Is Michael Ledeen a traitor or a spy ?

via Kevin Drum

In his recent article on Ahmed Chalabi, Michale Ledeen writes two very interesting things. The piece is presented as a ouigi board conversation with James Jesus Angleton (JJA).

A) "ML: It's fascinating to watch the anti-Chalabi campaign in Washington. You probably can't keep up with it, but some intel officials in town are saying two things to the journalists: 1) We broke the Iranians' communication codes, so we were reading their mail. Chalabi found out about this, and told the Iranian intelligence chief in Baghdad. 2) The Iranian immediately contacted Tehran to tell them that we had broken the code. Then they said to journalists, "you can't write about this because it would jeopardize our people.""

I am not well informed, but Kevin Drum is and this is the first he has heard of it. The journalists are un-named, why would they not be named if they had published the story. The "intel officials" are quoted as asking that the journalists not write about it. It seems to me clear that Ledeen is publically writing about something that "intel officals" asked to be kept secret.

B) "JJA: Furthermore, using the same logic, if we knew that Chalabi had told the Iranians, we would never go public with the accusations."

Who went public with the accusation ? It seems to me Michael Ledeen went public with the accusation. 9 lines later he has JJA write that it would be crazy to go public with the accusation because that would obviously hurt the USA.

Mr Ledeen maybe thats why the intelligence officials asked the reporters not to write about it.

It is obvious to Ledeen that, if this story is true, then it must not be discussed publicly. Ledeen discusses it publicly.

Is this treason ? No we are not at war with Iran. Helping Iran is not treason.
Is this espionage ? Well typically it's not considered espionage if you do it openly. I mean freedom of the press is for everyone even for people who choose to use that freedom to hurt the USA.


James Jesus Angleton also turns out to be a bleeding heart who explains that, if Chalabi was an Iranian spy, it was the CIA that made him do it.

"JJA: If anything, the United States pushed him toward the Iranians, and it's laughable that the intelligence community should now blame him for their previous actions."

then considerablly later

"JJA: ... In fact, you can make a fairly convincing case that the "raid" on Chalabi's house was probably an effort to get him killed.

ML: Killed? They were going to shoot him?

JJA: Not "they," even though it does seem there were CIA people on the scene. No, they're smarter than that. They sent Iraqi police to do the dirty work. The police were armed. It was reasonable to assume that at least one of Chalabi's bodyguards would shoot at the intruders, and then a gunfire would ensue, in which...well, people do get hurt at such times, don't they?"

I conclude that the legal reasoning above was a waste of time. Whatever he did or didn't do, Michael Ledeen is innocent, because he is insane.