Blog For Free!
Archives
Home
2008 July
2008 June
2008 May
2008 April
2008 March
2008 February
2008 January
2007 December
2007 November
2007 October
2007 September
2007 July
2007 June
2007 May
2007 April
2007 March
2007 February
2007 January
2006 December
2006 November
2006 October
2006 September
2006 August
2006 July
2006 June
2006 May
2006 April
2006 March
2006 February
2006 January
2005 December
2005 November
2005 October
2005 August
2005 July
2005 June
2005 May
2005 April
2005 March
2005 January
2004 December
2004 November
2004 October
2004 September
2004 August
2004 July
My Links
Global Warming: A Chilling Perspective
Watts Up With That?
Internet Haganah
Jihad Watch
Ponder the Maunder
The Dissident Frogman
Barking-Moonbat EWS
Just Barking Mad!
The Malaria Clock
Project Valour-IT
Islam: Turning everything it touches to Shi'ite since 632 AD...
10 Myths of Islam
tBlog
My Profile
Send tMail
My tFriends
My Images
Sponsored
Blog
| Bill Clinton Pardoned Nat'l Security Leaker |
| 07.26.05 (6:43 am) [edit] |
|
No wonder 2008 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has been silent as a churchmouse about Karl Rove while her Democratic colleagues call for his prosecution for leaking classified information about CIA employee Valerie Plame. Turns out - in the only case in U.S. history of a person successfully prosecuted for leaking classified information to the press - Hillary's husband pardoned the guilty party. On January 20, 2001, President Clinton pardoned Samuel Loring Morison, a civilian analyst with the Office of Naval Intelligence. In 1984, Morison had been convicted of providing classified satellite photos of an under-construction Soviet nuclear-powered aircraft carrier to Britain's Jane's Defense Weekly. He received a two-year jail sentence. In pardoning Morison, Clinton dismissed the advice of the CIA. "We said we were obviously opposed -- it was a vigorous 'Hell, no," one senior intelligence official told the Washington Post at the time. "We think . . . giving pardons to people who are convicted of doing that sends the wrong signal to people who are currently entrusted with classified information." Morison is the only person ever successfully prosecuted under the 1917 Espionage Act, the law invoked by Democrats who want to nail Rove after it became clear that he didn't violate the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act. But it's going to be difficult for Dems to feign national security outrage over Plame's outing when the husband of their party's presidential frontrunner let an actual convicted leaker off the hook. Last week, when Sen. John Kerry called for Mr. Rove to be fired with Hillary standing by his side, she nodded silently. When reporters asked her what she thought of the alleged Rove outrage, she offered only, "I'm nodding." No doubt while remembering her husband's pardon of Mr. Morison. Democrats doing what Democrats do best. http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/7/26 /101413.shtml" title="http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/7/26 /101413.shtml" target="_blank"http://www.newsmax.com/archiv... |
posted by: mblog (reply)
post date: 07.26.05 (5:15 am)
When Clinton left office, he pardoned lots of people. It's his right as a president. Nevertheless, it got a lot of people angry. That included Republicans and Democrats. And they were right to be angry. If you're mad at Clinton for this, you should be furious at Bush. And since this one is old news, you should concentrate on the current problem.
There are a few differences you should keep in mind, though. Morison did not work under the Clinton administration. Clinton did not claim he would go after a leak and then stonewall. Morison served his sentence. The pardon cleared his record, but he still had to pay the price.
If Karl Rove were to go to jail, and some future Republican president were to pardon him decades later, that president would deserve the same scorn that Clinton got when he went overboard with pardons. (Don't forget that GHW Bush also issued lots of pardons as he left office. It's a problem we have with both sides.)
However, the issue here is not with Morison. It's not with 1984. It's with now. If you are truly bothered by Morison, you should be outraged by Rove. And by Bush.
In the mean time, you should stop being hypocritical by pointing to old news about Clinton, and ignoring current news that is far worse. Clinton didn't get a free ride when he gave those pardons, even though it was his prerogative. Bush should not get a free ride now, especially after he lied about firing whoever it turns out to be.
posted by: newbie (reply)
post date: 07.29.05 (1:49 pm)
I think the more relevant point is that what Karl Rove is accused of doing is something that occurred several years ago. He wasn't prosecuted for it then, and it is only being dragged through the MSM now because he has recently become more influential. If, during the past presidential election, the majority of the MSM and the American public could ignore/dismiss the fact that John Kerry was a self-admitted war criminal, why should we now hold Karl Rove to a different standard for a much less significant "crime"?
