LEAK, LEAK, ELECT, ELECT?

October 22, 2006 -- How far will Democrats go for partisan gain?

Far enough to compromise national security?

Looks that way.

Late last week, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Pete Hoekstra (R-Mich.) suspended a Democratic staff member on suspicion of leaking a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) to The New York Times. The staffer's security clearance was also blocked.

Initial reports on the NIE cited it as saying principally that the Iraq war had energized Islamist radicals and, in the process, increased the danger to America from jihadist terrorism. In fact, taken in its entirety, the document concluded just the opposite: that the military defeat of jihadists in Iraq would mean "fewer fighters will be inspired to carry on the [war]."
That's a big difference.

And the selective leaking of the NIE - and the spin put on it by the Times and The Washington Post, among others - put the White House on the defensive and contributed to lagging poll numbers for both the president and the Republican Congress.

Which is likely just what the leaker intended.

In that light, intel committee member Ray LaHood (R-Ill.) wrote to Hoekstra last month to note that the unnamed, now-suspended staffer had requested the NIE from National Intelligence Director John Negroponte just three days before cherry-picked portions of it showed up on the front page of the Times and WashPost.

As LaHood wrote in his letter: "This may, in fact, be only coincidence and simply 'look bad.' But coincidence, in this town, is rare."

Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.), the top Democrat on the committee, said she was outraged that the staffer was suspended and insisted that his access to classified material be reinstated.

Sorry, Ms. Harman, the suspension doesn't go far enough.

If there were enough cause to warrant the suspension, there should be enough cause to warrant a full and complete federal investigation.

And, we mean "full and complete."

Let the investigation go where it may - even if it is to the Washington, D.C., bureau of The New York Times.

Leaking classified material in a time of war is bad enough. Selective and misleading leaks - for the blatantly partisan goal of discrediting the president and his agenda in an election year - are utterly reprehensible.

Time to get to the bottom of this - once and for all.


http://www.nypost.com/seven/10222006...ditorials_.htm