> Cooper's notes state very emphatically that Rove spoke on double secret > background- meaning off the record- for the purpose of casting doubt on > Wilson's > story, not to expose Plame. Cooper broke his word by revealing this > information.
Isn't there a caveat to "off the record" in that _nothing_ ever is off the record? Seems to me that if there is a question of breaking the law, then "double secret background" would still be breaking the law if the information revealed is protected and that is then what happened. Let me be clear, I am not saying Rove did or did not commit a crime (that can be debated somewhere else), but what you seem to be saying here is that classified information can be leaked to a reporter for "[deep] background" but no crime is committed unless the reporter "blabs." I'm sorry but that just doesn't wash. If it is a criminal act to reveal classified information, and classified information is revealed to anyone not cleared for it, then a crime is committed, no matter the circumstance I should think (e.g. reporter, wife, gf/bf, whatever). If no one ever finds out, then I think it is simply "getting away with it," not "not committing a crime." -- will "If my life weren't funny, it would just be true; and that would just be unacceptable." - Carrie Fisher ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble Ticket application http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:164628 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
