Joe DiGenova: Obama Should Be Held In Contempt For Leaking About Sealed Indictment (Audio)

There was some movement on the Benghazi scandal front today.

In an interview on WMAL, this morning, Washington attorney, Joe DiGenova noted that the president may be on thin ice for leaking information about the sealed indictment at his press conference, Friday. He said, “we are now getting close to a series of statements by the president that puts him on the long road toward impeachable offenses. At that news conference, the President of the United States violated a court order of the United States District Court of either the Eastern District of Virginia, or the District of Columbia where this sealed indictment apparently exists. He’s not allowed to say that. A president can declassify a document, but he cannot unseal an indictment – only a federal court can do that, DiGenova claimed.

He went on to say that what the president did was illegal, and he should be held in contempt of court for it.

“It’s unbelievable! And the way he did it! This nonchalant, Cool Hand Luke crapola!”

ABC News reported on the controversial disclosure, last Friday:

“[W]e have informed, I think, the public that there’s a sealed indictment,” the president responded. “It’s sealed for a reason. But we are intent on capturing those who carried out this attack, and we’re going to stay on it until we get them.”

That marked the only official confirmation so far of a sealed indictment in the Benghazi case. For days, officials across the law enforcement and intelligence communities have refused to publicly confirm reports of a sealed indictment.

After all, according to federal law, “no person may disclose [a sealed] indictment’s existence,” and a “knowing violation … may be punished as a contempt of court.” Contempt of court carries a maximum sentence of six months in jail.

A U.S. official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, called the president’s disclosure “crazy.”

But according to a former prosecutor in the Justice Dept’s Public Integrity Section , Peter Zeidenberg, the president can leak anything he wants – because he’s the president.

“The [president], by virtue of his position, can’t violate any non-disclosure/confidentiality rule,” said Peter Zeidenberg, now in private practice in Washington. “One of the perks of being the head of the executive branch: Nothing he says is technically a leak. If he does it, it is authorized.”

However, Zeidenberg acknowledged “an argument could be made that a sealed matter can only be unsealed by a court.”

That’s quite an acknowledgement from the left wing zealot who led the witch-hunt into who leaked the “secret” identity of CIA desk jockey, Valerie Plame in 2003 and the subsequent prosecution of Dick Cheney’s aide “Scooter” Libby for misrepresenting the facts about his role in all of it. It was good of ABC ask a non partisan like Zeidenberg to comment on this story, eh?

AWR Hawkins of Big Government  reported on the DiGenova’s bombshell revelation that400 missiles were stolen in Benghazi….

On August 12, Joe DiGenova, attorney for one of the Benghazi whistleblowers, told Washington D.C.’s WMAL that one of the reasons people have remained tight-lipped about Benghazi is because 400 U.S. missiles were “diverted to Libya” and ended up being stolen and falling into “the hands of some very ugly people.”

DiGenova represents Benghazi whistleblower Mark Thompson. He told WMAL that he “does not know whether [the missiles] were at the annex, but it is clear the annex was somehow involved in the distribution of those missiles.”

He claimed his information “comes from a former intelligence official who stayed in constant contact with people in the special ops and intelligence community.” He said the biggest concern right now is finding those missiles before they can be put to use. “They are worried, specifically according to these sources, about an attempt to shoot down an airliner,” he claimed.

Asked why  – in a situation like this – the Regime would delay the FBI from entering Benghazi to investigate, DiGenova said because it happened right before the 2012 election, and the president had to be protected – not American citizens from terrorists with US missiles – Obama needed to be protected so he could be reelected. This is why they lied about everything – “because they are now responsible for all the stepchildren of violence that happens as a result of this. This is a very serious matter”, he noted.

“And when you compound it with the flippancy of the POTUS who talks about a sealed indictment  to cover his fanny to make it look like he’s doing something when he in fact was doing nothing, we have reached a level of cynicism personally  on the part of this president that is staggering. He’s not a president, anymore – he’s a talk show host.”

Walid Shoebat and Ben Barrack have been working on this story for a week: Benghazi: Arabic-Language Media Implicates Egypt’s Fallen Muslim Brotherhood Regime

The experts who insist that the Benghazi attacks were carried out by jihadi stragglers who belong to the Jamal Abu Ahmad network don’t tell you how Ansar al-Sharia Egypt or the Muslim Brotherhood there were involved.

Why?

Identifying terrorist groups we entrusted to protect our diplomatic post in Benghazi is an admission that the Obama administration put the fox in charge of the henhouse; Ansar al-Sharia Egypt, along with its Libyan branch, members of the February 17 Martyrs Brigade, and LIFG were all very likely involved in the Benghazi attacks. This admission would also destroy the U.S. foreign policy reputation, as giving al-Qaeda the ability to rename and supervise its operations helped plunge the region into chaos.

Linked by Doug Ross, thanks!