Now the McCarthy defense, all lawyered up with scandal lawyer Ty Cobb, has a new angle on her defense: she was authorized to talk (i.e., leak) to reporters!

Associates, who spoke only on condition of anonymity because of her sensitive legal situation, say the CIA authorized McCarthy on a number of occasions to talk with reporters. However, the details and timing remain unclear, including whether that was ever true after Goss took over in September 2004.

But in the same story, the reporters note the CIA position, which is not in conflict with at one time having the authority to talk to the press:

In a statement to CIA employees, Goss said that “a CIA officer has acknowledged having unauthorized discussions with the media, in which the officer knowingly and willfully shared classified intelligence, including operational information.”

McCarthy’s hired-gun lawyer is playing a strange PR game. The propaganda game is on full, which means the stakes are really high. And a compliant press is turning into a partisan ally of some of the worst political dirty tricks since Nixon. The misinformation and misreporting is stunning:

Allegations of a Soviet-style gulag in Eastern Europe and other facilities sparked international condemnation and investigations.

Actually the allegation was, in case any reporter wanted to READ about it, that old soviet gulags were being used by the CIA to hold prisoners in transit. Not that the prisons were gulag style prisons with forced manual labor, etc. Just the sites used to be gulags. That’s like saying trains running through Auschwitz are holocaust style trains. Yes, they are trains on the same track in the same place that saw millions of people gassed to death. But that is where the analogy ends.

But, if we are going to play the loose analogy game, the CIA is re-affirming Nixonian acts:

CIA spokesman Paul Gimigliano reaffirmed the agency’s position Tuesday, saying “an officer was fired for unauthorized contact with the media and the improper disclosure of classified information.” The agency has not named that officer.

On a side note, Tom Maguire is going to be ecstatic that the media is finally accurately reporting McCarthy’s donations to the Democrats:

McCarthy has given $7,700 to Democratic campaigns in the past three election cycles; her husband has donated $2,500, according to public records.

Well, that’s some major progress for the antique media. But back to McCarhty’s new defense angle. Is she now going to claim the CIA made her do it? This get’s stranger by the day. on thing is for sure, the liberal defenses are up in spades with Johnson and Beers and McGovern and others all out making noise. Something has them all spooked on this one.

Addendum: I have said this is a risky move on the part of McCarthy because she may want a deal before too long. But the political risks to the Democrats is really pretty bad as well, as this editorial in the Delco Times (Delaware County Times) points out:

Last week’s firing of a CIA official who allegedly leaked highly classified information to the news media provides a bit of a conundrum to those who wish to be taken seriously on matters of national security.

…

Instead, she allegedly pretended to be upholding her oath while she was breaking it. It took a failed polygraph test before she finally admitted what she had done.

If this is the Democrat’s idea of National Security, I am looking forward to November.

Update: One has to wonder when someone in the media isgiving others the media advise how to hide their incriminating information. just like spies and Al Qaeda does:

So, as long as you’re prepared to defy a court order and go to jail on a contempt charge, here are some privacy techniques proven in the field by mobsters, spies, al-Qaida, and tobacco companies.

…

Don’t Write Down Anything

…

Destroy Your Notes After Publication

…

Use Prepaid Cell Phones

Yes, I am quite aware this is tongue-in-cheek. Too bad it seems more real than made up. If the media and left feel they are at war with us, do they also feel the enemy of their enemy is their friend?