Obama Administration Has Used Espionage Act Twice As Many Times as All Prior Administrations Combined

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Barack Obama, and his wily group of liberal loons, promised transparency, and that he would enhance "whistle-blower laws to protect federal workers."  The administration is doing the exact opposite. There has never been an administration in history that has tried to silence and prosecute federal workers more.

Something to hide?

The Espionage Act goes back to 1917, and was originally intended to punish those who gave aid to our enemies. Prior to the Obama administration, The Espionage Act was used three times. Since Barack Obama has taken office, the act has been used six times.

The only case where the use of the act may have been warranted is in regards to Private First Class Bradley Manning, an Army intelligence analyst who allegedly stole thousands of secret documents. The remaining prosecutions have been primarily regarding administrative secrecy, and has had very little to do with national security.

Something to hide?

Rather than being used as originally intended, the Espionage Act is being used by this administration as a way to protect official White House secrets, which, by the way, is a law that was never enacted in this country.

So much for transparency.

Something to hide?

The people's right to know the business of the politicians supersedes Washington's right to hide their business, unless it directly affects national security and a release of the information could endanger the nation.

According to the New York Times, the most recent case, John Kiriakou, a former C.I.A. officer who became a Democrat staff member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, was charged under the Espionage Act with leaking information to journalists about other C.I.A. officers, some of whom were involved in the agency’s interrogation program, including waterboarding.

Understand, the leftists hate the technique of waterboarding, and though the Bush Administration released the records regarding the people it was used on, which equaled three prisoners, and from one valuable information was ascertained, the leftist media demanded more satisfaction. Some liberals were even calling for the heads of members of the Bush administration, demanding that they be prosecuted for war crimes.

The Obama Campaign in 2008 railed against "torture," and promised to put those practices to rest. Then, after becoming President, the Obama administration has not only continued to use the technique, but now they are prosecuting Mr. Kiriakou. He is accused of talking to journalists and news organizations, including The New York Times, on the topic.

ABC News Jake Tapper, after hearing in the White House briefing room, the administration’s press secretary, Jay Carney, open on a somber note, citing the deaths of Marie Colvin and Anthony Shadid, two reporters who had died “in order to bring truth” while reporting in Syria, he felt he had to raise the issue. Hearing Mr. Carney echo the praise for reporters who dug deep to bring out the truth elsewhere got his attention, because through the Espionage Act this administration has been doing all it can to quell the truth here in America.

“I have been following all of these case, and it’s not like they are instances of government employees leaking the location of secret nuclear sites,” Mr. Tapper said. “These are classic whistle-blower cases that dealt with questionable behavior by government officials or its agents acting in the name of protecting America.”

Mr. Carney failed to respond to any attempt by Tapper, or other reporters, to seek comment.

Something to hide?

Last year Thomas A. Drake, a former employee of the National Security Agency, was prosecuted under the Espionage Act. He faced a possible 35 years in prison for spending hundreds of millions of dollars on a software program bought from the private sector intended to monitor digital data, and then suggesting an internally developed program that cost significantly less would be more effective and not violate privacy in the way the product from the vendor would.

He was charged with 10 felony counts that accused him of lying to investigators and obstructing justice. Last summer, the case against him fell apart, an he pleaded guilty to a single misdemeanor, of misuse of a government computer.

So much for transparency.

Something to hide?

Mr. Drake's lawyer said of this, “The Obama administration has been quite hypocritical about its promises of openness, transparency and accountability. All presidents hate leaks, but pursuing whistle-blowers as spies is heavy-handed and beyond the scope of the law.”

These are "leak prosecutions" that shows the Obama administration is shrouded in secrecy. The question one must ask is, "Why?"

The first thought is that they have something to hide. Could it be that they know what they are doing behind the curtain would not be met with approval by the voters? Does this administration truly believe that they are not just elected representatives of the people, but a ruling elite tasked to put upon the public an agenda best for the community as they perceive it, whether the populace likes it, or not?

If this begins to get out a little more, what will it do to Obama's chances for re-election?

Obama once called himself a professional politician, and I, for once, have to agree with him. He was right. He is a conniving, lying, deceitful, professional politician who has placed himself up on some pedestal above everyone else. He believes he is above the law, and Mr. Obama will use the law no matter how it was intended to silence those around him that might chirp a clue about the wretched reality in Washington.

This administration's greatest ally has been the media. Yet, with his use of the Espionage Act in order to hide the truth, Obama is creating a chilly environment between journalists and people who work at the various government agencies that may very well result in him losing the media's full support during the campaign.

As the public tries to seek out the truth, he is treating those who are trying to get at the truth as spies.

Something to hide?

The writer of the New York Times piece I used as a source for this blog post also pointed out something else very interesting, saying "It’s worth pointing out that the administration’s emphasis on secrecy comes and goes depending on the news. Reporters were immediately and endlessly briefed on the “secret” operation that successfully found and killed Osama bin Laden. And the drone program in Pakistan and Afghanistan comes to light in a very organized and systematic way every time there is a successful mission. There is plenty of authorized leaking going on, but this particular boat leaks from the top. Leaks from the decks below, especially ones that might embarrass the administration, have been dealt with very differently."

Recognition of the truth is selective. . . goes back to what I have said here before: What's the answer to the question? Whatever benefits Obama the most, even if it contradicts previous answers.

Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Blurred Line Between Espionage and Truth - New York Times