The OTHER Federal Law Rove Broke (Phila. Inquirer Excerpt)

[JPZenger]

Excerpt from article in July 18, 2005 Phila. Inquirer.
http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/news/12157726.htm
registration required)

"What's now on record ... is that Rove confirmed Novak's information by telling the columnist that he had heard the same stuff elsewhere. But that means Rove may have violated the Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement, a document known as SF 312 that must be signed by any administration official who receives a national security clearance.

Here's a provision: "Information remains classified until it has been officially declassified... . Before disseminating the information elsewhere or confirming the accuracy of what appears in the public source, the signer of SF 312 must confirm through an authorized official that the information has, in fact, been declassified. If it has not, further dissemination of the information, or confirmation of its accuracy, is also an unauthorized disclosure."

Mehlman, asked about this, said it's wrong to assume that Plame's CIA status was classified. But that remark is contradicted by the record. In the summer of 2003, Attorney General John Ashcroft's Justice Department - acting on a request from the CIA - agreed to launch a probe of the leak because the department agreed with the CIA's argument that Plame's status, as an NOC staffer, had been classified."


(Note - Although Plame was assigned to the White House, she was given a cover as an energy analyst working for another entity.)

[MrBenchley]

1. Great comment from a liberal blogger (forgot which one)

So the standard of evidence for keeping Rove in his job is far higher than the standard of evidence for going to war..."

[peacetalksforall]

3. Excellent comment.!

I made a big mistake this morning by switching fo Fox for a few minutes. What a disaster. The court jester-fools were pathetic in their excuses for the whouse. Someday soon they will have to start talking about the other memo.

I was only consoled by the fact that sensible people who value logic know that FOX is only preaching to the converted.

None of them mentioned the fact that we wouldn't be where we are if it hadn't already been proven that she was undercover and that some laws may have been broken. They should answer why C. Boyden Grey or Baker or Meese or Gonzales or Ashcroft aren't on FOX demanding that the investigation be shut down.

I caught Biden on NBC - what a weak argument he provided. I am now going to turn him off whenever he appears as a guest on tv - he is weak. He only speaks out when in the Senate, some of the time. I hope he is enjoying his MBNA contributions before MBNA morphs into B of A.

[MrBenchley]

4. You will notice last Friday's pack of lies contradicted Thursday's lies

On Thursday, Rove didn't even know Plame's name when he talked to Cooper on July 11, 2003....on Friday, Novak was the one who told Rove Plame's name when they talked on July 9, 2003...

[chapel hill dem]

2. There may be another: The "Clancy" law.

I am not a lawyer so I do not know how to look this up, but after Tom Clancy wrote "The Hunt for Red October", a Federal law was passed saying that accumulating unclassified information with the intent of discovering a classified result was illegal (similar to the "constructing the mosaic" concept in securities analysis, which, BTW, is legal). This law may have been wrapped up in the Patriot Act.

Anybody out there know more about this?

[JPZenger]

5. Sec. of the Navy Was Upset With Hunt for Red October

When the Hunt for Red October came out, the Secretary of the Navy read it. He came screaming into his office saying "Who approved the declassification of this?!!" It was particularly irritating to the Navy because that book was first published by the Naval Academy's own publishing house.