How is cheney leaking a cia agent NOT TREASON?

Question

explain repukes

Answer 1

PLAME WAS undercover, covert FACT proven ask the CIA dopes
GET A CLUE REPUKES stop lying
and living in the bush desulsions

Answer 2

Leaking the identity of a CIA or other national intelligence agent while they are doing covert surveillance in hostile territory would be treason. Plame was NOT doing covert surveillance in hostile territory. Plus, it has not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Vice President Cheney had anything to do with the leaking of Plame's name.

Answer 3

While technically, she may still have had covert status, she was not in a covert position at the time of the outing.

Second, for there to have been a crime, the person outing the agent has to be aware that they are covert or have a classified status, and thus would deliberately be outing the agent.

Since she was outed by Richard Armitage, a liberal anti-war anti-Bush State Department staffer, who did not know she had a classified status, then obviously, no crime occurred.

And in all the investigations by Fitzgerald, there is no indication that "Loose Lips" Libby was aware of her classified status, either.

Those are the facts. They amount to no crime having been committed, certainly not treason.

Answer 4

Because treason is specifically defined under the law as taking up arms against your country, or proving arms or material (hardware) support to enemies currently engaged in hostilities. See 18 USC 2381.

The term treason does not automatically include every bad act, nor does it include everything that might harm the govt.

Leaking classified information is a separate crime.

EDIT to JimValentin: You are correct. Specific tactical informotion provided by a US citizen or military member to an enemy would likely also fall within the scope of treason. But there is no Supreme Court case that actually says it does.

Answer 5

Leaking the identity of a covert agent is treason; besides the fact that if, it sort of feels that Fitzpatrick the two did no longer have or could no longer get adequate info to indict Cheney or Rove. He went for the advantageous factor as they often do--charging Libby with mendacity. yet even the jurors suggested that Libby replace into the "fall guy" for Rove and Cheney. the excellent objective replace into to discredit Joe Wilson, who replace into exposing the lies that led us to conflict.

Answer 6

As I explained before, you can't prove it was intentional. Just because a pitcher in a baseball game hits a player with the ball doesn't mean he did it on purpose, no matter how hard he hit him. Treason implies intent.

Answer 7

How is lying to the entire nation by President Clinton not treason? That was proven and he finally admitted to it. Cheney did not leak anything dummy. Do your research before you speak.

Answer 8

cora... I normally find your arguments flawless and entlightened. However, in this case material support also means logistical information, not merely hardware. If I told the enemy that our forces were coming over X hill at Y o'clock on Z date, it would be treason.

Answer 9

Try proving that Cheney leaked anything you typical lying liberal.

Answer 10

what's a repuke? And if you are going to childishly call names, why would anyone take the time to give you a civil answer. You need to grow up sonny.