Paul O'Neill may be investigated for release of possibly classified docs in his book

[Mike Irwin]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Treasury requested a probe on Monday of how a possibly secret document appeared in a televised interview of Paul O'Neill, as a book criticizing the Bush administration that uses material supplied by the ex-Treasury secretary hits the stores.

In the book about his term as Treasury chief, O'Neill, who left the job in December 2002 in a shake-up of President Bush (news - web sites)'s economic team, criticized White House policies and provided author Ron Suskind with thousands of administration documents.


O'Neill said the Bush administration had been looking for a justification to oust President Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) since early 2001, long before the Sept. 11 attacks that year.


Nichols did not specify the topic of the specific document that led to the decision to ask the Inspector General's office to look into it.


"It's based on the (CBS program) '60 Minutes' segment, and I'll be even more clear -- the document as shown on '60 Minutes' that said 'secret,"' Treasury spokesman Rob Nichols told reporters at a weekly briefing.


Nichols said the probe will focus on how possibly classified information appeared on a television interview as one of O'Neill's papers.


According to a summary of the segment on CBS's web site, Suskind said one of the briefing materials O'Neill had included a paper marked "secret" that was titled "Plan for post-Saddam Iraq (news - web sites)."


"We're asking them to simply look into the '60 Minutes' segment and then take appropriate steps, if necessary," Nichols said. However, he said the legal threshold for asking for an inquiry was "very low."


Asked if seeking the probe may look vindictive, Nichols said, "We don't view it in that way."

 

[Baba Louie]

Asked if seeking the probe may look vindictive, Nichols said, "We don't view it in that way."

"Just doing my job maam, Certain things must be kept from Saddam Hussein and Usama bin Laden and our enemies"...

 

[Bob Locke]

This is a tough one to gauge.

On one hand, dare to speak against the President and you feel the wrath of the administration.

On the other, it appears that he stole (that's the proper term, because he had no legitimate reason to possess them after he was out of office) classified government documents to use them for personal gain.

Sordid mess, this.

 

[fix]

The whole "throwing stones from a glass house" thing does come to mind.

 

[Waitone]

Smart play would be to ignore O'Neill and he'll go away when the media gets tired of using him. More damaging stuff will come out as we head for the election. Democrats should be careful of over playing their hand. Bush has a history of outsmarting them by a mile.

 

[SodaPop]

When are we going to tie people to the post for treason?

 

[longeyes]

Why not just declare him an enemy combatant and throw the key away?

 

[Russ]

O'Neill is rather pathetic. He's just pissed because no one listens to him. I am amazed at how he was picked to head one of the biggest companies in the world.

 

[longeyes]

No one listens to him? Sure about that?

Hey, Bono listened to him. Or was it the other way around?

 

[lapidator]

He's the bone-head that brought a document with the "SECRET" stamp on it to national TV. If it turns out to be what it looks like, i wonder what else he has that has privileged access.

Lapidator

 

[Politically Incorrect]

I think that the more the government intrudes on the privacy of individuals (i.e. Patriot Act), government officials should then release more "secret" documents for public scrutiny.

I like O'Neill because he isn't much of a politician and unlike politicians O'Neill understands simple economics such as "supply and demand."

 

[444]

Yawn...............................................

I thought this might be about Paul O'Neill that played for the Yankees

http://www.pauloneill21.com/career_history/index.html

 

[Jonesy9]

Days to investigate the outing of an undercover CIA agent working on WMD by senior WH officials: 80

Days to investigate an former WH senoir official who critizes the admin: 1

Having your "base" still not realize that a hypocritical bunch of traitors is running the country....priceless!


And was that not President Bush himself ADMITTING that what O'Neill said was true (much to the chagrin of Karl Rove no doubt) at the press conference yesterday? No wonder there were no denials, just attempts to kill the messenger. And yet, the sheeple sleep.

 

[MrAcheson]

Nothing O'Neill said in his book was ground-breaking: He said:

(1) W wanted Saddam out of Iraq before 9/11. This has been true of every president since Bush the Elder, Bush is nothing special. There has been some allegations that he was making post-war plans before the war started. However if you actually read the documents he cites, he is making a vast overstatement of what was going on.

(2) Internal White House politics are different in this administration than others. The VPs office has an almost unprecedented amount of power. Bush doesn't let his own staff know where he is going to come down on issues. There are lots of ideological discussions. Interesting but nothing really that important.

If O'Neill has mishandled classified materials (and if he is currently in possession of any he has defacto mishandled them) I hope he gets what is coming to him. There really isn't any excuse for that.

 

[buzz_knox]

And was that not President Bush himself ADMITTING that what O'Neill said was true (much to the chagrin of Karl Rove no doubt) at the press conference yesterday? No wonder there were no denials, just attempts to kill the messenger. And yet, the sheeple sleep.

Nice spin. What Bush said was that he wanted Hussein out and discussed it upon becoming President. Of course, there's a federal law on the books that advocates that very thing, and we had aircraft over Iraq in a hot zone on the day he was inaugurated. Maybe those had something to do with it. The truth is far different from the palp O'Neill is trying to spread.

Here's a basic point. O'Neill promised publicly not to bad mouth the President. He is now doing so, using "SECRET" documents to support his case. O'Neill is a liar and quite possibly a thief, so why give him any credibility?

 

[Leatherneck]

If news reports are true, he took some 19,000 pages of documents with him, some possibly classified. That, folks constitutes a big-time No-No. The document/copying costs alone would amount to felonious theft of Gummint property. The classified stuff would land you or me in prison for such mishandling. Those two faux pas alone should condemn him to history's trash bin.

TC
TFL Survivor

 

[OF]

And the Big Spin award goes to: Jonesy9! <clap clap clap>

"The sheeple sleep". Please. The president had getting rid of Hussein on the planning list: BFD. So did Clinton. That's what he's paid to do. If the president didn't have a plan to get rid of Hussein ready to go he would be called to task for being unprepared.

O'Neill is a moron who did a crap job and got canned. Now he's trying to sell his book. The president admitted wanting Hussein gone because it's a non-issue. Anyone with two brain cells to rub together can see past the hype and recognize this for what it is: a non-issue. A book-selling talk-show circuit hand-wringing hype-fest.

What a joke.

- Gabe

 

[buzz_knox]

The loser is already backpedalling.

O'Neill claims not to have taken any documents after all and never looked at them

He never saw the documents and regrets saying anything nasty about Bush. Aw! His butt is owned and he knows it.

 

[ojibweindian]

If a "Secret" cover sheet is covering anything, the contents covered are secret, period. Even if the document covered by the "Secret" cover sheet is nothing more than a recipe for chocolate chip cookies.

 

[MrAcheson]

If a "Secret" cover sheet is covering anything, the contents covered are secret, period. Even if the document covered by the "Secret" cover sheet is nothing more than a recipe for chocolate chip cookies.

This is not really the place to talk about it, but if memory serves this is not exactly true. Classified documents are supposed to be marked that way using more than just a cover sheet. Each page is supposed to be labeled top and bottom with the classification. Furthermore each paragraph/figure/table is supposed to be appropriately labeled so it can be properly redacted if necessary for FOIA. The document itself is required to be marked with declassification criteria. I could be wrong, but a cover sheet is basically an eye-catching warning to anyone nearby that this document is special and needs to be treated specially. The cover sheets are by themselves unclassified and I don't think that simply placing one on top of something else will impart a classification on it. Better to err on the side of caution though.

 

[Bruce H]

Since O'Neill is very little different from 90% of the other elected and appointed officials in D.C., what is the surprise. Whining little twits that raise way above their ability. That is the reason we are in the shape we are in.

 

[buzz_knox]

The cover sheets are by themselves unclassified and I don't think that simply placing one on top of something else will impart a classification on it. Better to err on the side of caution though.

It depends on what you call a cover sheet and how classified the material is. The cover of the file might not be classified, unless by viewing it one would be able to ascertain the nature of the contents. Then, arguably, it would be. Further, the indication is that while the cover sheet was shown on TV, the document itself was turned over to the journalist.

 

[MrAcheson]

The "cover sheet" is a warning flag page with a colored border (different colors for different levels) with the classification level written on it in big colored letters. Its heavy paper stock and basically says "what is under this is classified X and must protected using proper security procedures under penalty of law. This cover sheet itself is unclassified." It is not the title page of the document (and document titles usually aren't classified). Its basically a warning flag though. You are supposed to take them off documents before they are filed, etc.

The big issue with O'Neill is that classified documents must be properly stored in certified containers by law. If O'Neill has such documents and doesn't have a certified container he must have mishandled them, because he is required to store them properly when he sleeps, etc.

 

[Jonesy9]

I guess I'm just no good at swallowing the government line.

Seems to me O'Neill was touted as uber qualified, until he reminded Bush that his surplus projections he was using to spin his first tax cut were a sham. By being honest instead of loyal he was quickly ousted for the next uber qualified guy who was pitched as the better "salesman" for the tax cuts. Turns out O'Neill was right, but that was an open secret anyway.

I guess loyalty to the USA is more important to me than loyalty to Bush and his agenda.

 

[Obiwan]

O'neil was against the tax cuts...but the other night he admitted they had worked.

But he also said he was not going to tell stories out of school...and went and did it anyway.

And he appears to ahve turned information over to a reporter without really knowing what it was .....

So we are listening to this man why????????