Mary, Mary, quite contrary

Fired CIA leaker Mary McCarthy has told Newsweek she didn't do it. Well, wrong--she told her ex-boss Rand Beers she didn't do it, the same Rand Beers who left the Bush administration due to ethical concerns over how the WoT was being waged.

The blog coverage on this has been comprehensive and places like Mac's Mind, Spook86, AJ Strata and Powerline have provided in-depth answers.

My only confusion comes from a perceived employment gap during the past few years after Bush took over. Here's how the Times described it:

But she did not return immediately to a new assignment at C.I.A. headquarters. She took an extended sabbatical at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington research organization. In late 2003, she testified publicly before the 9/11 Commission about ways to reorganize the intelligence agencies to prevent another major terrorism attack.

So after dropping into this think tank, she then decided to return to CIA, presumably to complete her career and be eligible for retirement, which published reports say was imminent:

Several associates of Ms. McCarthy said she returned to the C.I.A. in 2004, taking a job in the inspector general's office. That year, public records show, she contributed $2,000 to Mr. Kerry's presidential campaign, identifying herself as a "government analyst."

There may be nothing sinister about her return to Langley, after all she probably needed a few more years to she could finish her career at the highest possible salary grade (the goal of every bureaucrat).

The key seems to be whether her extended sabbatical had anything to do with the eventual return; whether any famous players were involved; and whether the return was in any way some kind of "get Bush" parting shot. There is simply nothing heroic in leaking to the press, since she had other avenues available.

WAPO'S WALKBACK 4/25/06

Dana Priest's employer has a new column claiming that Ms. McCarthy was not the source for their Pulitzer winning secret prisons story. Apparently this was confirmed by a CIA official, who leaked it to the Post under condition of anonymity.

He indicated the IG office where McCarthy worked would not have been privy to all the goop published in Priest's article, which listed sources as present and former intelligence officials in three countries.

But really, reading this article was like stepping into fantasy world, since we know the WaPo knows Priest's source just like they know Woodward's source, and probably Novak's for that matter. Heck, they probably know where Osama is, too.

Before this story gets rotated 180 degrees by the lefty blogoshere let's remember McCarthy has NOT denied 'inappropriate' contacts with the reporters, Priest being one of them. That's why they fired her. But this latest revelation certainly makes her sound more like a puzzle piece than the enchilada.