Flutterby™! : Dubya waffles

Next unread comment / Catchup all unread comments User Account Info | Logout | XML/Pilot/etc versions | Long version (with comments) | Weblog archives | Site Map | | Browse Topics

Dubya waffles

2005-07-19 03:03:57.827808+00 by Dan Lyke 3 comments

Remember when Dubya said that if anyone in his administration leaked classified information they'd be fired? Well, what he really meant was that "if someone committed a crime" they'd be fired. Want some syrup with those waffles? Edit: It has been pointed out that Bush's stance hansn't changed since 2003. Although Scott McClellan did say that "The President expects everyone in his administration to adhere to the highest standards of conduct", "highest standards" apparently means "unconvictable".

Meanwhile, Rove and his supporters are claiming that since Rove never actually uttered the words "Valerie Plame", and instead allegedly referred to her by relationship, he's in the clear. Let's take a look at Title 50 Chapter 15  421:

Whoever, having or having had authorized access to classified information that identifies a covert agent, intentionally discloses any information identifying such covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent's intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

Note that it says nothing about what may already be known about the agent, just whether or not "the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent's intelligence relationship".

And he did this during a self-described time of war. Send the fucker off to Gitmo.

[ related topics: Politics moron Current Events ]

comments in ascending chronological order (reverse):

#Comment Re: made: 2005-07-19 16:48:16.112879+00 by: TheSHAD0W


Bush's position hasn't move one bit. On September 30, 2003, when Bush was first asked about the leak, here is what he said: "If there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is. And if the person has violated law, the person will be taken care of." Essentially the same thing.

#Comment Re: made: 2005-07-19 19:37:18.063763+00 by: Dan Lyke

Wow. I did some searching back, and apparently Bush did know who did it back then, because, yes, the wording is very cautious back in fall of 2003. New links in the body of the entry.

#Comment Re: made: 2005-07-20 17:29:26.168326+00 by: Medley [edit history]

Bush has not locked himself into only booting convicted criminals out of the White House (oo, what a courageous stand that is).

October 2003: "I don't know of anyone in my administration who has leaked," Mr. Bush told reporters in Chicago. But, he added, "If somebody did leak classified information, I'd like to know it, and we'll take the appropriate action. And this investigation is a good thing."

June 2004 press conference: "QUESTION: 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 --

QUESTION: And, and, do you stand by your pledge to fire anyone found to have done so?


And, let's go back to the early days of his administration where he exhorted his staff as follows: "[W]e must remember the high standards that come with high office. This begins with careful adherence to the rules. I expect every member of this administration to stay well within the boundaries that define legal and ethical conduct. This means avoiding even the appearance of problems. This means checking and, if need be, doublechecking that the rules have been obeyed. This means never compromising those rules."

Surely even Bush could agree that Karl Rove is not avoiding even the "appearance of problems."