Quote:

the G-man said:
However, if, as noted above, the source didn't realize that the information was confidential, there is an argument to made that the leak was not intentional. Therefore, depending on the language of the statute, the leak would not be a crime.

Again, this assumes that Plame even was a "covert operative" for purposes of the statute which, as noted ad nauseaum, may not even be the case.



Legality aside...

Even if no crime was committed, do you think the leaker demonstrated a degree of carelessness that should cost him or her their job, or have other consequences?

If there was that kind of uncertainty about whether Plame was covert or not on the part of the source, shouldn't the source have erred on the side of caution? Yeah, you can't always do that in conversation - things slip out and you can't help it - but it's not impossible to show a bit of restraint and stop yourself from saying something you probably shouldn't.

I think we should also be looking at the CIA to find out how well they keep government officials informed about the status of certain people so they know not to talk about them to make sure something like this doesn't happen.

If the leaking of Valerie Plame's name was not a criminal act, it was an act of carelessness that I think should have some serious consequences.

And as I stated earlier in this thread, whoever is the leak should have 'fessed up a long time ago, and should be ashamed of themselves for letting others take the heat for their actions - assuming the people who are being investigated or indicted aren't the leakers.

Last edited by Darknight613; 2005-11-22 7:09 PM.
"Well when I talk to people I don't have to worry about spelling." - wannabuyamonkey "If Schumacher’s last effort was the final nail in the coffin then Year One would’ve been the crazy guy who stormed the graveyard, dug up the coffin and put a bullet through the franchise’s corpse just to make sure." -- From a review of Darren Aronofsky & Frank Miller's "Batman: Year One" script