The Black Vault

Did The White House commit treason & leak secrets? US attorneys to head FBI probes

WASHINGTON • Two U.S. attorneys are taking over separate FBI investigations into leaks of national security information that critics have accused the White House of orchestrating to improve President Barack Obama’s re-election chances, a claim Obama calls "offensive" and "wrong."

Recent news articles contained details of U.S. involvement in a partially successful computer virus attack on Iran’s nuclear program and on the selection of targets for counter-terrorism assassination plots. The leaked information generally painted Obama as a decisive and hands-on commander in chief.


"The notion that my White House would purposely release classified national security information is offensive. It’s wrong," Obama told reporters at a news conference Friday. "And people I think need to have a better sense of how I approach this office and how the people around me here approach this office."

Obama promised investigations into the source of leaks about U.S. involvement in cyberattacks on Iran and drone strikes on suspected terrorists.

"We’re dealing with issues that can touch on the safety and security of the American people, our families or our military personnel or our allies, and so we don’t play with that," he said.

Hours later, Attorney General Eric Holder announced that two U.S. attorneys will lead a pair of criminal investigations already under way into possible unauthorized disclosures of classified information within the executive and legislative branches of government.

Holder said he was confident the prosecutors would follow the facts and evidence wherever they led.

"The unauthorized disclosure of classified information can compromise the security of this country and all Americans, and it will not be tolerated," he said.

Holder assigned Ronald Machen, the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, and Rod Rosenstein, the U.S. attorney for the District of Maryland, to direct separate probes that are already being conducted by the FBI.

Three weeks ago, FBI Director Robert Mueller said the bureau had launched an investigation into who leaked information about an al-Qaida plot to place an explosive device aboard a U.S.-bound airline flight. Separately, calls from Capitol Hill have mounted urging a leak probe into a New York Times story a week ago about U.S. involvement in cyberattacks on Iran.


Congressional intelligence committee leaders turned up the heat on the White House over alleged national security leaks on Thursday, with the head of the Senate Intelligence Committee suggesting she might be willing to join Republican demands for an investigation by a special counsel.

Senator Dianne Feinstein, the committee's Democratic chairwoman, told reporters she needed more time to consider Republican demands - voiced earlier this week by Senator John McCain and committee vice chair Saxby Chambliss - for a special counsel to probe how highly sensitive secrets were disclosed to news media.

The Intelligence Committee chiefs and other legislators have called for urgent investigations into recent media disclosures on U.S. cyber warfare against Iran, procedures for targeting militants with drones, and the existence of a double agent who penetrated a militant group in Yemen.

McCain has suggested that some of the leaks may have been calculated to boost the election prospects of President Barack Obama - something White House spokesmen emphatically deny.

Feinstein cautioned that she was still pondering the "special counsel" idea for the current leak inquiries because "A special prosecutor can take years. We don't have years. We need to legislate and we need to do things quickly."

She suggested she might propose legislation to give inspectors general of government departments more investigatory authority.

Historically, some special counsels, such as the prosecutor who conducted a lengthy leak-related investigation that led to the conviction of a top aide to former Vice President Dick Cheney on obstruction and perjury charges, have been accused of pursuing witch-hunts.

Feinstein and Chambliss joined the House Intelligence committee's Republican chairman Mike Rogers and ranking Democrat C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger at an unusual Capitol Hill news conference following a closed-door meeting on the leaks issue with James Clapper, Director of There were fresh indications on Thursday that even if Attorney-General Eric Holder does not formally appoint a special counsel, the Justice Department could create some kind of special chain of command to handle leak inquiries.

At the news conference, Rogers said portions of the Justice Department's National Security Division (NSD) had removed themselves from elements of at least one current leak investigation.

Rogers later issued a statement clarifying that he did not mean to suggest wrongdoing by Justice Department officials, but was merely pointing out the hazards of a Justice Department-led investigation of the leaks.

Hold the phone.

Let me get this right ......

When Bradley manning leaks military secrets to the press ( wikileaks ) It's a crime & an act of treason & an act of espionage, resulting in Bradly manning being tossed away in a cell never to be seen again.

& Julian Assange being chased all around the world & fake rape charges used to track him down and capture him.

Yet it is not a problem if you are the President of the USA.

What ... it's ok to commit treason & aid the enemy if you are the President.

Espionage is ok, as long as your the President.

& Lets just remember, this is not the first time a US President has leaked Classified secrets.

We all remember when President G.Bush leaked CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity in 2003.

Quite an imagination you have there!

Sounds like you just said "Assange committed Espionage with Manning".

greeney2 wrote:Quite an imagination you have there!

Sounds like you just said "Assange committed Espionage with Manning".

See thats where your whole argument falls down.


there is no proof that Bradly Manning gave anything to Julian Assange.

Like i said Bradly manning may have given the us documents to China or Russia, who then uploaded the documents via a military computer to wiki Leaks.

Julian Assange is being chased by the USA because he Published the documents on his web site WikiLeaks.

SO tell me this ....

Why is the USA going after Julian Assange for being the Publisher, who Published the US diplomatic cables & such, but the USA has never sort to arrest the Publishers of the New York times, or the Washington post or The Guardian. ECT ECT

Why is it ok for news papers coordinating with WikiLeaks to publish the US diplomatic cables & military documents & videos of US war crimes. but not the wikileaks web site?

Like I said quite an imagination. Any proof to the fact any of you senerio is true? We'll see what evidnce comes out of the Bradley Manning trial.

interesting comments.
Obama, actually signed into law allowing
more transparency, and a systematic method to declassify.

let's reflect for for a moment. our countries 'state of mind ' at this juncture,
was huge,in favor for transparency. his lawyer if shrewd, will set this very stage opinion.

further, the government official " classifier " is required to know the reason
why the information was classified in the manner it was. ' that's a bingo'

argument might posit ,releasing the clip of the helicopter crew , straffing civilians,(news crew)would undermine 'public support' for the war, thus national security.was this war vital to our national security ?

prosec/ could say publishing the soldiers actions,was contributing to bad morale and thus, will have detrimental effects on combat readiness. impacting
the final outcome of the conflict. (this has nat. security implications.)

in addition, the burden of government will be to prove the information shared by manning " damaged national security." that in itself; and , the classification,
is not to be used to "coverup criminal activity."

what is damage to national security during a undeclared and possibly illegal war,
may have to be decided by a jury. precedent ?
I'm outta here...

greeney2 wrote:Like I said quite an imagination. Any proof to the fact any of you senerio is true? We'll see what evidnce comes out of the Bradley Manning trial.

That we will ...

either way, i matters not to me what the outcome is.

Bradly Manning is the person who stole classified us documents.

Bradley Manning is an American, so the usa can do with him as they please.

But i find it sad & pathetic that Bradly Manning, would implicate an Innocent man like Julian Assange. Just to get his name in the lime light & feel a little famous.

Why Bradley Manning feels the need to lie & make up story's, claiming other people were part of his treasonous plot.

I will never understand.

Maybe he is scared & feels if he lies and blames it all on Julian Assange, that Bradley Manning himself might escape the death penalty, & may even get into witness protection programe or something .

All he has to do is set up Julian Assange & tell the US government what ever they want him to say.

ricardo wrote:interesting comments.

Likewise, with yours.

So as the facts unfold, we will see the trail to wikileaks unfold, and that will implicate him.