The latest scandal involving a loyal Democrat is actually an indictment of…… you guessed it, The Bush Administration. In Greenwald’s post Treason by association Greenwald points to some on the right who are connecting the dots between McCarthy and some Democratic politicians, operatives, and allies as evidence of some greater conspiracy. There may or may not be/ have been some cooperation between McCarthy, and others loyal to the Democratic Party. We may or may not ever learn if there was. However Greenwald without ever acknowledging that what McCarthy is accused of is in fact a violation of law, and her oath attempts to indict loyal Bush followers using the same methods he is condemning in his post.

Greenwald characterizes the speculation thusly:

While many of them are content to insinuate darkly about the nefarious Plot against America which has likely been revealed by exposure of this web, others are more bold, explicitly speculating that this is but the tip of an iceberg of a traitorous conspiracy.

Wow thats some scary stuff there Glenn who of course proceedes to do exactly the same thing:

But if one’s political and professional connections to a leaker cast aspersions on the person’s integrity and patriotism, there are plenty of aspersions to be cast. Larry Franklin, for instance, is a former Department of Defense official who — unlike McCarthy — has actually been convicted of the unauthorized disclosure of classified information, to which he had access as a result of his Pentagon job, and sentenced to 12 years in prison.

Franklin was a top aide to Douglas Feith, the No. 3 official in Bush Defense Department, and had long-standing and very close ties to Paul Wolfowitz, deputy to Don Rumsfeld.

Other than his thinly vieled attempt to obfuscate the real subject. The first obvious question for Mr. Greenwald is, do you acknowledge that what Ms. McCarthy is accused of is in fact illegal?

Without commenting specifically on her case do you condemn the leaking of classified information by CIA officers no matter their political preference?
I have sent an email to Mr. Greenwald requesting answers to those questions but I won’t hold my breath. I know he is a busy guy and can’t really be bothered with petty details like the law and the truth.

Greenwald later responds to a commenter:

I never disputed the notion that Mary McCarthy broke the law. It may be that under the governing Executive Order which prohibits the classifying of information for certain purposes (such as to conceal wrongdoing), the information she disclolsed was not legally classifiable. But I don’t know if she broke the law or not because I don~t have the facts one would need to know.

Selective enforcement of the law — particularly when, as here, it is aimed at concealing government wrongdoing while allowing the government to use the leaking weapon with impunity — is a far worse crime and far more destructive than any single leak we are discussing. Do you understand the distinction now?

So Greenwald choose to reserve judgement on McCarthy’s leak until the facts come out. I take it he means until she is actually convicted if even then. However he is perfectly comfortable of continually accusing the Bush administration of breaking the law even though numerous legal scholars, and an overwhelming majority of congress are of a different opinion.
While we are at it I would like to examine some of the comments to Greenwalds post.
From one of my favorite commenters Hypathia:

Yes, on a superficial level, it seems inconsistent to approve of the leakers while also excoriating George Bush for violating the law. But the operative word there is “superficial.”

No its not superficial at all. It is either ignorant or a flat out lie to do so. 1. The President is authorized to declassify anything he chooses therefore it is not illegal. A CIA operative is not and doing so is a federal crime.

If one is working in an intelligence milieu where all kinds of illegal things are going, but they are classified, and if the GOP-controlled Congress renders reporting to it per the Whistleblower Act futile, what is a person supposed to do?

Well the first thing one would do would be to actually gather some proof of that fact.

Rosa Parks violated the law, too. I think McCarthy is closer to Parks than she is to Bush, and her lawbeaking far more justified, if not necessary.

And I think you violate the memory of Rosa Parks by comparing her refusal to submit to segregation to an act of treachery such as leaking highly classified information in a time of war.

Dread Scott says: Anything that hurts Bush or the Republican party is partisanship, which makes it illigitimate. Nothing that hurts Democrats and helps Republicans is ever considered partisan somehow.

When a senior CIA official leaks highly classified information that hurts the war effort and the Presidents administration is found to have ties to the most recent Democratic Candidate, and a recently convicted Democratic operative then it is legititmate to call for a closer examination of those ties. To argue otherwise exposes your lack of what you call “common sense and objective reality”.

Barbara O’Brien asks:

Do they really want to talk about ‘rendition” again? Do they really want the press reviewing Dana Priest’s article? I say bring it on. Let’s talk about the secret prisons.

Sure lets talk about them as soon as you actually find one.

Zack said Let’s see, the first step in determining motive for a crime is identifying who would benefit.

Who benefited from McCarthy’s leak? The American public. That was easy.

News alert Zack. We did not elect her to act on our behalf. She was hired and swore an oath to serve the policies of the President no matter his party.