Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
You've got my proxy on the irrefutable shit, then.
|
Here's something refutable to ponder. What if the definition of "covert agent" in question isn't
50 USC § 426(4)(a) but 50 USC § 426(4)(b)(ii)?
(4) The term “covert agent” means—
The first definition:
- (A) a present or retired officer or employee of an intelligence agency or a present or retired member of the Armed Forces assigned to duty with an intelligence agency—
(i) whose identity as such an officer, employee, or member is classified information, and
(ii) who is serving outside the United States or has within the last five years served outside the United States; or
vs.
the second definition
- (B) a United States citizen whose intelligence relationship to the United States is classified information, and—
(i) who resides and acts outside the United States as an agent of, or informant or source of operational assistance to, an intelligence agency, or
(ii) who is at the time of the disclosure acting as an agent of, or informant to, the foreign counterintelligence or foreign counterterrorism components of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; or
The
Blumenthal piece that Ty cited and Slave dismissed had the following passage in it:
- On July 30, the CIA referred a "crime report" to the Justice Department. "If she was not undercover, we would not have a reason to file a criminal referral," a CIA official said. On Dec. 30, the Justice Department appointed Patrick Fitzgerald, U.S. attorney for northern Illinois, as the special prosecutor.
Makes the five years part of the statute that everyone's been talking about irrelevant.
