karl rove and the espionage act

* wapo's new A1: "At the White House and among its close allies, discussion about Rove's fate is verboten -- in part out of fear and in part out of ignorance about what his legal vulnerability actually is. No one in the White House wants to talk about an indictment. As another former official said, "No one wants to believe anything's going to happen." Nor do people easily discuss other staff changes. "Anyone who talks about that kind of stuff should be shot," said a third Republican with close ties to the White House."
they're a bunch of fucking ostriches. and btw - anyone who outs a cia agent should be shot, not anyone planning for a future without karl

* wsj's lede:

"The range of questions that Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has asked witnesses in the CIA leak case suggests he may be exploring whether to charge White House officials with leaking garden-variety classified information."

lol

luckily, surprisingly, the article actually improves beyond that, giving Luskin an Espionage Act-related heart attack:

Yesterday, one former administration official said Karl Rove had discussed Joseph Wilson and the role of his wife, Ms. Plame, with White House staffers in 2003. That buttresses the possibility that Mr. Fitzgerald is investigating charges related to leaking classified information.

The former official said Mr. Rove had these discussions after Mr. Wilson went public with claims that the Bush administration had twisted intelligence to build support for the Iraq war. Mr. Rove discussed discrediting Mr. Wilson, the former official said, adding that Mr. Rove didn't necessarily name Ms. Plame or make her a key talking point in conversations with other White House officials. Prosecutors have been told of these internal discussions.

Robert Luskin, an attorney for Mr. Rove, said, "The allegation is maliciously false."

OUCH! I love that - any discussion of the Espionage Act makes my nipples all tingly - especially on the Fitzmas eve, and especially in the wsj... its gets even better:

A charge of leaking classified information might seem a stretch in Washington, where many believe that too much information is deemed classified -- and where, in any case, such information routinely passes among White House officials, congressional staffers and the media.

But there are some relevant earlier cases. A current investigation into the leaking of classified Pentagon information to the Israeli lobbying group, American Israel Public Affairs Committee, has resulted in three indictments.

For Mr. Fitzgerald, there may be advantages to such an approach. Building a case on leaking classified intelligence likely would require a lower burden of proof than proving the 1982 law was violated.

Exposing a covert agent's name might violate the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act. But it is narrowly written, and includes a series of precise hurdles that need to be cleared to prove a crime.

More-general charges of leaking classified information would fall under the 1917 Espionage Act, which prohibits disclosure of "information relating to the national defense." That statute is broader, and would set a lower legal burden for proving a defendant's intent, legal experts said.

the wsj makes only the lamest attempt to spin it - but the elephant below the cutaneuos is the espionage act (capitalised or otherwise)

oh joy.