1
   

We'll who would of ever guessed, Mary McCarthy

 
 
Reply Sun 23 Apr, 2006 09:49 am
C.I.A. Fires Senior Officer Over Leaks - New York Times

April 22, 2006
C.I.A. Fires Senior Officer Over Leaks
By DAVID JOHNSTON and SCOTT SHANE
WASHINGTON, April 21 ? The Central Intelligence Agency has dismissed a senior career officer for disclosing classified information to reporters, including material for Pulitzer Prize-winning articles in The Washington Post about the agency's secret overseas prisons for terror suspects, intelligence officials said Friday.

The C.I.A. would not identify the officer, but several government officials said it was Mary O. McCarthy, a veteran intelligence analyst who until 2001 was senior director for intelligence programs at the National Security Council, where she served under President Bill Clinton and into the Bush administration.

At the time of her dismissal, Ms. McCarthy was working in the agency's inspector general's office, after a stint at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, an organization in Washington that examines global security issues.

The dismissal of Ms. McCarthy provided fresh evidence of the Bush administration's determined efforts to stanch leaks of classified information. The Justice Department has separately opened preliminary investigations into the disclosure of information to The Post, for its articles about secret prisons, as well as to The New York Times, for articles last fall that disclosed the existence of a program of domestic eavesdropping without warrants supervised by the National Security Agency. Those articles were also recognized this week with a Pulitzer Prize.

Several former veteran C.I.A. officials said the dismissal of an agency employee over a leak was rare and perhaps unprecedented. One official recalled the firing of a small number of agency contractors, including retirees, for leaking several years ago.

The dismissal was announced Thursday at the C.I.A. in an e-mail message sent by Porter J. Goss, the agency's director, who has made the effort to stop unauthorized disclosure of secrets a priority. News of the dismissal was first reported Friday by MSNBC.

Ms. McCarthy's departure followed an internal investigation by the C.I.A.'s Security Center, as part of an intensified effort that began in January to scrutinize employees who had access to particularly classified information. She was given a polygraph examination, confronted about answers given to the polygraph examiner and confessed, the government officials said. On Thursday, she was stripped of her security clearance and escorted out of C.I.A. headquarters. Ms. McCarthy did not reply Friday evening to messages left by e-mail and telephone.

"A C.I.A. officer has been fired for unauthorized contact with the media and for the unauthorized disclosure of classified information," said a C.I.A. spokesman, Paul Gimigliano. "This is a violation of the secrecy agreement that is the condition of employment with C.I.A. The officer has acknowledged the contact and the disclosures."

Mr. Gimigliano said the Privacy Act prohibited him from identifying the employee.

Intelligence officials speaking on the condition of anonymity said that the dismissal resulted from "a pattern of conduct" and not from a single leak, but that the case involved in part information about secret C.I.A. detention centers that was given to The Washington Post.

Ms. McCarthy's departure was another unsettling jolt for the C.I.A., battered in recent years over faulty prewar intelligence in Iraq, waves of senior echelon departures after the appointment of Mr. Goss as director and the diminished standing of the agency under the reorganization of the country's intelligence agencies.

The C.I.A.'s inquiry focused in part on identifying Ms. McCarthy's role in supplying information for a Nov. 2, 2005, article in The Post by Dana Priest, a national security reporter. The article reported that the intelligence agency was sending terror suspects to clandestine detention centers in several countries, including sites in Eastern Europe.

Leonard Downie Jr., The Post's executive editor, said on its Web site that he could not comment on the firing because he did not know the details. "As a general principle," he said, "obviously I am opposed to criminalizing the dissemination of government information to the press."

Eric C. Grant, a spokesman for the newspaper, would not address whether any C.I.A. employee was a source for the secret prison articles, but said, "No Post reporter has been subpoenaed or talked to investigators in connection with this matter."

The disclosures about the prisons provoked an outcry among European allies and set off protests among Democrats in Congress. The leak prompted the C.I.A. to send a criminal referral to the Justice Department. Lawyers at the Justice Department were notified of Ms. McCarthy's dismissal, but no new referral was issued, law enforcement officials said. They said that they would review the case, but that her termination could mean she would be spared criminal prosecution.

In January, current and former government officials said, Mr. Goss ordered polygraphs for intelligence officers who knew about certain "compartmented" programs, including the secret detention centers for terrorist suspects. Polygraphs are routinely given to agency employees at least every five years, but special polygraphs can be ordered when a security breach is suspected.

The results of such exams are regarded as important indicators of deception among some intelligence officials. But they are not admissible as evidence in court ? and the C.I.A.'s reliance on the polygraph in Ms. McCarthy's case could make it more difficult for the government to prosecute her.

"This was a very aggressive internal investigation," said one former C.I.A. officer with more than 20 years' experience. "Goss was determined to find the source of the secret-jails story."

With the encouragement of the White House and some Republicans in Congress, Mr. Goss has repeatedly spoken out against leaks, saying foreign intelligence officials had asked him whether his agency was incapable of keeping secrets.

In February, Mr. Goss told the Senate Intelligence Committee that "the damage has been very severe to our capabilities to carry out our mission." He said it was his hope "that we will witness a grand jury investigation with reporters present being asked to reveal who is leaking this information."

"I believe the safety of this nation and the people of this country deserves nothing less," he said.

Ms. McCarthy has been a well-known figure in intelligence circles. She began her career at the agency as an analyst and then was a manager in the intelligence directorate, working at the African and Latin America desks, according to a biography by the strategic studies center. With an advanced degree from the University of Minnesota, she has taught, written a book on the Gold Coast and was director of the social science data archive at Yale University.

Public records show that Ms. McCarthy contributed $2,000 in 2004 to the presidential campaign of John Kerry, the Democratic nominee.

Republican lawmakers praised the C.I.A. effort. Senator Pat Roberts of Kansas, the Republican chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said, "I am pleased that the Central Intelligence Agency has identified the source of certain unauthorized disclosures, and I hope that the agency, and the community as a whole, will continue to vigorously investigate other outstanding leak cases."

Several former intelligence officials ? who were granted anonymity after requesting it for what they said were obvious reasons under the circumstances ? were divided over the likely effect of the dismissal on morale. One veteran said the firing would not be well-received coming so soon after the disclosure of grand jury testimony by Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff that President Bush in 2003 approved the leak of portions of a secret national intelligence estimate on Iraqi weapons.

"It's a terrible situation when the president approves the leak of a highly classified N.I.E., and people at the agency see management as so disastrous that they feel compelled to talk to the press," said one former C.I.A. officer with extensive overseas experience.

But another official, whose experience was at headquarters, said most employees would approve Mr. Goss's action. "I think for the vast majority of people this will be good for morale," the official said. "People didn't like some of their colleagues deciding for themselves what secrets should be in The Washington Post or The New York Times."

Paul R. Pillar, who was the agency's senior analyst for the Middle East until he retired late last year, said: "Classified information is classified information. It's not to be leaked. It's not to be divulged." He has recently criticized the Bush administration's handling of prewar intelligence about Saddam Hussein's unconventional weapons programs.

Mark Mazzetti contributed reporting for this article.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,422 • Replies: 13
No top replies

 
Lasombra
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Apr, 2006 06:05 am
@Drnaline,
Is anyone else concerned that this was in the IG office?
0 Replies
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Apr, 2006 06:07 am
@Drnaline,
Na, there more concerned with declassified stuff like Bush did with plame. Never mind a REAL leaker. Hope they nail her and who ever did the NSA leak, But alas we know most liberals call that kind of leak a whistleblower?
Lasombra
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Apr, 2006 06:19 am
@Drnaline,
Drnaline wrote:
Na, there more concerned with declassified stuff like Bush did with plame. Never mind a REAL leaker. Hope they nail her and who ever did the NSA leak, But alas we know most liberals call that kind of leak a whistleblower?



What really sucks for McCarthy is that she got caught in the middle of the AIPAC case (for those unfamiliar with the case, it's a spy trial where a Pentagon employee was caught giving classified information about Iran (our enemy) to Israel (our ally)). The fact that we are going after someone who in essense was doing something that could be construed as "doing something for the right reason" in the most macro of senses, proves that breaking the law should get you in trouble. The Pentagon employee is looking at something like 15 years in FPMITA prison. McCarthy should get atleast as much.

Oh, if there's any good news about this, it's that if there was an investigation into this leak, one can be assured that there is one going into the NSA Wiretap case.

Perhaps we should change the Pulitzer Prize so that in addition to a nice little medal, you get a subpeona as well. Very Happy
Curmudgeon
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Apr, 2006 12:48 am
@Lasombra,
I agree , leaks of truly classified info should be prosecuted to the fullest .

One thing in that article puzzles me . Why is this staement there ?--"Public records show that Ms. McCarthy contributed $2,000 in 2004 to the presidential campaign of John Kerry, the Democratic nominee."

Is this added out of context so that if she gets convicted , the Liberals can point to it as Conservative scapegoating ?
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Apr, 2006 05:59 am
@Curmudgeon,
Curmudgeon wrote:
I agree , leaks of truly classified info should be prosecuted to the fullest .

One thing in that article puzzles me . Why is this staement there ?--"Public records show that Ms. McCarthy contributed $2,000 in 2004 to the presidential campaign of John Kerry, the Democratic nominee."

Is this added out of context so that if she gets convicted , the Liberals can point to it as Conservative scapegoating ?
Quote:
One thing in that article puzzles me . Why is this staement there ?--"Public records show that Ms. McCarthy contributed $2,000 in 2004 to the presidential campaign of John Kerry, the Democratic nominee."

I think they added it to show party loyalty. We can assume she had/has a vendeta for this admin. All that cash just to lose, would make me pissed?
0 Replies
 
tikala
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Apr, 2006 03:20 pm
@Curmudgeon,
Curmudgeon wrote:
I agree , leaks of truly classified info should be prosecuted to the fullest .

One thing in that article puzzles me . Why is this staement there ?--"Public records show that Ms. McCarthy contributed $2,000 in 2004 to the presidential campaign of John Kerry, the Democratic nominee."

Is this added out of context so that if she gets convicted , the Liberals can point to it as Conservative scapegoating ?


>>I agree, leaks of truly classified info should be prosecuted to the fullest<<

Except if you're Dick Cheney...he is still counting the profits that Haliburton would be making from Iraq, instead of getting fired.
His poor assistance, 'Scooter Libby' is receiving all the blows for him.

But, all joking aside, please read the following :

THE WASHINGTON POST, Front page, Tuesday, April 25, 2006.

DISMISSED
CIA OFFICER
DENIES LEAK ROLE

Official Says Agency
Is not Asserting She
Told of Secret Prisons

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.

A senior intelligence officer said the agency is not asserting that McCarthy was a key source of Priest's award-winning article last year disclosing the agency's secret prisons.
McCarthy was fired because the CIA concluded that she has undisclosed contacts with journalists, including Priest.

That does not mean she revealed the existence of the prisons to Priest,
Ty Cobb, McCarthy's lawyer, said.
Cobb said that McCarthy, who worked in the CIA inspector general's office, "did not have acces to the information she is accused of leaking", namely the classified information about any secret detention centers in Europe. Having unreported media contacts is not unheard of at the CIA but is
a violation of the agency's rule.

By R.Jeffrey Smith and Dafna Linzer
Washington Post Staff Writers.-


Trying to connect John Kerry to "Leaking Classified Information" is because many pathetic "honorable" republicans still can't stand that Kerry carried his half dozen medals for bravery back home in his swiftboat?
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Apr, 2006 04:13 pm
@Drnaline,
I would think some one "honorable" when they supposedly have a have doozen medals on there chest and they say they will release there service record, should do so. So much for honor? I'm still waiting on that one too amoung other things?
0 Replies
 
Curmudgeon
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Apr, 2006 06:52 pm
@tikala,
Tikala said --
Quote:
Trying to connect John Kerry to "Leaking Classified Information" is because many pathetic "honorable" republicans still can't stand that Kerry carried his half dozen medals for bravery back home in his swiftboat?


Where did that come from ? Who was trying to link Kerry with leaks ???
ndjs
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Apr, 2006 07:02 pm
@Curmudgeon,
Curmudgeon wrote:
Tikala said --

Where did that come from ? Who was trying to link Kerry with leaks ???

Tikala.
0 Replies
 
tikala
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Apr, 2006 08:55 pm
@Curmudgeon,
Curmudgeon wrote:
Tikala said --

Where did that come from ? Who was trying to link Kerry with leaks ???



If I'm not mistaken you yourself mentioned a statement of Mary McCarthy's contribution to the Kerry campaign that was added to the report of her firing by the CIA.

Why else did they find it necessary to mention Mary's contribution to the Kerry campaign?

Mary's contribution to Kerry has nothing to do with her firing by the CIA.

Hey, that's MY opinion, and I don't ask you to agree. You may disagree, of course !

"Enjoy conflicting views" says the administrator !
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Apr, 2006 06:18 am
@tikala,
tikala wrote:
If I'm not mistaken you yourself mentioned a statement of Mary McCarthy's contribution to the Kerry campaign that was added to the report of her firing by the CIA.

Why else did they find it necessary to mention Mary's contribution to the Kerry campaign?

Mary's contribution to Kerry has nothing to do with her firing by the CIA.

Hey, that's MY opinion, and I don't ask you to agree. You may disagree, of course !

"Enjoy conflicting views" says the administrator !
Quote:
Why else did they find it necessary to mention Mary's contribution to the Kerry campaign?

I guess you missed this one "I think they added it to show party loyalty. We can assume she had/has a vendeta for this admin. All that cash just to lose, would make me pissed?"
It is also called freedom of the press, they can write what ever they think is true or is pertanent to the topic.
tikala
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Apr, 2006 07:35 am
@Drnaline,
Drnaline wrote:
I guess you missed this one "I think they added it to show party loyalty. We can assume she had/has a vendeta for this admin. All that cash just to lose, would make me pissed?"
It is also called freedom of the press, they can write what ever they think is true or is pertanent to the topic.




My reply was for Curmudg.

I did not tough your post.

That means "I enjoy conflicting views"
0 Replies
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Apr, 2006 04:09 pm
@Drnaline,
Couple of related storys.

Townhall.com :: Columns :: A traitor in the midst by Cal Thomas - Apr 25, 2006

What do you call someone who, in violation of her oath, reveals government secrets to a reporter, who then prints them and exposes a clandestine operation designed to get information from suspected terrorists that could save American lives?

Here is what one dictionary says about that word: "One who betrays another's trust or is false to an obligation or duty." The word so defined is traitor.

The Central Intelligence Agency fired an intelligence officer after determining she leaked classified information to a Washington Post reporter about secret overseas prisons used for interrogating suspected terrorists. News reports say the fired employee is Mary McCarthy, who has denied being the source of the leaks. McCarthy was appointed by former National Security Adviser Samuel Berger as special assistant to President Bill Clinton and senior director for Intelligence Programs. Berger has had his own problems with classified documents. In 2005, he pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges that he stole five copies of highly classified terrorism documents while doing "research" at the National Archives building.


Virtually all people who handle classified documents, whether members of Congress or their staff, or employees of the Central Intelligence Agency, take an oath not to reveal those documents to anyone without proper authorization. McCarthy is alleged to have violated that oath. Such oaths are nothing new. They extend back to the founding of the nation.

___________________-

Click for the rest.

______________________
Townhall.com :: Columns :: John Kerry's tangled webs by David Limbaugh - Apr 25, 2006

Oh, what tangled webs John Kerry weaves. But then again, foolish consistencies are the hobgoblins of little minds, not sophisticated, expansive minds calibrated for complexity and nuance, like John Kerry's.
Sen. Kerry has been trying to make himself a part of the news other than as a failed presidential candidate ever since he became a failed presidential candidate. He has been sending group e-mails almost daily since his defeat, on every imaginable political subject. Hey, if I'm on the distribution list, can you imagine who all gets these gems?

They cry out, "Look at me. I'm still here. I have craved this position since before I made the most profound statement ever uttered by a precocious politician-in-waiting: 'How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?' Oh, those were the glory days -- before the Swiftees started stalking me. Oh, and by the way, I'm running again in 2008."

Kerry has stepped up his profile even more in the last few days. Thirty-five years ago from the day he sat before the Senate Judiciary Committee and slandered his fellow Vietnam soldiers with false allegations that they committed atrocities, he gave a speech at Faneuil Hall in Boston. This time the subject was the War in Iraq and patriotic dissent. Kerry just couldn't wait to tell the fawning antiwar, antiBush audience how proud he was to have been a loud, dissenting voice on returning from Vietnam, and he was proud to be one again over Iraq. He also reiterated his patently bogus charge that the Bush administration, by defending itself against the onslaught of lies against it, is trying to stifle dissent.

______________________

click for the rest.

And another. Townhall.com :: Columns :: Of Pulitzers and treason by Pat Buchanan - Apr 25, 2006
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » We'll who would of ever guessed, Mary McCarthy
Copyright © 2026 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 03/02/2026 at 05:27:03