A Judge once said to a man who leaked classified information...
"This is like the drunk driver who gets home without killing anybody. Nobody got killed. But you should never have gotten in the car. No agent was killed and no investigation was compromised. But the risk was certainly there... Anything that would affect the security of officers and of the operations of the agency would be of tremendous concern, I think, to any law-abiding citizen in this country."
TRUE STORY...
Once upon a time there was an administration...
that prosecuted a man for leaking information under a law that prohibits use of government records and information for non-governmental purposes.
If convicted, he faced 500 years in prison... He pleaded guilty.
In sentencing the man to a 1-year prison sentence and 3 years probation, the judge made the statement sited above... He added that this leak of sensitive information was "a very serious crime."
The U.S. Attorney boasted that the conviction of this man made a good example of how the Administration would handle leakers.
Whoa! What Administration was this?
Which Administration was this, you might ask?
Well, it was the Bush Administration of course... THIS BUSH ADMINISTRATION!
What law is this?
It is called 18 USC 641... Or, if you want CLEAR and FORCEFUL, The Randel Law...
(Hat tip to John Dean himself for this gem...)
[Jonathan] Randel was a Drug Enforcement Agency analyst, a PhD in history, working in the Atlanta office of the DEA. Randel was convinced that British Lord Michael Ashcroft (a major contributor to Britain's Conservative Party, as well as American conservative causes) was being ignored by DEA, and its investigation of money laundering. (Lord Ashcroft is based in South Florida and the off-shore tax haven of Belize.)
Randel leaked the fact that Lord Ashcroft's name was in the DEA files, and this fact soon surfaced in the London news media. Ashcroft sued, and learned the source of the information was Randel. Using his clout, soon Ashcroft had the U.S. Attorney in pursuit of Randel for his leak.
By late February 2002, the Department of Justice indicted Randel for his leaking of Lord Ashcroft's name. It was an eighteen count "kitchen sink" indictment; they threw everything they could think of at Randel. Most relevant for Karl Rove's situation, Court One of Randel's indictment alleged a violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 641. This is a law that prohibits theft (or conversion for one's own use) of government records and information for non-governmental purposes. But its broad language covers leaks, and it has now been used to cover just such actions.
Kitchen sink sounds life fun too...
Randel, faced with a life sentence (actually, 500 years) if convicted on all counts, on the advice of his attorney, pleaded guilty to violating Section 641. On January 9, 2003, Randel was sentenced to a year in a federal prison, followed by three years probation. This sentence prompted the U.S. Attorney to boast that the conviction of Randel made a good example of how the Bush Administration would handle leakers.
Check this out from the Silha Center...
The gravity of the leaks were further emphasized by U.S. District Judge Richard W. Story at Randel's sentencing, who said, "The risk you created was tremendous. This is like the drunk driver who gets home without killing anybody. Nobody got killed. But you should never have gotten in the car. No agent was killed and no investigation was compromised. But the risk was certainly there."
How is that for clear and forceful!
Cooper has testified that Rove said that the information about Wilson's wife was about to be declassified - indicating that he knew it was classified (of course it never was declassified.)- and finished by saying that he had said too much. Rove clearly understood the risks of leaking classified information...
Rove will be particularly spooked when he hears that Judge Story said to Randel...
that he surely must have appreciated the risks in leaking DEA information. "Anything that would affect the security of officers and of the operations of the agency would be of tremendous concern, I think, to any law-abiding citizen in this country," the judge observed. Judge Story concluded this leak of sensitive information was "a very serious crime."
"In my view," he explained, "it is a very serious offense because of the risk that comes with it, and part of that risk is because of the position" that Randel held in the DEA.
John Dean sticks the dagger in here...
... the risk posed by the information Rove leaked is multiplied many times over; it occurred at a time when the nation was considering going to war over weapons of mass destruction. And Rove was risking the identity of, in attempting to discredit, a WMD proliferation expert, Valerie Plame Wilson.
...Given the nature of Valerie Plame Wilson's work, it is unlikely the public will ever know if Rove's leak caused damage, or even loss of life of one of her contracts abroad, because of Rove's actions. Dose anyone know the dangers and risks that she and her family may face because of this leak?
It was just such a risk that convinced Judge Story that "for any person with the agency to take it upon himself to leak information poses a tremendous risk; and that's what, to me, makes this a particularly serious offense." Cannot the same be said that Rove's leak? It dealt with matters related to national security; if the risk Randel was taking was a "tremendous" risk, surely Rove's leak was monumental.
Karl Rove's leak to Matt Cooper is now an established fact. First, there is Matt Cooper's email record. And Cooper has now confirmed that he has told the grand jury he spoke with Rove. If Rove's leak fails to fall under the statute that was used to prosecute Randel, I do not understand why.
The meme is this: Karl Rove is like someone who drives drunk and claims he should not get in trouble because we can't prove that he hurt anyone. Sorry Karl, you took the risk... you pay the price! And remember it is the Randel Case, not the IIPA that applies.
BYW, his meme has the added benefit of fitting a certain President for whom the metaphor is particularly appropriate.