7
   

If Plame's exposure was treason, then this should be a hanging offense

 
 
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2009 05:04 pm
My apologies to Fark.com for using their headline, but it is appropriate.

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/08/21/aclu-gitmo-lawyers-exposed-cia-agent-identities-to-terrorists/

Quote:
The ACLU and defense attorneys for detainees at Guantanamo Bay surveilled and took pictures of CIA agents and then showed the photos to terrorists at Gitmo. The Department of Justice has begun an investigation into the exposure of American agents, the Washington Post reports, in some cases in front of their homes. It underscores once again the stupidity of involving the civil court system in the handling of unlawful combatants in wartime.


So,since the left said that outing Valerie Plame was treason, will they also say that this is treason?
OR, will they excuse it as justified.

I bet it will be the latter.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 7 • Views: 1,970 • Replies: 12
No top replies

 
boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2009 06:38 pm
Hmmm.

Plame was exposed to the world.

If they had printed the photos and names in the newspaper I could equate the two but I'm having a hard time with the information available.

This is really just my bookmark to follow the story.....
0 Replies
 
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2009 06:42 pm
well i'm all for setting up public executions and hanging politicians, any side of the aisle, i'd say just start randomly grabbing them, have the hangings go around the clock for about a week, afterward the politicians left, will probably have a different attitude towards public service
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2009 06:48 pm
If it could be demonstrated with real evidence that someone revealed the identity of an active agent working undercover, it would have to be taken as a very serious crime.
0 Replies
 
engineer
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2009 07:09 pm
@mysteryman,
How did these attorneys get the names of American agents? If these are undercover agents, this is indeed a hanging offense and we have to wonder how the names got out in the first place. Was it part of the case and did the lawyers release info that should have been privledged? If the agents' names are public knowledge and it's just something that anyone with an Internet connection could do, then I don't see the fuss.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2009 07:46 pm
@mysteryman,
Nobody was convicted of treason, re Plame. That said, I don't have enough information on this story.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2009 07:51 pm
@edgarblythe,
What Edgar said . . .

Who says the Plame affair was treason?
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2009 09:46 pm
@Setanta,
Quote:
What Edgar said . . .

Who says the Plame affair was treason?


Do you want a list?
Lets start here...

http://able2know.org/topic/56457-154

Quote:
(In Plame's ``60 Minutes'' interview last week, she suggested that this act had endangered the life of at least one of her contacts.) That seems a lot like treason to me.


http://able2know.org/topic/121242-1

Quote:
Democratic Congressman Dennis Kucinich introduced 35 articles of impeachment against George W. Bush for high crimes ranging from creating a false propaganda campaign to lead the country into an illegal war to felony treason in leaking classified information of CIA operative Valerie Plame


CI has said it.
Cyclo has said it.

Almost every liberal here on A2K has said that the outing of Plane was treason.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2009 10:02 pm
@mysteryman,
Well, since you're responding to me, allow me to point out that i have not said that it was treason. To my knowledge, EB has not said it is treason. This thread is much like the "have you stopped beating your wife" trick question. Responding to this thread in anything like a serious manner would inferentially constitute an agreement that outing Plame was treason. It was certainly illegal, but i personally have never described it as treason.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Aug, 2009 10:09 pm
@mysteryman,
mysteryman wrote:
OR, will they excuse it as justified.

An accused is entitled to be confronted with the witnesses against him. That's part of the constitution. If the prosecution uses an interrogator's statements against an accused, then the accused has a right to question the interrogator, which first requires that the interrogator be identified. That's a fundamental right guaranteed by the sixth amendment. Anyone who opposes the rights of these prisoners to identify their CIA interrogators, therefore, is sanctioning the government's violation of the constitution. The rule of law is in the nation's best interest, and anyone in favor of violating the constitution is opposed to the country's best interests. So, the question to you, mysteryman, is: why do you hate America?
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Aug, 2009 12:29 am
@joefromchicago,
That being one of the evils of Gitmo etc....that this right to confront bboth accuser and see the evidence was ripped away.

I was interested to see your view.

0 Replies
 
Ceili
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Aug, 2009 01:47 am
@mysteryman,
I fail to see why this is an issue with you. Libby was charged and convicted under a republican president. He was not pardoned by a republican president. The liberals had nothing to do with it.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Aug, 2009 01:58 am
Quote:
Joshua Dratel, a lawyer with the John Adams Project and a former board member of the National Association of Criminal Defense Attorneys, also confirmed that the group had learned about two weeks ago that the F.B.I. had questioned three military defense lawyers about photographs allegedly obtained by John Adams Project researchers and provided to the lawyers.

It was not clear what law investigators may think had been broken. Both Mr. Romero and Mr. Dratel disputed that there could have been anything illegal about showing photos taken in public to the detainees. “If you get information in the public record, it doesn’t become classified just because the government feels it is embarrassing or that they would prefer you not to show it to anyone,” Mr. Dratel said. “There is no prohibition on gathering public-source information and showing it to your client.”

Mr. Romero said researching what had happened to their clients in the hands of government agents was “a normal part of criminal defense work.”

“Identifying who tortured our clients and what they did to them and when is an essential part of defending their interests in these sham proceedings,” he said.

Source
0 Replies
 
 

 
  1. Forums
  2. » If Plame's exposure was treason, then this should be a hanging offense
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 08/05/2020 at 01:04:03