Was it legal for Bush to authorize Libby to leak bits of the Iraq National Intelligence Estimate? Here's an argument that it was: (1) Bush declassified the relevant bits of the NIE; (2) Bush did so legally; and since there's nothing illegal about authorizing someone to leak legally declassified information, Bush's act was legal.

But neither (1) nor (2) stands up to examination.

Former FBI translator and whistleblower Sibel Edmonds has written an open letter to CIA Director Porter Goss in response to his New York Times op-ed. What follows is exerpts from her letter with some comments by yours truly.

I have been astounded that the Bush administration's highest officials feel that they can unilaterally decide to release classified information, with no consequences. I hold the highest level of clearance possible, and have been a contractor for the intelligence community for almost 15 years. We are told over and over again about the consequences of releasing classified information. When Larry Franklin (a Pentagon intelligence analyst) recently released classified information, he received almost 13 YEARS in prison. But when Karl Rove and Scooter Libby reveal the name of a clandestine agent (the name itself is classified), aren't they guilty of revealing classified information? And now we find that Scooter Libby was given permission by the Vice President to reveal classified information to the press. The Vice President is not allowed to unilaterally declassify anything, and the Vice President made no effort to do so through proper channels. That information (the National Intelligence Estimate) is STILL officially classified!

(continued below)