PDA

View Full Version : Nat'l Security FBI looks into possible White House leaks


Donger
06-06-2012, 04:00 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/06/politics/white-house-leaks/index.html?hpt=hp_c1

(CNN) -- The FBI has launched an investigation into apparent leaks of classified information involving a cyberwarfare program against Iran, a U.S. official said Wednesday.

FBI spokesman Paul Bresson had no comment on the reported investigation.

Sen. Saxby Chambliss, ranking Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said he was informed that an FBI inquiry was under way.

The senator from Georgia and other leaders of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees issued a joint statement Tuesday deploring the apparent leaks.

"In recent weeks, we have become increasingly concerned at the continued leaks regarding sensitive intelligence programs and activities, including specific details of sources and methods," said Chambliss; Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein, D-California; Chairman Mike Rogers, R-Michigan; and Ranking Member C.A. "Dutch" Ruppersberger, D-Maryland, in the statement.

"These disclosures have seriously interfered with ongoing intelligence programs and have put at jeopardy our intelligence capability to act in the future. Each disclosure puts American lives at risk, makes it more difficult to recruit assets, strains the trust of our partners and threatens imminent and irreparable damage to our national security in the face of urgent and rapidly adapting threats worldwide."

The House and Senate Intelligence Committee leaders said they intended "to review potential legislation to strengthen authorities and procedures with respect to access to classified information and disclosure of it, as well as to ensure that criminal and administrative measures are taken each time sensitive information is improperly disclosed."

"We also intend to press for the executive branch to take tangible and demonstrable steps to detect and deter intelligence leaks, and to fully, fairly, and impartially investigate the disclosures that have already taken place."

Spyware infiltrating Iranian computers

The White House pushed back against suggestions it could be leaking classified information for political purposes.

"This administration takes all appropriate and necessary steps to prevent leaks of classified information or sensitive information that could risk ongoing counterterrorism or intelligence operations," spokesman Jay Carney said Wednesday aboard Air Force One as the president traveled to campaign events on the West Coast.

"Any suggestion that this administration has authorized intentional leaks of classified information for political gain is grossly irresponsible."

Asked about the White House's response, Sen. John McCain told CNN International's "Amanpour," "I would expect nothing else from the White House. But the fact is that the portrayal of the president in these stories is nothing short of heroic."

The ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee added, "Clearly, administration officials were involved."

McCain said that he has "great faith" in the FBI but that a matter as weighty as national security "probably deserves a special counsel."

He continued, "It's clear that the Iranians will profit from having this information. In fact, they might even feel they are justified in cybercounterattacks."

Feinstein told CNN's "The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer" that she didn't believe any of the information came from the top ranks of the White House.

"I think one of the problems is, information is not closely held sufficiently," she said. And she described policies regarding responding to leaks as "archaic" and said they need to be revamped.

The government's failure to keep its secrets has dissuaded some people from giving information to the United States and has endangered lives, she said, but she is unaware of anyone having been killed as a result. She would not go into specifics.

"People just talk too much," she said. "This didn't used to be the case. But suddenly it's like it's a spreadable disease."

A report in The New York Times on Friday provided classified details of what it described as a U.S cyberattack targeting Iran's nuclear centrifuge program.

Since shortly after he became president, Barack Obama has ordered cyberattacks targeting computers that run Iran's nuclear enrichment facilities, the report said, attributing the information to participants in the program.

The White House has said it did not authorize any leak of such information.

McCain said Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin has agreed to hold a hearing on the matter.

Some Republicans, including McCain, have called for a special prosecutor to investigate.

But Deputy Attorney General James Cole, in response to a question from Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, said Wednesday that he does not believe a special prosecutor is needed in this case.

Chambliss said he expects the FBI to conduct a "full and fair investigation, including a review of administration officials who have been quoted anonymously or directly."

Feinstein said she had discussed the possibility of a joint hearing with Levin.

On Tuesday, White House deputy press secretary Josh Earnest said the administration believes that classified information should remain secret for a reason, and "publicizing it would pose a threat to our national security."

McCain and Chambliss cited other recent leaks as well, including information on the administration's efforts to expand its drone program and the president's involvement in "kill lists" against militants in Yemen and Pakistan.

Also, the public airing of details surrounding a recently disrupted bomb plot in Yemen by al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula angered intelligence and national security officials.

Ace Gunner
06-06-2012, 04:37 PM
the whole fucking thing is an oxymoron

qabbaan
06-06-2012, 05:16 PM
Ah, Eric Holder is going to investigate the Obama administration. I can't wait to see how this turns out... :rolleyes:

vailpass
06-06-2012, 05:20 PM
Ah, Eric Holder is going to investigate the Obama administration. I can't wait to see how this turns out... :rolleyes:

My first thought as well. Attorney General Step-n-Fetch is on the case.
The only good news is that Holder is supposed to NOT catch obama in illegal activities here. If he holds true to form this means Holder will definitely catch obama in illegal activities.

cosmo20002
06-06-2012, 05:56 PM
Ah, Eric Holder is going to investigate the Obama administration. I can't wait to see how this turns out... :rolleyes:

Similar to when W's AG "investigated" W's administration?

vailpass
06-06-2012, 05:57 PM
Similar to when W's AG "investigated" W's administration?

LMAO W it's W look at W everything is W all W all the time WWWWWWW!!!1111

Pathetic bastards.

cosmo20002
06-06-2012, 06:04 PM
LMAO W it's W look at W everything is W all W all the time WWWWWWW!!!1111

Pathetic bastards.

W seemed to be a relevant comparison, you know, since he was most recently president. I admit, I really didn't think to mention the Polk administration.

BucEyedPea
06-06-2012, 06:22 PM
Similar to when W's AG "investigated" W's administration?

Can you follow a thread title instead of hijacking?

mlyonsd
06-06-2012, 06:37 PM
Similar to when W's AG "investigated" W's administration?You gotta be a Kotter mult.

BucEyedPea
06-06-2012, 06:39 PM
You gotta be a Kotter mult.

I was wondering if he was a mult of someone myself. Not just Kotter either. Like banyon even.

mlyonsd
06-06-2012, 07:14 PM
Like banyon even.No, not banyon. He's about as honest as they get. You can disagree with him but my experience is he's a solid poster.

cosmo20002
06-06-2012, 08:38 PM
Can you follow a thread title instead of hijacking?

It was in the ballpark, but thanks for letting me know you don't approve. Where would we be without thread Nazis keeping things on track?

patteeu
06-06-2012, 10:35 PM
I suspect that these leaks are authorized for political purposes regardless of what Jay Carney says. And if that's the case, as deplorable as it is, I don't think it's illegal. It makes a good political issue though. Time for new management.

cosmo20002
06-06-2012, 10:44 PM
I suspect that these leaks are authorized for political purposes regardless of what Jay Carney says. And if that's the case, as deplorable as it is, I don't think it's illegal. It makes a good political issue though. Time for new management.

Didn't your hero Cheney authorize leaks to a New York Times writer?

patteeu
06-06-2012, 10:48 PM
Didn't your hero Cheney authorize leaks to a New York Times writer?

I'm not sure, but if he did and if the president delegated the authority to authorize them to him, it was legal. And we can be confident that any such leaks weren't designed for personal political advantage.

cosmo20002
06-06-2012, 11:23 PM
I'm not sure, but if he did and if the president delegated the authority to authorize them to him, it was legal. And we can be confident that any such leaks weren't designed for personal political advantage.

Not for political advantage? I assume you are joking.

In a nutshell, they 'leaked' (generally false) stories to Judith Miller in particular about Iraq's weapons capabilities, WMDs, etc. Then, W, Cheney, and Rummy would say, "Hey, the New York Times is reporting that Saddam has WMDs" when it was the admin that planted the stories in the first place. Any of this ring a bell?

patteeu
06-06-2012, 11:27 PM
Not for political advantage? I assume you are joking.

In a nutshell, they 'leaked' (generally false) stories to Judith Miller in particular about Iraq's weapons capabilities, WMDs, etc. Then, W, Cheney, and Rummy would say, "Hey, the New York Times is reporting that Saddam has WMDs" when it was the admin that planted the stories in the first place. Any of this ring a bell?

None of that has to do with personal political advantage. They weren't trying to win an election. They were trying to implement policies that they believed were best for the country.

And no, your scenario where the Bush administration was citing the NYTimes as an independent source of WMD info doesn't ring a bell at all. What might have confused you are the times when they referenced publicly reported information because non publicly reported information was still classified.

Notice the difference between the two alleged leaks:

1. Bush admin leaks info in order to help it pursue national security goals.

2. Obama admin leaks info that damages national security but looks good to voters.

cosmo20002
06-06-2012, 11:43 PM
None of that has to do with personal political advantage. They weren't trying to win an election. They were trying to implement policies that they believed were best for the country.

And no, your scenario where the Bush administration was citing the NYTimes as an independent source of WMD info doesn't ring a bell at all. What might have confused you are the times when they referenced publicly reported information because non publicly reported information was still classified.

Notice the difference between the two alleged leaks:

1. Bush admin leaks info in order to help it pursue national security goals.

2. Obama admin leaks info that damages national security but looks good to voters.

They were trying to build and maintain support for a war and to justify their actions in starting that war, and they couldn't do it without fudging the intelligence. Leaking stuff about Saddam having WMDs when he didn't isn't pursuing naitonal security goals. It is pursuing support they otherwise wouldn't have received and it is covering of their asses.

cosmo20002
06-07-2012, 12:07 AM
All this reminiscing about the W years is a really good reminder of just how corrupt, immoral, and incompetent that administration was. Its easy to remember the stupid decisions to invade Iraq and underman Afghanistan. The way the economy entered territory not seen since the 30s. How the president couldn't speak at a 7th-grade level. Those are the high-level highlights.

But there's just so much more behind those things. Knowingly presenting false intelligence, the lies and deceit that when into building support for Iraq just scratches the surface.

You may not like Obama, but there's just miles between his and W's administration. It is not hard to see why 90% of Obama's activities have involved fixing the unprecedented problems left by that travesty of an administration.

|Zach|
06-07-2012, 01:56 AM
I was wondering if he was a mult of someone myself. Not just Kotter either. Like banyon even.

A squirrel has eaten your brains.

blaise
06-07-2012, 05:19 AM
"But, but, GEORGE BUSH! GEORGE BUSH!"

patteeu
06-07-2012, 06:51 AM
They were trying to build and maintain support for a war and to justify their actions in starting that war, and they couldn't do it without fudging the intelligence. Leaking stuff about Saddam having WMDs when he didn't isn't pursuing naitonal security goals. It is pursuing support they otherwise wouldn't have received and it is covering of their asses.

All this reminiscing about the W years is a really good reminder of just how corrupt, immoral, and incompetent that administration was. Its easy to remember the stupid decisions to invade Iraq and underman Afghanistan. The way the economy entered territory not seen since the 30s. How the president couldn't speak at a 7th-grade level. Those are the high-level highlights.

But there's just so much more behind those things. Knowingly presenting false intelligence, the lies and deceit that when into building support for Iraq just scratches the surface.

You may not like Obama, but there's just miles between his and W's administration. It is not hard to see why 90% of Obama's activities have involved fixing the unprecedented problems left by that travesty of an administration.

Almost everything in these two posts is wrong. I've bolded the accurate part. Contrast that with "they were trying to build and maintain support for re-election at the expense of national security", which is what is going on in the present administration.

durtyrute
06-07-2012, 07:04 AM
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-MZrXG0EGCOg/TcChm6n_7dI/AAAAAAAAAb8/LzeZ1aXsPrM/s1600/shocked.jpg

Radar Chief
06-07-2012, 07:06 AM
An attempt at moral equivalence is my only move.

FYP, cause thatís what everyone just read.

Radar Chief
06-07-2012, 07:09 AM
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-MZrXG0EGCOg/TcChm6n_7dI/AAAAAAAAAb8/LzeZ1aXsPrM/s1600/shocked.jpg

You can spread a whole bunch of that around.
OMG!!! Our government leaks like a screen door on a submarine.
OMG!!! Our government is going to investigate itself.
OMG!!! Itíll most likely go nowhere.

durtyrute
06-07-2012, 07:21 AM
You can spread a whole bunch of that around.
OMG!!! Our government leaks like a screen door on a submarine.
OMG!!! Our government is going to investigate itself.
OMG!!! Itíll most likely go nowhere.

ROFL:thumb:

Chiefshrink
06-07-2012, 08:33 AM
Ah, Eric Holder is going to investigate the Obama administration. I can't wait to see how this turns out... :rolleyes:

:thumb:

Attorney General Step-n-Fetch is on the case.

ROFLROFLROFL:thumb:

mikey23545
06-07-2012, 09:01 AM
A squirrel has eaten your brains.

I assume you're simply envious of the fact she has brains.

Chiefshrink
06-07-2012, 09:36 AM
Can you follow a thread title instead of hijacking?

It's what Marxists do to divert from real truth and any debate in the arena of ideas.:thumb:

vailpass
06-07-2012, 10:04 AM
FYP, cause thatís what everyone just read.

Boom.

Donger
06-07-2012, 04:46 PM
Huh. I guess transparency only goes so far?

President Barack Obama opposes the appointment of a special counsel to investigate whether vital national security secrets were improperly disclosed in a wave of news reports detailing sensitive operations, the White House said Thursday.

"No," press secretary Jay Carney told reporters aboard Air Force One when asked whether Obama would support such a move. Carney referred reporters to government agencies already tasked with ferreting out leakers. Some Republicans, like Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, have said the administration cannot be trusted to investigate itself.

Carney also declined to say whether the administration would cooperate with congressional investigations into the disclosures. The Senate and House Intelligence Committees have said they will be looking into the matter.

"I just don't have enough information about it," Carney said.

AustinChief
06-07-2012, 04:53 PM
Not sure if this has been posted yet...

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/gates-national-security-team-osama-raid-shut-f_646731.html

Robert Gates, the former defense secretary, reportedly blasted the national security team in the Obama White House for blabbing about the raid to kill Osama bin Laden. "Shut the f--- up," Gates told Tom Donilon, who is now Obama's national security adviser, according to a book by New York Times reporter David Sanger.