Today Aaron continues his onging misinformation campaign by misquoting the President of the United States. The transcript of the President's adress at whitehouse.gov shows that he did not say "Revealing this information is illegal" as Aaron quotes him. Such a quote would unabiguously have POTUS saying that "this information", meaning the information revealed in the Times was illegal. POTUS never says that what the Times revealed or what the sources revealed to the Times was illegal. He does a nice tap dance around saying that because he knows it isn't true.

His actual statement was "Revealing classified information is illegal" In typical Bush-speak he makes a true statement but doesn't attach it to a specific act. Of course revealing classified information is illegal be he doesn't say that the times or their informants did that. The words that he uses when he talks about the information that they released is "unauthorized" and "improperly provided" If he wanted to say that what the Times did or what the leaker's did was illegal he could have said so instead of using weasel words that only say that he didn't approve of what they did. There is a very big difference between illegal and unauthorized.

I say bring on the investigiation of this. It never will be illegal to blow the whistle on illegal acts of the executive branch no matter how much they believe it benefits national security. The leakers are former officials with NSA and with a year to determine their identities, I'm quite sure the Bush administration already has a pretty good idea of who they are and could have had them arrested if they released classified information. You are more likely to see these former officials as witness at congresssional investigations into White House misconduct, than you will ever see them as the targets of investigation for leakiing classified information.

KeithS continues his tap dance....

"Today Aaron continues his onging misinformation campaign by misquoting the President of the United States. The transcript of the President's adress at whitehouse.gov shows that he did not say "Revealing this information is illegal" as Aaron quotes him. Such a quote would unabiguously have POTUS saying that "this information", meaning the information revealed in the Times was illegal. POTUS never says that what the Times revealed or what the sources revealed to the Times was illegal. He does a nice tap dance around saying that because he knows it isn't true."

I would say this paragraph says exactly that.

"This is a highly classified program that is crucial to our national security. Its purpose is to detect and prevent terrorist attacks against the United States, our friends and allies. Yesterday the existence of this secret program was revealed in media reports, after being improperly provided to news organizations. As a result, our enemies have learned information they should not have, and the unauthorized disclosure of this effort damages our national security and puts our citizens at risk. Revealing classified information is illegal, alerts our enemies, and endangers our country."

Where are all the Democratic congressmen that were briefed on this program?

Bush very carefully selected his words to only accuse the Times and the leakers of doing something unauthorized or unapproved as oppossed to doing something illegal. You can argue all day long that he actually said that they did something illegal, but his actions speak louder than either his or your words. If he indeed believes that they have done something illegal, then why hasn't he cuffed the criminals and put them in jail?? The answer is that they haven't done anything illegal, so HE can't have them arrested. And he won't have them arrested. Just watch and one of us will be proven wrong but so far, it isn't me who is having his interpretation brought into question by the Administration's response.

As far as your question about Democratic leaders who were briefed on the project, this is just more of the typical Bush-Speak (hereafter known as BS). According to the BS realeased by the White House, key Democratic congressonal leaders were briefed about the domestic spying being done by NSA. As is usaul with White House BS, the President only provides part of the truth by saying they were briefed, but not saying WHEN they were briefed. He leaves his audience to conclude that they were briefed early in the process. What does the Democratic Leadership have to say about that?

Senator Harry Reid acknowledged that he was briefed by the administration about the surveillance program but that the briefing took place "a couple of months ago." He said the program apparently has been going on for a period of FOUR YEARS and "there's no way the President can pass the buck" by saying that he briefed the minority leadership on the project.

In other words, Democratic Congressmen were informed of the domestic spying AFTER it was clear to the Bush Adminstration that the New York Times already had the story and was eventually going to blow the lid off of the whole episode. The administration made a pre-emptive strike before the story was published so that they could make a false claim of keeping the legislative branch informed when the crap eventually hit the fan. Since they were negotiating with the NYT about what would be excluded from the story for National Security reasons, they were well aware in advance of the impending publication and only disclosed the information to the minority leadership when publication was close at hand.

"ou can argue all day long that he actually said that they did something illegal...."

I don't think so.

18 USC 793

(e) Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or
(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense,
(1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or
(2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both."

"Senator Harry Reid acknowledged that he was briefed by the administration about the surveillance program but that the briefing took place "a couple of months ago." He said the program apparently has been going on for a period of FOUR YEARS and "there's no way the President can pass the buck" by saying that he briefed the minority leadership on the project."

What do you want to bet the White House can produce records of exactly who, when, what of these briefings? Too bad Harry doesn't show up for briefings or is his memory faulty?

"Leaders in Congress have been briefed more than a dozen times on this authorization and the activities conducted under it.[9]"

For further reading let me suggest

http://www.yargb.blogspot.com/2005/12/opening-act.html