CIA Leak Controversy Adds to Bush's Woes - NPR

[rndmprsn]

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4765592

A White House that has established itself as the most "leak-proof" in generations is in the midst of a growing controversy over who in the administration leaked the name of an undercover CIA officer to the press in mid-2003.

The reality is that even with a reputation for secrecy, this White House leaks when it wants to. Usually to float a trial balloon... or sometimes in what seems an attempt to distract the press from another story.

This leak -- whatever the source -- has become a big problem for the Bush White House.

The first important moment in this story was July 6, 2003, when former U.S. ambassador Joseph Wilson, in an op-ed column for The New York Times, accused the administration of exaggerating claims of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to justify the war. In 2002 Wilson had been sent to Niger by the CIA to check on claims that Saddam Hussein had tried to buy uranium for his weapons program. Wilson reported back to the CIA and the State Department that he'd found no such evidence. He went public via the Times op-ed page because the administration (including the president in a State of the Union address) continued to cite the Saddam-Africa connection to justify the war...

[The_Casual_Observer]

1. They make it sound as though it was a leak in the conventional sense

of leaking information to the press as a whistle blower would do. They still hold the record for not doing that. This was all together different and over-the-top sinister form of leaking, don't they get it?

[Swamp Rat]

2. Bush "leak" = Treason and National Insecurity