According to Montgomery County District Attorney (DA) Risa Ferman and the media, Attorney General (AG) Kathleen Kane has committed the crime of the century by allegedly orchestrating a leak of grand jury information.
The crazy thing about all of this bluster (over Kane) is that information from grand juries and criminal investigations are leaked with regularity to the press. At Ferman's press conference, one (honest) reporter more or less asked Ferman what the big deal was about the leaks.
The fact is that the media rarely, if ever, treats leak cases with any seriousness at all -- unless it involves someone they want to take down.
Pardon me while I reminisce back to the case of CIA employee, Valerie Plame...
...the media was in a lather to see Karl Rove and/or Dick Cheney "perp-walked" out of the White House for leaking classified information about the identity of a CIA agent. The media waited in great anticipation for the results of the special investigation and when it happened it was a non-event. Neither Rove nor Cheney were found responsible. The actual leaker, Richard Armitage, was not charged and received little to no media attention.
As it turned out, the investigation ended up charging an underling in Cheney's office named Lewis "Scooter" Libby. Like Kane, Libby didn't leak information that was subject to secrecy rules. And, much like Kane, he got caught in a perjury trap and was found guilty of that and lesser charges.
About 8 minutes in to Ferman's press conference, she announced the full list of charges -- which did not allege Kane leaked grand jury information. Instead, Ferman charged her with conspiracy.
The press conference was almost over before any reporter asked a question that came close to getting at the identity of the persons or person behind the leaks, however, the question was more like an accusation -- that Kane's head of her security detail, Patrick Reese, was involved in the conspiracy with Kane.
In order to clear the matter up, Ferman responded by giving an explanation of what a conspiracy is.
"If you read through the evidence, it is clear for the evidence we gathered, that while the Attorney General orchestrated and directed the scheme, that she, herself, did not compile the materials and deliver them to Mr. Morrow. So clearly, there were at least one other, perhaps, more individuals involved, and that is the crux of conspiracy. What a conspiracy means, in the most basic terms, is the act of one is the act of all. So all of the people involved in the leak of that information can be responsible."
|Ferman: Claims conspiracy is an "act of all," but doesn't charge leaker, co-conspirators.|
So after hearing Ferman's explanation of a conspiracy, the press naturally asked who else was involved, right?
The next question was: "If Kane is convicted of these crimes, should she lose her law license?"
Clearly, the media really doesn't care who the leaked grand jury information or that grand jury information was leaked at all. It certainly hasn't spent any time at all demanding answers about James Reeder's investigation into the Sandusky and DeNaples grand jury leaks.
|King: Leaked information but wasn't charged|
The evidence in the grand jury presentment clearly shows the grand jury information (i.e., the 2009 memorandum and emails) was provided to Josh Morrow by Adrian King.
Morrow testified that King left a clasped envelope containing a manila folder for him to retrieve. The manila folder's contents included the 2009 memo, two emails, and the Miletto transcript. Under the grand jury act, the 2009 memo, and perhaps the two emails, were subject to grand jury secrecy rules. The transcript was not.
Going backwards in time, King testified that a plain (unmarked) sealed envelope was left on his desk (by someone) and that he took it with him to Philadelphia and provided it to Morrow.
The evidence in the grand jury presentment (paragraph one below) clearly shows that AG Kane did not have the 2009 memo and/or the emails in her possession until 24 July 2014, thus could not have placed it in the unmarked envelope for King.
However, that didn't stop prosecutors from trying to make it look like Kane put in the memo and emails in the "packet" -- not envelope -- for King (paragraph 2) that was eventually released to the press. But the fact is being aware of a document and discussing it does not equal evidence of possession of the document.
Unless you believe in time travel, the grand jury found no evidence that Kane put the 2009 memorandum and emails in the envelope for King.
April 22, 2014: King found a sealed UNMARKED envelope which -- according to sworn testimony -- he believed contained campaign information for Morrow.
April 23, 2014: Morrow received a clasped envelope from King that contained a manila folder -- "packet" -- with the word JOSH written on it. Within that manila folder -- "packet" -- was the 2009 memorandum and emails.
June 6, 2014: Chris Brennan's Philadelphia Daily News article containing information from the 2009 memorandum went to press.
July 25, 2014: An email was sent to AG Kane that included the 2009 memorandum and the emails as attachments.
The timeline of the evidence speaks for itself. What was allegedly left for King was not the same package that King delivered to Morrow. And if King was the only person to possess the packet, then he added the 2009 memorandum and the emails.
Let me go out on a limb here and guess that Adrian King testified under a grant of immunity and that is why he wasn't charged.
The only question that remains is if anyone else from the AG's office conspired to leak this information (to undermine AG Kane) and who they are.
Don't hold your breath waiting for Risa Ferman's "ongoing investigation" to identify those individuals.
Up next: Luckily, Ferman wasn't under oath at her August press conference
Best Wishes for a Happy & Truthful New Year!