Berged [sic] selected Mary O. McCarthy for a top intelligence position at the National Security Council in the Clinton administration. McCarthy was reportedly fired by the Central Intelligence Agency in April 2006 for leaking classified information to journalists.For the record, I am not a conspiracy theorist. However there is a pattern slowly emerging with regard to the deliberate undermining of national intelligence and foreign policy since 9/11 that is striking.
I will have more to say about this in the next few weeks.
UPDATE: Mark Levin has some comments:
Well, as of this morning (Saturday) most of the big media don't care. They're fixated with the weather and gas prices — and anything else that will divert the public's attention from the stunning revelation that a Sandy Berger crony has apparently been leaking top-secret information from her high post at the CIA. The media will continue to downplay this story as they cover-up their own role in exposing our nation's secrets, including the supposed existence of CIA prisons in Europe. She'll be called a "whistleblower" and praised as some kind of patriot (a patriot, in the eyes of the media, is anybody who undermines this administration and the war effort by leaking national security secrets to them). They will downplay that McCarthy was a Clintonoid who somehow managed to land a top post at the CIA, ultimately winding up in the CIA's Inspector General's Office, from where she could monitor CIA internal investigations of, well, leaks, among other things.
The news spin, to the extent attention is being paid to this by the big media outlets, is that McCarthy's firing is unprecedented! Or it's Bush's fault! In one of the most absurd comments by any newsman anywhere, Newsbusters.org notes that Bob Schieffer of CBS Evening News asserted that “it is no secret that the current administration does not like its people hanging out with news reporters without permission” and he described the firing as “a first — a dubious first, to be sure.” Here. Is this guy for real?
Let us see if this gets anywhere near the coverage that la affaire Plame generated in the media. It is already being completely discounted and rationalized as nothing serious by the usual dim bulbs that spin left. (AJ Strata has a big round-up). These are the same guys who continue to hyperventilate about Plame.
Both discounting and rationalization are techniques used by those in denial; and which I discuss in my series on dealing with psychological denial.
UPDATE II: Varifrank--who appears to be seeing some of the same connections as I do is asking some excellent questions. Here's a sample but go read them all:
4. How many "dots" are not being "connected" because half of the CIA is sitting in its cubicles frothing at the mouth in hatred over the words "President Bush". How many people have died due to someone elses Bush Derangement Syndrome?
5. At what point does the actions of someone like McCarthy stop being a "Leak" and start being a form of "shadow government"?
6. Its supposed to be the "Central Intelligence Agency", not the "Central Policy Agency". We didnt elect you Dr. McCarthy, you are not "the decider"; its not your call.
7. If a person will violate their security oath for political revenge, what wont they do?
8. What strikes me as most interesting about this case is that it appears that Dr. McCarthy has close working relationships with many people in the "anti-Bush" community and the Democrat party. Is this just a leak, or part of an attempt at a soft "coup"?
UPDATE: III: Hmmmmmm. Does it begin to seem like pieces of a puzzle are falling into place...?
UPDATE IV: UPDATE IV: Ace asks if it might have been McCarthy who sent Wilson to Niger! Gee, I should have named this post: "Mary McCarthy: The Missing Link"....