymphna said...

Just saw Boghie's commment --missed it the first time -- so will add James Lewis' essay from the American Thinker:
And Mary McCarthy Makes Four

4/25/2006 01:20:00 AM  
Blogger allen said...

Wretchard said,

'A great civilization is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself from within.'

For those who have missed it, it is not only Iraq that is in the midst of a civil war. But, like the decades-long war being waged by Islam against the US, this administration seems, again, to have missed the obvious – RoP and all that jazz.

As to other leakers, I'd be asking some pertinent questions of Messrs. Deutch and Berger to begin. These appointees of a previous administration, no doubt known to Ms. McCarthy, took the same position on state secrets as she: The role of an appointee is not custodial; rather, state secrets become the personal domain of the cognoscenti.

Not putting too fine a point on it, while so called secret prisons are reported and commented upon as the matter of fact, their existence is merely “alleged”. Let’s all do our part to keep it that way.

4/25/2006 03:28:00 AM  
Blogger allen said...

Wretchard said,

"If we put all the elements together it's natural to wonder whether we aren't seeing parts of the old KGB network shifting to providing political intelligence to the press in order to undo a policy which Russia has openly opposed. Namely, OIF."

Now, this is fun stuff.

I am willing to stipulate that the average "Progressive" wouldn't know an apparatchik from a Birkenstock. However, I do seem to recall a certain Senator who has a long, long record of opposing every effort at American containment of "Russian" international designs. This record goes all the way back to his work on behalf of Hanoi during the Vietnam War.

4/25/2006 03:56:00 AM  
Blogger wretchard said...

There's quite an interesting roundup at Hot Air. Another item which may or may not have relevance is that Mary McCarthy's lawyer, according to a Free Republic poster is employed by a law firm closely connected with the Democratic Party. I have not been able to verify this allegation myself.

"Ty Cobb is a big bug in Hogan & Hartson LLP based in Washington D.C. Although they like to say they are equal-opportunity opportunists when it comes to politics (and they point to the fact that John Roberts was employed before joining the Supreme Court), the outfit is decidedly Democrat. So much so that a couple of its employees were fined $67,000 for funding activity in support of the Bill Clinton re-election in 1996. Since then, the outfit has been much more careful. McCarthy and her husband must have some big bucks; Ty Cobb doesn't come cheap."

This kind of attention and backup suggests that Mary McCarthy wasn't some loose cannon; the proverbial deranged "lone assassin". She had a phone number to call in case things went South. So, if McCarthy wasn't the leak there must be someone else out there in even deeper.

A few comments back I speculated that if there were also leakers in the NSA and their product was being released according to a politically advantageous pattern, it argued for the existence of a central controller. What are the odds that an operation like this can be run out of a political party? Good enough to beat counter-intel? Not the kind of thing you'd entrust to a hack. What are we looking at here?

4/25/2006 03:58:00 AM  
Blogger wretchard said...

OK, it's official. It turns out that Ty Cobb is definitely the go-to guy when Democrats are in trouble. According to Right-Wing Nuthouse Ty Cobb has represented the Whitehouse Travel Office, Clinton Cabinet official Eli Segal, the First Lady's staff in Whitewater, and John Huang. And now Mary McCarthy. Quite a roster.

4/25/2006 04:16:00 AM  
Blogger wretchard said...

But then again, guess who once worked for Ty Cobb's firm, Hogan and Hartson, LLP? Current
Chief Justice John Roberts
. Imagine that. But the Free Republic post is
undoubtedly correct in saying "it doesn't come cheap".

4/25/2006 04:49:00 AM  
Blogger Mr.Atos said...

Its like the Greek Assualt of Troy, without the Horse. Trojans who despise both Priam and Hector, have slipped out in the night to slice throats and open the gates.

Emilio Mola, called them his 'fifth' column. I called them the 'enemy within '(http://mysandmen.blogspot.com/2006/04/storm-warning.html). Either way, clearly we are fighting a war on both sides of the wall and there is no option to fall back.

We are at a climax in our existence. Someday, an epic historian will give this episode a name. Do let's hope that historian, like Homer, is not recording our glory from the perspective of our enemy... long after we are dead.

4/25/2006 05:05:00 AM  
Blogger allen said...

Wretchard, your link to Hot Air presents a great summary. Thanks.

I am amused to hear that Ms. McCarthy’s behavior was the result of her being disgruntled by a demotion to the IG’s office. For those unaware, the IG of any bureaucracy serves as the laundry, much like a divorce attorney. Essentially unfettered by the usual privacy constraints etc, the IG can sort and launder dirty laundry with impunity. Because of anonymity or the unofficial nature of complaints sent to the IG, the owners of the dirty laundry are usually blissfully unaware of being sanitized. If one really wants to know what is happening within an organization, go to work for the IG and not for the media relations center: the former deals with nitty-gritty, the latter with the meaningless torrent of regulations, memoranda, and e-mails rushing through the organization. One speaks to fact the other to fiction.

When Ms. McCarthy and company were no longer able to affect administration policy by pro-active advocacy, such as recommending against extraditing OBL from the Sudan or taking the hit on him in Pakistan or Afghanistan, they gravitated to the one remaining realm where the bulk of the administration’s policy could be stymied reactionarily, the IG’s office. On those occasions when a negative finding by the IG would not suffice and when maximum damage to the administration was desired, Ms. McCarthy and company selectively leaked. Consequently, the administration has been done to death by a steady flow of unhindered leaks, almost from day one.

Mr. President, your laundry will be ready on Thursday - Mary O.

4/25/2006 05:19:00 AM  
Blogger Charles said...

Emilio Mola, called them his 'fifth' column. I called them the 'enemy within '(http://mysandmen.blogspot.com/2006/04/storm-warning.html). Either way, clearly we are fighting a war on both sides of the wall and there is no option to fall back.
////////////////
this is essentially correct.

4/25/2006 05:23:00 AM  
Blogger trish said...

My, oh, my, but people do love a good conspiracy theory.

"while so called secret prisons are reported and commented upon as the matter of fact, their existence is merely 'alleged'. Let’s all do our part to keep it that way."

Good job, allen. Secret what? is more like it.

Priest is to the WaPo as Sy Hersh is to the New Yorker. Sy at least knows that most of what he puts out there is BS. Dana Priest doesn't.

Beware delusional "truth-tellers" and their conduits.

As in...

"I would like to talk, representing all those veterans, and say that several months ago in Detroit, we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged and many very highly decorated veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia, not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command...."

4/25/2006 06:30:00 AM  
Blogger Habu_1 said...

It is apparent that the Democratic Party has a "fifth column" leadership and a useful idiot constituency.
Increased authorizations by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court should be increased.
I can all but guarantee that somewhere in the ECHELON system there was ELINT documenting the Clinton administration nefarious dealings with China (via Sandy Berger) but also the treachery abounding today. Unfortunetly the ECHELON "dictionaries" probably missed or skipped over much of this vital information.
It is still there but finding it is a monumental task and not one to many on the Hill would support.

Similar programs worked in Great Britian with success during the term of Margaret Thatcher and much intelligence abuse was halted.

The US is slow in enemy identification and thus our responses are always in the catch up mode. A perfect example is our current leaderships refusal to acknowledge to the American public that we are at war with ALL of Islam. It has been such since it's formation. Nuking Iran's nuclear facilities will go a long way in the weak horse/strong horse stable with the added plus of killing a few million Persians.

Ferret out the leakers, interrogate them and hang them, no prison, hang them...it will slow them down and help clear some of their mindsets on when and who gets to do what with INTEL.

4/25/2006 06:41:00 AM  
Blogger desert rat said...

On the Iraqi side of the wall, we empower our foe, giving them the command and contol of Federal Iraq.

In the US, it's now claimed by many, our intelligence operations are compromised and ineffective.
That may just be a "Slam Dunk".

And yet responsibility for these disasters of consequence is laid at no one's door step.

Have faith, the fellas that have been "blindsided" by the Real World, they will be getting with the Program, soon. Real soon.

As buddy said earlier, if the November Elections go poorly for the Republicans, the Mohammedan War will be over.

Pay any price, bear any burden.

Seen this all before. In regards the US and War, been there, done that. Been here, done this, before.

Win quick or stay on the porch.

If your Generals cannot win quick, find new ones that can.

See: Abe Lincoln and the War of Northern Aggression, for further details.

4/25/2006 06:47:00 AM  
Blogger allen said...

trish, 6:30 AM

Thanks.

Wasn't there something about Ghengis Khan in there? - (old gray matter and long ago)

4/25/2006 06:58:00 AM  
Blogger trish said...

"If your Generals cannot win quick, find new ones that can."

Who directs the generals, Rat? And who is interested in winning?

4/25/2006 07:00:00 AM  
Blogger desert rat said...

But then, good ol' "Honest Abe" he could tell US who the Enemy was.

Mr George W. Bush has yet to cross that Rubican, and his lack of success, as a War President, is evident.

The Border Bandits have not been suppressed.
In the Iraq War the situation has not improved since D-Day.

Mr Rumsfeld recently said leaving now would leave Iraq with Leaders referenced as "same as Saddam" in power.

4/25/2006 07:07:00 AM  
Blogger allen said...

trish said,

"Who directs the generals, Rat? And who is interested in winning?"

Apropos the thought, why is Ms. McCarthy sitting at home, unmolested, free to chatter through hired guns to her little heart's content. Indeed, '[W]ho is interested in winning?'

4/25/2006 07:10:00 AM  
Blogger trish said...

Indeed, allen.

*Jayngis* Kahn, as it was spoken.

4/25/2006 07:11:00 AM  
Blogger Buddy Larsen said...

Whose America is it?

4/25/2006 07:12:00 AM  
Blogger Habu_1 said...

Why Buddy it's America. The worlds melting pot.
This country produces great citizens.
Rodney King
OJ.
Bill Clinton & wife
Sandy Berger

A truly great country.

4/25/2006 07:17:00 AM  
Blogger fred said...

After digesting the scenarios and opinions put forth, and especially Wretchard's, it may indeed be highly probable that this is a brilliant op being run by a political handler whose political loyalties dictate that the loss and/or compromise of allied intelligence operations, as well as our own, is of no great consequence. Whoever is doing this, that person or persons has a "burn the house down" mentality. If indeed this be a political handler. If it is a political handler, it has to be someone who has POWER to command or entice. I still think the ultimate handler would be someone who has OVERSIGHT power, and that points right to the Senate Intelligence Committee. There may indeed be others inside the CIA who carry out the nuts and bolts, but POLITICAL TIMING bespeaks of someone who is strategically-minded.

If, as Wretchard suggests, this may be handled by Russia, using the remnants of its KGB network inside our intelligence community, for the purpose of dividing and destroying our European collaboration, then it is going to be harder to identify the handler. We have to respect the probability of this scenario, because when one sees that Russia has been consistently aiding and abeting the Islamic musclemen (Iraq and now Iran)one ought to reasonably assume that Putin is carrying on a war by proxy against us. Witness the arms deals with Iran, the concerted effort to restrict its own oil output and use other connections to direct oil resources away from the capitalist markets (while still benefiting from the rise in ppbl), and its attempts to forge military and trade ties with China (orchestrating joint military maneuvers in the Far East). Is the Cold War really over?

Right now, on this forum, we are scenario building. Lacking enough information, we are using reason deductively, intuiting what may be the case from the sparse information we have at our disposal.

It is interesting to note that the aim to discredit GWB seems to reveal that there is a commonality between the Democratic Party and some very old, familiar adversaries.

4/25/2006 07:17:00 AM  
Blogger Buddy Larsen said...

Trish, for a refreshing memory, scroll down about halfway to "A Legend In His Own Mind". I personally would respect the Senator a lot more if he would just come out publicly for the Hammer & Sickle, and quit the silly-ass pretending.

4/25/2006 07:19:00 AM  
Blogger fred said...

Oooops! The above comment from "fred" is from "fred, New Hampshire." Forgot to make that distinction.

4/25/2006 07:25:00 AM  
Blogger allen said...

trish,

*Jayngis* Kahn

Having seen the devastation at Hue, I wondered whether former [Left]tenant Kerry was giving testimony before the Communist Central Committee or the Congress. But I repeat myself.

4/25/2006 07:28:00 AM  
Blogger Buddy Larsen said...

Hue--when Tet didn't destroy Saigon, destroy the Imperial City up on the DMZ--anything to impress Walter Cronkite.

4/25/2006 07:38:00 AM  
Blogger theDdoubleSstandard said...

is the problem a) she leaked classified information or b) the content/nature of the information she leaked or c) both

4/25/2006 07:39:00 AM  
Blogger TmjUtah said...

Loyal opposition or enemy.

The other side chose their definition long, long ago.

Bush has two years and change left.

He's stated his objectives each step of the way, and proceeded to do what was necessary to see the process(es)implemented.

A Dem house would indeed be in effect surrender, but the active offensive against the administration (consciously embracing defeat of our nation as a price to be paid for a return to political power) by the Democrats has been in process since even before 9/11.

Crimes don't kill politicians. Cover ups do. CNN showing an interest in McCarthy's bio and network of Clintonista/DNC associations is heartening.

One of the gutsiest strategies in a long poker game is being willing to lose small bets long enough to entice an opponent to get fatally greedy.

Not prosecuting Berger to the fullest extent possible was the equivalent of throwing in a full house and waiting for a bigger pot.

Dems do three card monte well enough, but only with marked cards and a herd of shills in residence. Chess is beyond them, and poker... at poker they have no clue.

I look forward to indictments before summer. Multiple indictments, and for espionage aimed at aiding and abetting terrorists. Just in time for November.

4/25/2006 07:39:00 AM  
Blogger theDdoubleSstandard said...

also, i forgot to ask the following: McCarthy has been fired but has she been charged with any crime or indicted for any crime ???

4/25/2006 07:43:00 AM  
Blogger Buddy Larsen said...

TMJ, if you look into Turner Broadcasting's affiliations with the Soros and Heinz-Kerry networks, you'll see why CNN is covering its ass with a show of "news" work.

4/25/2006 07:45:00 AM  
Blogger allen said...

fred de NH,

"familiar adversaries"

The epiphany of Vladimir Putin

When Mr. Bush met his friend “Pootie Pooh” in Midland, the MSM was gesticulating with paroxysms of joy. For Mr. Putin, however, the experience was profoundly religious; he met his Maker, just down the road from Waco.

Following the meeting, imagine this conversation between Mr. Putin and trusted aids.

“Andrei, there is a G-d!” shouted Vladimir Putin, diminutive President of Russia and sometimes KGB colonel.

“Vladimir Droogovich, what are you saying”, responded ashen-faced retainer Andrei Shostakovich?

Putin replied, “I went into the meeting fearful of the fate of Mother Russia, expecting to meet a Texan, a John Wayne in miniature. Instead, Andrei what I found was our usual Connecticut Yankee, another useful idiot, a guy in cowboy boots wanting to give me a soulful wet kiss. Phetooy!

Imagine, Andrei, Mother Russia is saved, without so much as a kopek or a bullet spent. There is a G-d!”

4/25/2006 08:06:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

"On the Iraqi side of the wall, we empower our foe, giving them the command and contol of Federal Iraq."
---
On the US side of the wall, (where lazy Amerikans won't work) we give them control of Federal Welfare/"Education" ENTITLEMENTS.
The solution?
Ask POTUS:
Tear Down that Wall!
(You might get your racist Joo Buddies to do that over there, too, Allen)
---
BTW, I think think this thread has confused "the KGB" with Hillary '08.
What's up w/that?

4/25/2006 08:28:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

American Thinker:
"A politicized national security apparatus is not the only Clinton legacy. Slick Willie himself routinely attacks the White House before foreign audiences, including those that are filled with radical Islamists, as in Dubai. So do Al Gore and Madeleine Albright.
(they left out: for $300k for Bill)

That’s why Iran’s nuclear zealots are placing their bets on 2008, when the Democrats will collapse to rising Islamist power.

Then we have the Clinton generals, who were promoted by Bill and Hillary to make the military politically correct—- i.e., leftist. They were in the news just last week, applauded by the media for their courage and integrity.

The Justice Department was deeply politicized under Clinton I, which explains a lot of things, including 9/11.

And the upper levels of the CIA are still undermining the long war against Islamic fascism.

If Hillary wins in 2008 watch for new leftwing infiltration, subversion and politicization of the military and foreign policy apparatus.
"

4/25/2006 08:46:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

GWB's single biggest blunder was his Kinder and Gentler approach to DC Politics.
ie, the New Tone.
aka
Bend over, grab em, see what happens next.

4/25/2006 08:50:00 AM  
Blogger RWE said...

By the way, if McCarthy was indeed an SES, which seems likely, then she is handled in a different way than normal Fed Govt Civilian GS, GM, and WG employees.

SES operate outside the normal system and are selected differently and paid more.

But since they operate outside the normal system, they typical Civil Service Commission protections do not apply.

All it takes to fire them is a warning from their superior about the dangers of anal impact from doorknobs.

4/25/2006 08:55:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

"SES operate outside the normal system and are selected differently"
---
In this case, differently, indeed.

4/25/2006 08:59:00 AM  
Blogger allen said...

doug,

"(You might get your racist Joo Buddies to do that over there, too, Allen)"

What is needed in both instances is some real "shock and awe."

In the case of Hamas (or the villain dejour) I'm thinking a wall of mechanized steel - fire for effect, fire at will, wrath of G-d hellfire and HP.

As for the "Progressives", "nothing clarifies thought so well as the thought of hanging in the morning." - Swift/Johnson (?) - only figuratively speaking, oh, squeamish ones… or maybe not.

Expecting either from this POTUS would be the equivalent of seeing a fist beating administered by Mary Poppins.

4/25/2006 09:14:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

"I'm Mad as Heck,
and I, I'm...
"

4/25/2006 09:18:00 AM  
Blogger fred said...

I think the most interesting question anyone could ask is who advanced her career so rapidly from 1984 to 1994? The answer to that question may just indeed provide clues as to who the handler might be. Someone high up in the food chain passed over more long serving, outstanding, and accomplished people. The more interesting period would be the years before Clinton was in office. She was pre-positionned in advance of Bill Clinton's ascension to power.

signed: fred, New Hampshire

4/25/2006 09:20:00 AM  
Blogger Aristides said...

First, I would note that the addition of Ty Cobb to this story strongly indicates that Ms. McCarthy is not only a Democratic asset, she is a Democratic liability. She knows something damaging to the Democrats, you can bet on it. Otherwise, why send in the Wolf to take care of things? The Clintons do not stick their neck out for mere loyalty purposes. In fact, they are quite ruthless in dealing with failure.

Well, this according to Hot Air:

By 1991 – just seven years after joining the agency – she was a top deputy to Charles Allen, then-national intelligence officer for warning. McCarthy inherited that position from Allen in 1994, then went to work in the Clinton White House in 1996 before replacing Rand Beers as senior director for intelligence programs in 1998...[T]he guy who appointed her to the position of senior director in 1998 was then-NSA Sandy Berger, who was last seen pleading guilty to destroying intelligence documents after smuggling them out of a National Archives reading room.

One guess would be that she is one of the last repositories of the information that Burger destroyed. Another, larger guess is that the information Burger destroyed was one of many data held by McCarthy that could damage the Clintons and the Democrats. Another guess is that, since she was National Intelligence Officer for Warning from 1994 - 1996, she made some strong recommendations re: bin Laden's War Declaration (1996) that were either a) dismissed, b) discounted, or c) ignored by the Clinton administration. She may have withheld this information during the 9/11 Commission investigation, in collusion with Burger's purges, with the hopes of cashing in on a later Democrat administration.

But then we also have the Joe Wilson connection. Could she also know about some Wilson-Plame-Democrat plot to unseat the current President? Worse for the Democrats, was she running the plot? Note: I strongly doubt that she was part of the conspiracy, given the timing. 9/11 had yet to happen when she was smoozing with Wilson, and the long-term national security liabilities for the Democrats had yet to take shape.

So McCarthy left the CIA in July 2001 and returned in 2004. Why? Who rehired her and put her in the sensitive position of IG, during a Presidential election year of all things? Is it possible that she was fired for being a Democratic operative in 2001, and rehired for precisely the same reason in 2004? Was she a known enemy used as a plant to discover unknown enemies in the CIA that were working against the Administration? Is it possible that Goss and/or Bush knew that her new position as IG, combined with her strong affiliations with the Dems, would create an irresistable situation for the Dems?

My guess is that she is a pivotal inside player for the Democrats, has gads of harmful information on them and their operations to gain power, and that she will be forced to make a choice: the Wolf, the Dems, and maybe jail, or a tell all that would destroy her party.

4/25/2006 09:28:00 AM  
Blogger Buddy Larsen said...

Must read DoD essay (refractory to the thread).

4/25/2006 09:29:00 AM  
Blogger Aristides said...

Another question. Is it true she was let go in 2001 for skewing the intelligence she was giving the President? If so, this may be a more serious problem than just this one incident. It would could spell disaster if Democrats and/or Republicans are planting high level officers during their respective administrations to undermine a subsequent Administration.

4/25/2006 09:33:00 AM  
Blogger Eggplant said...

Wretchard said...

"Going backwards in time it will be observed that all the leaks were never randomly timed but always politically timed. The NSA wiretap and Secret Prisons stories never came up together, when there would have been public relations fratricide, but they came serially. That suggests that the leaks are not the random eruptions of conscience but are controlled by a handler."

This has been my own conclusion for several months. An MSM hack would have blerted out everything at once. The timing indicates an experienced handler from the intelligence community who knows something about agitation and propaganda.

Allen said...

"When Ms. McCarthy and company were no longer able to affect administration policy by pro-active advocacy, such as recommending against extraditing OBL from the Sudan or taking the hit on him in Pakistan or Afghanistan, they gravitated to the one remaining realm where the bulk of the administration’s policy could be stymied reactionarily, the IG’s office. On those occasions when a negative finding by the IG would not suffice and when maximum damage to the administration was desired, Ms. McCarthy and company selectively leaked. Consequently, the administration has been done to death by a steady flow of unhindered leaks, almost from day one."

I think Allen has nailed it. It follows that there's a small group of disgruntled people within the CIA who are working in conjunction with fired and retired ex-CIA and State Department people. They are selectively leaking classified information to the MSM to cause maximum political damage to the President. If the FBI squeezes Ms. McCarthy hard enough or the Justice Dept. makes a plea deal with her then this will all come out. The timinig is about right in terms of political impact. This might constitute "Rove's October surprise" (I was originally assuming the surprise would be a raid on Iran).

4/25/2006 09:34:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

Or, place her bets on the Dem/MSM Cabal ability to pull her fat out of the fire.
Aided and abbeted by the pleasant tone, of course.

4/25/2006 09:36:00 AM  
Blogger Dan said...

WaPo online has a Kurtz editorial titled "The New McCarthyism?"

Honestly, are we above a purge here? We sure need one, badly.

4/25/2006 09:37:00 AM  
Blogger fred said...

In order to squeeze her (and I am all in favor of that)the FBI and Justice Department are going to have to assemble an array of facts about her perfidious behavior that constitute a steel vise that no expensive legal firm can melt. I have thought from the very beginning of this event that this would be the preferred strategy going forward. Assemble the facts/evidence and line it up in such a way that the odds favor the prosecutor (and assign someone who is at least the equal of the defense attorney). That's how you squeeze the juice out. Once she knows that she is facing serious, long jail time my bet is that she'll sing like a canary in courtship.

signed: fred, New Hampshire

4/25/2006 09:52:00 AM  
Blogger Doug said...

"That victory, however, always depended on vigorous civilian control over a Pentagon that would rather not make enemies on Capitol Hill.
That leadership starts with the defense secretary and also requires support from a president who understands that it's vital for the Pentagon to control its own intelligence assets. Sen. Collins, who led the fight in Congress against Reps. Hunter and Kline, has never accepted the powerful but limited role for the DNI. Instead she has continued to insist that Mr. Negroponte push to expand his mandate and gain total dominance over the intelligence community
"

Buddy, lacking details, I often make judgements on the character of the actors.
In this case Hunter and Kline vs Collins?
...not to mention that the damned new agency should never have been created anyhow.

4/25/2006 09:56:00 AM  
Blogger Biff Baxter said...

For God's sake, someone get her under oath and let's see how far up the food chain she will go. To Joe "Pretty Boy" Wilson, perhaps?

4/25/2006 10:18:00 AM  
Blogger Ash said...

trish said...

"Everything I've read seems to suggest that whatever this program may be, it is fully supported by the Europeans. It's not secret to them -- if it exists."

What you've read suggests correctly.

So, why are we all getting our knickers in a knot about it become no secret?

4/25/2006 11:47:00 AM  
Blogger Aristides said...

Again, does anybody know who rehired Mary McCarthy to the CIA IG? In the middle of an election year?

4/25/2006 11:50:00 AM  
Blogger Habu_1 said...

A little help here.
When Clinton ran for the Presidency it came out that during his time at Oxford he made an illegal trip to the Soviet Union. That was just about the end of the story.
John Kerry becomes a useful idiot,dodges allowing his records released and dissembles as well as Slick Willie on the meaning of "is"
#1 What was Clinton doing in Moscow? Of course he was at minimum followed by the KGB, but was he recruited?
#2John Kerry..was he ever approached and recruited? We know he was in meetings where assassination of US officials was discussed.
#3Al Gore is still upset we found out he didn't invent the Internet.

We've got moles cratering this country like you wouldn't believe. Some are dupes like McCarthy. Others need to be sanctioned.

4/25/2006 12:07:00 PM  
Blogger Aristides said...

And what about James Pavitt?

Note:

1. James Pavitt has worked for the agency for 31 years, five as the Deputy Director of Operations (DDO), in charge of the agency's spies according to BBC News "Second top official to quit CIA". His identity was relatively unknown until April 2004 when, in an unprecedented move, he appeared publicly before the 11 September commission. The commission's report said that Pavitt told Mr. Bush shortly after he was elected that Osama bin Laden was one of the gravest threats to the country.

2. On June 4, 2004, he unexpectedly announced his (early) retirement one day after George Tenet. The CIA says Mr. Pavitt's decision was unconnected with Mr. Tenet's departure.

3. When Bush put Porter Goss in charge of the agency, Pavitt reportedly opposed the internal reorganizations announced by Goss, on the ground that they might "do damage to a strategic effort that has produced excellent work on terrorism and a variety of other important issues."

Is he a player? There is some speculation that Valerie Plame was working under him in an administrative capacity when she was fired.

4/25/2006 12:08:00 PM  
Blogger Aristides said...

I mean exposed, not fired.

4/25/2006 12:10:00 PM  
Blogger WECoyote said...

Jeanne at Captain Ed's pointed out that McArthy's handler's are just being clintonesque in their non-denial denials.

Why the awkward "didn't have access to this [what? the specific locations of alleged dention centers] info." If she didn't know of any classified European detention information whatsoever before the story broke, and thus could not have communicated anything classified even if she had wanted to, why only hint at that and not just say that?

Why not? --because that's not true.

So instead, we get a carefully crafted half-denial. "Source" is not defined. "Confess" is not defined. "Access" is not defined.

Goss said the person was fired for both unauthorized contact and for discussing classified info--not necessarily the detention center issue.

This goes way beyond just being friendly with a reporter(s). Some classified info was discussed in her contacts with the press.

Note that no one is denying that McArthy may well have confirmed the detention story to Priest. The door is left wide open for McArthy to be anything other than "the primary source" for certain details of that specific detention story.

Finally, how many reporters are "at least one": one, two, ten?; and who are they?"

4/25/2006 12:18:00 PM  
Blogger Aristides said...

Another interesting coincidence? From 9/11 Commission report:

George Tenet in 2000 recognized a deficiency in the analysis of Al'Qaeda. "To tackle the problem within the CTC [Counterterrorism] he appointed a senior manager, who briefed him in March 2001 on “creating a strategic assessment capability.”The CTC established a new strategic assessments branch during July 2001.The decision to add about ten analysts to this effort was seen as a major bureaucratic victory, but the CTC labored to find them."

McCarthy was left the CIA in July 2001.

4/25/2006 12:25:00 PM  
Blogger ed said...

Hmmm.

... Mary O. McCarthy said yesterday that his client did not leak any classified information and did not disclose to Washington Post reporter Dana Priest ...

I've stated a number of times that there is a cabal of CIA officers that are attempting a coup against this administration and that the conduit is *Joe Wilson*.

1. McCarthy tells Valerie Plame/Wilson.

2. Valerie Plame/Wilson accidently leaves information lying around for Joe Wilons to see.

3. Joe Wilson tells reporters.

The key is plausible denibility since the CIA employees face repeated polygraphs. Since neither Valerie Plame/Wilson nor McCarthy ever leak classified materials directly to reporters, they're in the clear.

Frankly I believe this has been the process since Wilson went to Niger and that creating this process, this pipeline, was the entire POINT of sending him to Niger. Not to debunk anything or to investigate anything. But to create a media entity as the conduit between reporters and the CIA cabal.

4/25/2006 12:27:00 PM  
Blogger Aristides said...

Who leaked this?

For example, a New York Times article in April 1999 sought to debunk claims that Bin Ladin was a terrorist leader, with the headline “U.S. Hard Put to Find Proof Bin Laden Directed Attacks.”

4/25/2006 12:27:00 PM  
Blogger allen said...

Aristides,
Thanks.
As usual, first rate stuff. Much food for thought. Hope the administration is doing the same.
Thanks, again.

I must now mow my non-virtual lawn. Oh, the humanity!

4/25/2006 12:31:00 PM  
Blogger Buddy Larsen said...

habu--you left out an incredibly flagrant one:

4/25/2006 12:44:00 PM  
Blogger Buddy Larsen said...

Is this old stuff, or is it the old end of the new stuff?

4/25/2006 12:50:00 PM  
Blogger Buddy Larsen said...

semi-old stuff (or new, as Ortega is currently making another run)

4/25/2006 12:54:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

Buddy's a virtual Swift Boater.

4/25/2006 12:57:00 PM  
Blogger Buddy Larsen said...

IOW, don't look just at Clintonistas. Richard Holbrooke was somehow allowed to pick Kofi Annan's new chief of staff (in a 2004 highly publicized "secret meeting")...Holbrooke was in competition with Sandy Berger for Kerry's Sec of State (until Berger got "McCarthy'd").

Something's ripe around here.

4/25/2006 01:05:00 PM  
Blogger Buddy Larsen said...

Doug, it just gags me, the low quality of those people (Three Stooges play Manchurian Candidate). However I'm way over allotment and will shaddup for the day.

4/25/2006 01:12:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

Yesterday Rush Limbaugh recalled
John's Standard of this past November: "Leaking at all costs."> It's time for another another look. The column opens:
THE CIA'S WAR against the Bush administration is one of the great untold stories of the past three years. It is, perhaps, the agency's most successful covert action of recent times. The CIA has used its budget to fund criticism of the administration by former Democratic officeholders. The agency allowed an employee, Michael Scheuer, to publish and promote a book containing classified information, as long as, in Scheuer's words, "the book was being used to bash the president." However, the agency's preferred weapon has been the leak. In one leak after another, generally to the New York Times or the Washington Post, CIA officials have sought to undermine America's foreign policy. Usually this is done by leaking reports or memos critical of administration policies or skeptical of their prospects. Through it all, our principal news outlets, which share the agency's agenda and profit from its torrent of leaks, have maintained a discreet silence about what should be a major scandal. John's column remains timely and on point. I think that, standing alone, it exceeds the quality and insight of the commentary for which New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof won the Pulitzer Prize last week.
---
You will recall Kerry skipped CIA briefings since he had his own source: Rand Beers fed by McCarthy.
Some of his earlier work:
I, RAND BEERS, HEREBY DECLARE THE FOLLOWING TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT:
In which Beers corrects one "inadvertent" lie after another.

There's a great laudatory post piece on him I will refind.

4/25/2006 01:16:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

Sweetness:
SHEEHAN-PROTEST CASE THROWN OUT.

Justice might not be blind, but clearly DC Judge Deborah Robinson is:
By the way, this is the same judge who let Sandy Berger off with the mildest slap on the wrist. (Try and guess her party affiliation.)
The message is clear.
As long as you hate America, you don’t have to worry about obeying its laws.

-------------------------
-------------------------
The BEERS Post piece: Very romantic, heroic, even.
Former Aide Takes Aim at War on Terror (washingtonpost.com)
"Things were dicey," said Rand Beers, recalling the stack of classified reports about plots to ... There has to be offense and defense," says Rand Beers.

4/25/2006 01:30:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

Islam in the Big House

THE FEDERAL, STATE, AND CITY JAILS in America have allowed the seizure of a privileged position for missionaries of Wahhabism, the state religious sect in Saudi Arabia. Wahhabism teaches hatred of all non-Wahhabi Muslims, especially Shia Muslims and the spiritual Muslims known as Sufis.

Wahhabis serve as chaplains at all levels of incarceration in America. They are mainly certified and trained as religious officials by two groups: The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the Graduate School of Islamic and
Social Sciences (GSISS), which moved to Ashburn, Virginia, after renaming itself Cordoba University in 2005

4/25/2006 01:54:00 PM  
Blogger wretchard said...

If you're really interested in speculation, try the excellent Tigerhawk. His guest blogger is essentially arguing that the current leaks are an attempt to misdirect from an earlier intel failure.

4/25/2006 02:10:00 PM  
Blogger Aristides said...

Okay, here we go.

The CIA IG is appointed by the President, subject to the "advice and consent" of Congress. (Note: Congress may specially appoint Administrative sub-officers and restrict their firing to instances of "just cause," but I cannot find any information about whether they can do this for sub-officials in the CIA IG.) Under the 1989 Statute that created the
Statutory CIA IG, it is the CIA IG himself who "selects, appoints, and employs qualified officers and employees." So, this means that McCarthy was hired into her IG role by the CIA Inspector General at the time, Rebecca Donegan.

Note (from above link), the CIA IG was created as a way for Congress to further erode the President's executive power:

A statutory IG, on the other hand, could only complicate things, said Webster, threatening his ability as DCI to protect intelligence sources and methods. He noted that potential sources might be reluctant to work with CIA for fear that an independent IG might disclose their identities. Foreign partners might worry their relationships with the Agency might be exposed. ...

As far as Congress is concerned, oversight of the executive branch is motherhood. Oversight of the CIA is motherhood, apple pie, and the 4th of July wrapped into one. ...


I found this interesting tid-bit in how CIA IG's can be directed (from the CIA IG investigation of Aldrich Ames):

Procedurally, this has been an unusual report for the CIA IG to write. In the first instance, our inquiry was directly requested by the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Select Committee on Intelligence of the U.S. Senate in late February 1994--shortly after Aldrich H. Ames was arrested. Normally, our congressional oversight committees ask the Director of Central Intelligence to request an IG investigation. On this occasion their request was directed to the IG.

Senator Jay Rockefeller is a member of the Senate Committee on Intelligence.

Next, who is Rebecca Donegan, besides the person who gave McCarthy another break at the CIA? Well, she figures most prominently in the Kerr Group series of reports on how Bush ignored and misused intelligence in the lead-up to Iraq. Here is a NYTimes article about it. Excerpt:

The unclassified report was completed in July 2004...The review was conducted by a team led by Richard J. Kerr, a former deputy director of central intelligence, working under contract for the C.I.A. ...

The New York Times first reported last year that two classified reports prepared for President Bush in January 2003 had predicted that an American-led invasion of Iraq would increase support for political Islam and would result in a deeply divided Iraqi society prone to violent internal conflict. ...

In the summer of 2004, newspaper articles about those reports so angered some Republicans that they accused the agency of trying to undermine President Bush. ...

The Senate Intelligence Committee was to have addressed the issue as part of a second phase of its inquiry that began with a study of the intelligence on Iraq's weapons program. But the Republican-led committee has shown no sign of producing a report, prompting complaints from Senator John D. Rockefeller IV of West Virginia and other Democrats. ...

Mr. Kerr also praised what he called perceptive analysis by intelligence agencies on the issue of ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda, a subject on which the agency clashed with the White House by concluding that there were no substantive links.


There was a lot going on with Donegan in the Summer of 2004. She also played a part in the Abu Ghraib investigation (from CNN.com):

U.S. intelligence officials say the CIA Inspector General is cooperating with Defense Department officials in the abuse investigations, including one case in which an Iraqi detainee died in the Abu Ghurayb prison.

A U.S. intelligence official said CIA personnel had nothing to do with photos taken by U.S. soldiers of Iraqi prisoners being abused at the same prison.


So McCarthy was hired in 2004 by Donegan, who was intricately involved in every hit piece that came out against Bush during the lead up to November. Hmmm..

4/25/2006 02:11:00 PM  
Blogger Habu_1 said...

Buddy,
Thanks for the reminder ...

It is of more than a little interest that James Jesus Angleton, former Chief of CIA Counter Intelligence and former KGB Major General Anatoli Goltsin got together after Golitsyn's defection to discuss what we are discussing today.
Golitsyn's, "New Lies for Old" is a starting point.
This stuff goes back to the 60's and Angleton was considered a "genius" at counter intelligence.
James Angleton ...worth loooking into.

4/25/2006 02:13:00 PM  
Blogger Aristides said...

Note: there is no record of any political donation by a 'Rebecca Donegan' in 2004, 200, 1996, or 1992.

4/25/2006 02:28:00 PM  
Blogger Red River said...

The implicit involvement of the Democratic Party can be seen in their rapid-fire response to the Leaks - in at least one case they faxed information out BEFORE the leak hit the press.

The frequency and range of the leaks and their narrow focus on GWOT is particularly troubling because they seem designed to cripple the US Response. We do not see leaks on intel related to China or Russia.

Another troubling aspect is the political public involvement of Generals, most notably Zinni. This is unprecedented.

The Secret Chief may not be at the CIA or even in the Intel Community. They just need agents with access to data to follow up on tips and access to the Press and a small counsel with whom to discuss the information. This argues for a seasoned professional - someone with broad links across the Press, Politics, NSA, and CIA, or several people acting in concert on targets of opportunity.

It also argues for someone who believes that the USA is the focus of Evil in the world, someone who deeply hates and distrusts the USA. They would have to think that most of us are stooges or criminally culpable and that we deserved 9/11.

4/25/2006 02:34:00 PM  
Blogger The_Head_Jimmy said...

Clinton Unleashed bin Laden

Abu Ghraib Other government agencies

Clinton's CIA Handed Iran the Bomb

4/25/2006 03:01:00 PM  
Blogger wretchard said...

The_Head_Jimmy,

Interesting links there, and go well with Tigerhawk's. I wonder if we'll ever know the truth. Personally, I don't think so. We'll break even if we don't totally believe in the lie.

4/25/2006 03:06:00 PM  
Blogger Buddy Larsen said...

Carter and Clinton have long, long shadows, alright.

Some might say we deserve where we are because we elected them.

But maybe we just didn't then any better *then*.

However, those people must--must--be kept away from the levers of power. They are the end of us otherwise.

4/25/2006 03:06:00 PM  
Blogger Clioman said...

Let's imagine a conversation, shall we?

An ax-grinding spook visits the CIA IG Office, want to complain about 'Those Bushies,' and what they're doing to poor, suffiering Mooslims.

Spook: I'm really angry about how we're treating those Mooslims. This is against the Geneva Convention! If Gore had won, this wouldn't happen, because then the Mooslims would love us.'

Mary: You're right. This Chimpy Bushitler has to be stopped.

Spook: Well, should I file an IG complaint?

Mary: You could, but why let the Bushies know you believe in truth, justice, and the Democratic Party?

Spook: So, what should I do?

Mary: Well, of course I can't tell you what to do, but if you call this number and tell them 'Mary sent me,' I'm sure they'd want to hear what you have to say.

Spook: Hey, great idea. We can knife the Bushies in the back, and YOU can claim you never leaked!

Mary: See? Liberals are ALWAYS smarter than those stupid Repugs!

4/25/2006 03:10:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

Great stuff, Aristides.
Too bad the Supremes did not believe in the Constitution as written.
That setup has nothing to do with what the Founders had in mind and won't unless and until CIA is abolished.
Should do State at the same time.

4/25/2006 03:19:00 PM  
Blogger heather said...

according to Byron York at National Review Online (http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york200604251221.asp) Mary McCarthy may not only escape Justice Dept proceedings, but..SHE WILL RETAIN HER PENSION!!!!

4/25/2006 03:21:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

3:06 PM
They haven't left the levers.
The levers are on hard left.

4/25/2006 03:29:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

On Hewitt: McCarthy thinks they may wimp out again... fear of the MSM blowback
My fear is the fate of the country
Why no investigation into illegal leaks?
04/25 11:49 a.m.
Another provision of the espionage laws, Section 793(e), expressly targets persons who: (a) have "unauthorized possession" of national defense information, (b) have reason to believe such information could be used to the injury of the United States or the benefit of any foreign nation, and (c) willfully communicate that information to others not entitled to have it.

It is tailor-made for the black-sites leak.
The Washington Post published Dana Priest's story on the black-site prisons back on November 2, 2005. It has thus been about six months since this egregious compromise of national secrets involving the acquisition of intelligence desperately needed to protect American lives — information from top al Qaeda detainees about the terror organization's ongoing plots.

Still, the Post reported this weekend that no one at the newspaper has yet been interviewed about the leaks.
Templates aside, if Americans are wondering what in the world is going on here — and, more to the point, whether any attempt has been made to question Ms. Priest about her intelligence community source(s), and if not, why not — that's a very good question.

4/25/2006 04:12:00 PM  
Blogger Dan said...

What I'd like to know is this: what is the grand strategic thought behind the status-quo CIA types - that is, the one that furthers American interests, whether realpolitik or revolutionary-republican (small r)? I don't get it. Incompetence, perhaps; treachery, perhpas occasionally; vanity, undoubtedly. But despite their terrible performance with respect to bin Laden and their self-evident lameness - Iraq was full of hateful sects? no kidding, cf. 300AD to the present - it's hard to imagine such qualified and probably diligent, decent people didn't have some basic strategic premises derived from their experience in the wider world. The large unexamined and only reluctantly refered to most-obvious point is that the Middle East's entire post-WWI order was as shallow and temporary as the Bolsheviks' grafted onto the hard soil of bumbleblank Russia. But no one has ever offered a satisfactory alternative answer to the question: "well is it really Tolerable that we have to police Iraq via the air, for more than a decade? what kind of crap is that?" What a bunch of high-tech punks we seem to have here. I bet the British, with their high Imperial traditions, were laughing until recently.

4/25/2006 04:32:00 PM  
Blogger Dan said...

By the way - great work, Aristedes.

4/25/2006 04:32:00 PM  
Blogger Dan said...

And by the way the announcement today by Khatami himself that Iran will share nuclear technology with Sudan - if that doesn't freak out the Libs, I say screw them all and let the air force and navy loose. I'll be damned if these people get to decide that Any African country gets this stuff. Ever. They've already got AIDS-infested jihadi child speed-addicted death armies for God's sake.

4/25/2006 04:36:00 PM  
Blogger Buddy Larsen said...

better watch it, sudan might sue, dan.

4/25/2006 04:49:00 PM  
Blogger trish said...

"So, why are we all getting our knickers in a knot about it become no secret?"

- ash

I didn't say it's not secret. I was agreeing with Wretchard that:

"whatever this program may be, it is fully supported by the Europeans. It's not secret to them -- if it exists."

That's not the same as saying that it was a matter of public knowledge or that it is not, in fact, classified.

(It never occurs to anyone to ask who owns those facilities.)

4/25/2006 04:54:00 PM  
Blogger RWE said...

Dan: I don't think there is any grand strategic thought at work here.

To me, the State Dept was always focused on the Status Quo. Not only was it National Policy prior to Reagan, but I think the folks at State have an innate resistance to working with foreign governments which they are also planning to overthrow. My contact with State was limited but I was still struck by the incredible minuet they had to dance to do the simplist and most straightforward things.

CIA has far more in common with State that it does DoD (NOTE: I have not had much contact with the Agency, but did teach a course for them). They are still focused on the Status Quo approach. They are not Jack Bauer; they are more like Andy Taylor. And perhaps the most important aspect is that they are large, government-civillian organizations, with all that implies. They have a lot of expertise - which mostly goes wasted due to their incredible inertia.

I was struck by the statement by the CIA guy who was told "bring me the head of OBL" when we started into Afghanistan. His attitude was that he had be given a clear cut mission and all required resources he thought he needed should have been supplied to hi, So, from his perspective - his own job - OIF was a "distraction" from getting OBL and he cared nothing for the larger strategic view. I see that attitude reflected some of in the Govt Civillians I work with now - their personal work has priority and that is that, Period.

Another example was how we saw TWO Fed Govt civillian employees set wildfires in the West a few years back because they thought it would enhance their careers. opportunities. Did they have a strategic viewpoint? No, it was all about THEM. So it clearly is with many at CIA. And they are starting wildfires, too.

Finally, do you recall in that Tom Clancy novle, what happened when Pres Jack Ryan started shaking up the agency and getting rid of the McCarthy-likes? They went after him. Life imitates art - when it has no other guidelines.

4/25/2006 04:55:00 PM  
Blogger The_Head_Jimmy said...

How to turn a criminal to a hero

"The U.S. strikes against Osama bin Laden have unleashed a backlash among moderate Arabs already fearful that "globalization" is another word for U.S. imperialism."

"Many analysts of the region say the only way the United States can avoid that lonely scenario is by addressing moderate Arab concerns. That means not only punishing enemies like bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, but also pushing Israel harder on the peace process and encouraging moderates in Iran."

"Just as the U.S. cruise missiles sent an unmistakable message to bin Laden, Arab moderates appear to be sending a message to President Clinton. That message says the moderates don't like bin Laden any more than the Americans do. But it also warns that the societies of the region are fragile and could fracture as a result of one-dimensional American policies. If that happens, they seem to be saying, President Clinton's new war against terror could become a clash of civilizations."

-JONATHAN BRODER Salon 1998

4/25/2006 05:19:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

More Self-Inflicted Wounds .

Other Damage
It must also be asked:
If government officials in sensitive positions who actively subvert the President's policies are given promotions by the Director of National Intelligence, should we be surprised that a partisan CIA officer like Mary McCarthy would feel untroubled leaking highly classified - and operationally and politically damaging - information to the Washington Post?

Mr. Negroponte and his team also created an environment in which one of the Nation's finest national security professionals, Michelle Van Cleave, felt unable to continue to serve under the DNI as the President's National Counterintelligence Executive. The Negroponte team does not understand this vital position and is ham-handedly undermining the role we need it to play.

The Bottom Line
As White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten continues his reorganization of the Administration, he could go a long way towards redressing the problems with the Directorate of National Intelligence - problems that have become too manifest to ignore - with a DNI personnel change of his own.
He should make this entity's first anniversary the occasion for replacing the incumbent Director of National Intelligence with someone who truly understands how to fix what ails the U.S intelligence community and wants to help the President accomplish that goal: Michelle Van Cleave.
---
So Feema was made worse, Security Made worse, by the New Layer of Govt that should not exist.
Now compounded by a Pinhead at the top.

4/25/2006 05:21:00 PM  
Blogger trish said...

"So McCarthy was hired in 2004 by Donegan, who was intricately involved in every hit piece that came out against Bush during the lead up to November. Hmmm."

The predictions on Iraq look pretty damn prescient to me, aristides.

And the CIA has never acknowledged its share of the total mess at abu Ghraib.

4/25/2006 05:22:00 PM  
Blogger allen said...

Well, all, another day has passed and still no word of Dana Priest having been hauled before a grand jury, with the government then and there demanding disclosure of her leak source or sources.

Another day has passed and Ms. McCarthy is all lawyered up. She, too, has escaped the scrutiny of the grand jury. You see, before a grand jury, Ms. McCarthy’s expensive enablers would be of no help.

4/25/2006 05:25:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

RWE,
Kid used to work with civilians, now mostly Air Force, active and retired. Much happier now.
---
Bud,
Hewitt talked to head API analyst:
Hopefully Radioblogger will have it.
Windfall in govt tax receipts should be taxed, ie returned!

4/25/2006 05:28:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

At least we're used to it Allen:
Like that Frog.

4/25/2006 05:29:00 PM  
Blogger trish said...

There was an article in the LA Times recently that told of flash drives stolen from Bagram being sold at the market outside the base. The reporters purchased a couple of these and proceeded to divulge, in the article itself, sensitive (to say the least) USG information contained on those drives.

Why?

Simply because they could.

4/25/2006 05:36:00 PM  
Blogger allen said...

Well, well, well

Mary, the quite contrary, is going to do a radio interview, this evening. See Michelle Malkin for particulars.

http://michellemalkin.com/

So, the Clinton media blitz begins.

4/25/2006 07:47:00 PM  
Blogger fred said...

The Democrats are going to try to save her derriere because she knows too much about too many people. They are not going to shell out the big bucks just because they are altruistic. Granted, there probably was some compartmentalization in this "shadow government," but I think many of the people involved certainly knew of each other's existence.

She will dissimulate until such time as a well-informed prosecutor slams a thick folder on the interrogation table and tells her the evidence of her perfidy. Until that point, do not expect any chance of plea-bargaining. Her lawyer is working not just for her, but also for those who pay his retainer, which means he will advise her to shuck and jive until they really have something solid. Then, it will be her choice to purchase mercy in return for what she knows and who else is involved.

Right now all the b.s. out there is just damage control and propaganda for the stupid and the ill-informed.

signed: fred, New Hampshire

4/25/2006 08:38:00 PM  
Blogger ledger said...

A [democrat ] lawyer representing fired CIA officer Mary O. McCarthy said yesterday that his client did not leak any classified information... to Washington Post reporter Dana Priest ... -Wopo

To state the obvious, I did not expect Mary McCarthy's lawyer to announce that his client was guilty and should go to jail. I expected him to deny the charges - and in the proper place - the Washington Post.

It's well known certain members the CIA had been had been waging a political war against the Bush administration for some time by leaking classified material to the Wopo and the NYT. The lawyer's statement seems to fit the typical defense pattern.

I will say that some of the above poster's speculation of "deeper moles" including the possibility of state sponsored moles is possible. I just don't have enough information to come to that conclusion.

Occum's Razor would suggest Mary McCarthy is one of the prime leakers. Her democrat lawyer is just pounding the table in a typical defense fashion. All of the rest of the speculation is interesting and could prove true - but, at this point I just don't see it.

4/26/2006 04:58:00 AM  
Blogger Buddy Larsen said...

A sacrificed pawn is uaually a poisoned pawn, though--what you don't see you ain't supposed to see--
(just sayin)

4/26/2006 10:17:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home


Powered by Blogger