National Journal: Bush Told Prosecutors He "Directed" Cheney To Discredit Joe Wilson...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(IsrAmeriPrius @ Jul 9 2006, 07:33 AM) [snapback]283315[/snapback]</div>

Hmmm ... no, I don't think I can provide a source that is "hard news" and not "testimony" from people who say they knew it. So I'll concede this point to you.

Do we still agree that regardless of the legal implications, revealing her identity is morally repungent? And that it would be even if some people already knew about it, even the Russians and the Cubans, as the news agencies reportedly testified to the grand jury?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(IsrAmeriPrius @ Jul 9 2006, 01:40 PM) [snapback]283466[/snapback]</div>

OK, I thought we agreed there. Can we take it a bit further?

My understanding was that Joe Wilson was saying things the Administration didn't like about the impending conflict, and the President's direction to VP Cheney was that he should release information supporting the Administration's position. We both agree the Valerie Plame leak shouldn't fall into this category, but how do you feel about the other information released?

For instance, the "yellow cake" report from French intelligence supported the Administration's claim, and the Administration released that classified information to the news media (two separate reporters on two different dates). This was part of the effort to counter Joe Wilson's charges that there was no evidence Saddam Hussein was contemplating building WMD. Even though the "yellow cake" report is generally thought to be in error today, it was accepted by all the intelligence agencies as probably valid at the time.

The same authority has been used by nearly all Presidents to inform the American people of certain facts to support a policy they want to pursue. I remember when Jimmy Carter used his authority to release details of the Stealth Fighter to counter the Republican's claim that he was soft on defense. That, like the Valerie Plame leak, was solely political (but not illegal when the President does it).

I understand the desire of those who dislike the current President to strip the Executive of all power, but we do so at our peril. We must have three strong branches of government tugging at each other to maintain the dynamic tension that keeps us free. Your time will come soon enough in 2008, and we'll have to lecture Republicans not to hamstring the Executive branch too much.