Greg Palast, in a guest editorial he wrote for Buzzflash, picks up the legal thread spun last week by the administration and and from his perspective as a past federal investigator he outlines the web of legal liabilities in which the cabal is wrapping themselves... "OK, let's accept the White House alibi that releasing Plame's identity was no crime. But if that's true, they've committed a bigger crime: Bush and Cheney knowingly withheld vital information from a grand jury investigation, a multimillion dollar inquiry the perps themselves authorized."
"Palast says, "On February 10, 2004, our not-so-dumb-as-he-sounds President stated, "Listen, I know of nobody -- I don't know of anybody in my administration who leaked classified information. If somebody did leak classified information, I'd like to know it, and we'll take the appropriate action.... Notice Bush's cleverly crafted words. He says he can't name anyone who leaked this "classified" info -- knowing full well he'd de-classified it.
www.buzzflash.com/contributors/06/04/con06129.html#top
Palast continues, "Far from letting Bush off the hook, it worsens the crime. For years, I worked as a government investigator and, let me tell you, Bush and Cheney withholding material information from the grand jury is a felony. Several felonies, actually: abuse of legal process, fraud, racketeering and, that old standby, obstruction of justice."
He explains that the Bush gang's use of phones duing this con added the charge of "wire fraud". And while Bush may be able to declassify and leak intelligence information, he does not have a right to obstruct justice or squander dollars sending a Grand Jury "on a wild goose chase".
Now that Mr. Bush has revealed that he declassified that information before it was leaked, it seems that we all had front row seats for the show, watching for the past two years as members of his administration and their lawyers gamed the Federal Proscecuters and the Grand Juries. Will this increase a liklihood that he will be impeached?
A question for the legal minds here: ( I really appreciate the incredible breadth and depth of expertise reflected on this site). Doesn't the information in Palast's editorial change the dynamics of the NSA spying on Americans"? If Mr. Palast's perspective on this is true, doesn't it affect the president's legal standing in a way that has ramifications on his claims to protections of secrecy, executive privilege, and unitary power and changes the underpinnings of his NSA wiretapping argument.
On a slightly different issue related to the wire tap outrage... Am I the only one who thinks that part of the wire tap program is used to mine for legislator's "secrets" as a way to "manage" voting? I usually think that legislative "arm twisting" is a tidied up way to describe threats of blackmail used to achieve desired legislative outcome.