Even AP Not Taking the Bait
Even AP Not Taking the Bait
Even the Associated Press isn’t falling for President Bush’s attempts to now move the goalposts on the Karl Rove leak case. Fresh off the wire:
President Bush said Monday that if anyone in his administration committed a crime in connection with the public leak of the identity of a CIA operative, that person will “no longer work in my administration.” At the same time, Bush yet again sidestepped a question on the role of his top political adviser, Karl Rove, in the matter.
[snip]
Bush said in June 2004 that he would fire anyone in his administration shown to have leaked information that exposed the identity of Wilson’s wife, Valerie Plame. On Monday, however, he added the qualifier that it would have [to] be shown that a crime was committed.
UPDATE: Bush on June 10, 2004:
Q: Given — given recent developments in the CIA leak case, particularly Vice President Cheney’s discussions with the investigators, do you still stand by what you said several months ago, a suggestion that it might be difficult to identify anybody who leaked the agent’s name?
THE PRESIDENT: That’s up to –
Q: And, and, do you stand by your pledge to fire anyone found to have done so?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. And that’s up to the U.S. Attorney to find the facts.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
I would also raise the bar a bit. It’ s not enough not to break the law! Competence, serving the public interest not petty vindictiveness should also be a measure of a public servant. Of course, this is too much for the Bush White House, where alegiance to the Caesar is the supreme rule, and where failures are rewarded with medals and promotions!
July 18th, 2005 at 12:25 pmHe just sealed the deal.
Rep. King, Peter (R-NY-3rd)
July 18th, 2005 at 12:27 pmSen. Hutchison, Kay Bailey (R-TX)
Sen. Cornyn, John (R-TX)
Sen. Coleman, Norm (R-MN
Rep. Blunt, Roy (R-MO-7th
Of course, if Rove was accused of having an affair with an intern, Republicans would be drawing up impeachment papers right now.
July 18th, 2005 at 12:37 pmBrian, I’ve seen you post this list several times and I must have missed the explanation. I identify each name on that list as pretty despicable but would you mind getting me up to speed?
July 18th, 2005 at 12:37 pmJay,
It is an incomplete list of Republicans who have publicly defended Karl Rove. Collectively, their argument is that there is no evidence of crime and/or the CIA is wrong to place a high regard on Plame. Initially, Cornyn, King and Coleman were the designated point men on Karl Rove.
July 18th, 2005 at 12:45 pmI get Hutchison news because I am in Texas, so her comments are probably not national.
I email these folks often to express my concern about WH behavior.
Have no fear, Karl, when you are convicted of your crimes DUHbya will just pardon you and then claim that the crimes and conviction don’t count because of the pardon. The only pardon we should hear from DUHbya is his apology to the jail keeper for stepping on the keeper’s toes as DUHbya is led to his cell.
July 18th, 2005 at 12:49 pmHa!
This just aired on cspan about a minute ago. It was interesting watching him at the moment the “committed a crime” caveat was suddently dropped into the equation: speaking freely, at the very moment those three words were spoken, he had to look down at his notes.
July 18th, 2005 at 12:53 pmRep. King, Peter (R-NY-3rd)
Sen. Hutchison, Kay Bailey (R-TX)
Sen. Cornyn, John (R-TX)
Sen. Coleman, Norm (R-MN
Rep. Blunt, Roy (R-MO-7th
This is an incomplete list of Republicans who have publicly defended Karl Rove. Collectively, their argument is that there is no evidence of crime and/or the CIA is wrong to place a high regard on Plame. Initially, Cornyn, King and Coleman were the designated point men on Karl Rove.
July 18th, 2005 at 12:56 pmI get Hutchison news because I am in Texas, so her comments are probably not national.
I email these folks often to express my concern about WH behavior.
What is the goal behind all of the allegations against Rove? Is it just to give Bush a black eye? Is it to impeach him? If it is, do you really want to see Cheney as president or is this just a prelude to 2008?
July 18th, 2005 at 1:44 pmBeing able to remove Karl Rove as a political operator would be nice. I am thinking that IF this was to blow up enough to impeach bush it would most likely remove Cheney as well. that would leave hastert in charge?? I am sorry I don’t recall the order that the presidency would go to.
If Cheney did become president, I am thinking that he would be unable to rally the type of support that bush was able to garner. granted there is a huge block of folks who will always vote republican almost no matter what, however swing voters are not likely to identify well with Cheney.
July 18th, 2005 at 2:06 pmThere is no goal except to investigate the allegations.
July 18th, 2005 at 2:09 pmPolitically, I would imagine the goal is to shift votes towards a more moderate congress.
Hastert is next in succession after Cheney.
30% is the hard core base who will support Bush no matter what, especially if he nuked CA and the Northeast.
This is political warfare. It’s about destroying them. That’s what they had intended, and almost accomplished, with us. They could have done it, too. But they got greedy and destroyed themselves. Take no prisoners in this.
July 18th, 2005 at 2:23 pmthats what I thought, the speaker of the house is next in line. After reading some idiot who said that china nuking California would be no big loss I have to agree that alot of people would not care until prices went up at wal-mart.
July 18th, 2005 at 2:49 pmPresidential succession:
The Vice President Richard Cheney
Speaker of the House John Dennis Hastert
President pro tempore of the Senate Ted Stevens
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice
Secretary of the Treasury John Snow
Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales
Secretary of the Interior Gale A. Norton
Secretary of Agriculture Mike Johanns
Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez
Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao
Secretary of Health and Human Services Mike Leavitt
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Alphonso Jackson
Secretary of Transportation Norman Yoshio Mineta
Secretary of Energy Samuel Bodman
Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings
Secretary of Veterans Affairs Jim Nicholson
Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff
It’s all ugly.
July 18th, 2005 at 3:50 pm[...] It may seem like a minor detail. But with so much misinformation and spin being tossed about by the White House, it’s important that the media not create the impression that Bush is remaining consistent on this issue. He absolutely is not; he is moving the goalposts. I have a recommendation for a new title: Bush Backs Away From Pledge To Fire Leaker. Any other suggestions? [...]
July 18th, 2005 at 5:40 pmTo #9, Right, the goal, or at least what I would like to see, is that government remains in check. We elect these people to represent and lead us, for the benefit of all, not to abuse their power for personal gain. In other words, when they f$ck up, they must be held accountable for their actions.
July 18th, 2005 at 6:05 pmI have a feeling that the right is making us go in circles. Too much time is being spent in opposing their lies, which is making us look partisan.
We should shift the focus on to Judith Miller, as in my opinion that is where the real truth lies. Rove seems to be a distraction and is rightly taking the flak at present because nothing really may be proven against him.
If we shift the focus to “Special Plan Office” in the White House operating under the VeePee and the disinformation they generated with “General Judith Miller” etc.,in the lead-up to the Irag fiasco, we will be getting closer to where all this should be leading.
It looks like Libby and Miller had a conversation, which is the root of this. My feeling is that subsequently Miller told Novak about Valerie; but in the context of being Wilson’s wife in the CIA, who so called “engineered” the trip, rather than being a covert agent. Again my gut says both Novak and Rove were ignorant of the covert status, otherwise Novak would not have gone public. Rove is highly disciplined in what he does, thus exposing a covert agent does not really fit into being his modus operandi.
The problem is that Miller has taken on a so-called martyr role and the liberal media has rolled over in her favor. They have to get out of this and realise how she is taking us all for a ride to hide her own “false journalism” and “march beats to war”.
I think Miller is the key and the prosecuter “is telling us so” based on whatever he has said or done till now. Cooper/Rove is not in the same category as Miller/VeePee/Rumsfeld in lead upto war. That is the story Americans need to know, and then we can talk treason of the highest order!!!!
This is a good item on her to start with:
http://www.etherzone.com/2005/raim071805.shtml
July 18th, 2005 at 10:03 pmRamsey Clark is calling for the impeachment of Bushie, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Ashcroft.
Rove will already be in jail so thats a non-issue.
The rest will resign under pressure.
I believe we will have an interim govt. just like Iraq does until we can have a new election.
Hey, if it’s good enough for Iraq, it’s good enough for me.
votetoimpeach.org
July 18th, 2005 at 10:16 pmI understand (but do not share) the collective frustration with the Bush administration, but I think you all are wasting a lot of energy on this topic and potentially hurting yourselves in the process.
I suggest you let this play out under the special prosecutor and see what happens. If Rove is guilty, you’ll have your big game trophy. If not, then you’ll have to live with him for 2 more years.
If it turns out he did not do anything wrong, all of the current screaming by the lefty-blog world is just going to make you guys look even crazier to the rest of the world. Not a good way to expand your base.
July 19th, 2005 at 1:38 pm[...] Surely Rove wants nothing more than for the media’s coverage of the leak case to focus on whether he and other White House officials technically broke the letter of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act (which is extremely difficult to break) when they exposed Valerie Plame’s identity. (Exhibit A of the White House strategy: President Bush now saying he’ll fire anyone involved in the leak only if they committed a crime.) [...]
August 6th, 2005 at 10:11 pm