Will Bush Fire Himself?
Wow!!!
We got a hot one here tonight!. The big story of the day is that Libby testified before the grand jury in the Plame case that Bush authorized him to leak classified information contained in the National Intelligence Estimate. While the story doesn't say whether he was specifically authorized to leak Plame's identity, if memory serves, the NIE included a discussion regarding Plame's identity.
Remember how Bush hates leaks and has promised to fire anyone involved in the Plame leaks. Well, he's got some 'splaining to do.
More importantly, will this story open up pandora's box (knocking Pat Roberts off the lid) as to what exactly the White House did to massage the intelligence and manipulate the American public into supporting a bogus war.
We got a hot one here tonight!. The big story of the day is that Libby testified before the grand jury in the Plame case that Bush authorized him to leak classified information contained in the National Intelligence Estimate. While the story doesn't say whether he was specifically authorized to leak Plame's identity, if memory serves, the NIE included a discussion regarding Plame's identity.
Remember how Bush hates leaks and has promised to fire anyone involved in the Plame leaks. Well, he's got some 'splaining to do.
More importantly, will this story open up pandora's box (knocking Pat Roberts off the lid) as to what exactly the White House did to massage the intelligence and manipulate the American public into supporting a bogus war.
posted by Macswain at
11:33 AM
12 Comments:
Don't wet your pants just yet. As noted the last time the libs got hysterical over this issue, there's nothing wrong with the President authorizing the release of classified information - he is the ultimate authority on classification guidance. All classifications (except for a few by Congress) are derived from his orders, so he doesn't have to answer to anybody over how he handles the information.
Basically this is no news, and certainly no new news.
By
Anonymous, at 1:23 PM
Geoff,
As a contractor for the military, is part of your job to monitor left-wing blogs?
By
Anonymous, at 4:33 PM
As a contractor for the military, is part of your job to monitor left-wing blogs?
Naw, as a reader of RWS's blog, it's my job to follow Macswain back to his miserable little hovel and shine light on his sordid speculations. Since he doesn't hesitate to make rude and senseless comments there, I figure it's reasonable to make rude but informed comments here.
Does this bother you?
By
Anonymous, at 6:10 PM
It may not be illegal, but neither is getting a BJ at work.
Getting a BJ at work is a fireable offense, as I'm sure you well know, and the height of hypocrisy for a "family values" president. Libby and Clinton share the rationale for their prosecution - they are/were both indicted/impeached for lying about the event, not the event itself.
By
Anonymous, at 6:40 PM
jeff,
You say this is not news and there's nothing wrong with the prez doing this in your first post. Then in a later post you say that if Libby's accusations are true, it would demonstrate that the prez is immoral and hypocritical.
Are you saying that accusations from former administration members that the prez is immoral and hypocritical is not news? I would agree with you that the prez's hypocrisy is not new news.
By
Anonymous, at 10:20 PM
Then in a later post you say that if Libby's accusations are true, it would demonstrate that the prez is immoral and hypocritical.
Correct me if I've got this wrong, but Libby's testimony did not say that Bush or Cheney specifically authorized the release of Plame's status. They authorized the release of classified material from "portions" of the NIE - material which was officially released a couple of weeks later. That material did not include Plame's status.
Where's the confusion?
Should Bush be allowed to do
whatever TFHWants?
That's a very poor characterization of the situation. Let me put it this way - revealing classified info or even the names of CIA agents lies well within the powers of the President and VP. Abusing those powers would cost them and their party a tremendous amount of political capital. The questions are whether such an abuse occurred, and whether a coverup occurred.
Since there haven't been any indictments relating to such an abuse, we'll have to let the wheels of justice continue to turn and see what unfolds. I'll be very disappointed with Fitzgerald's investigation if he doesn't show us that he tracked the whisper chain back to its original source.
But getting all het up over Libby revealing classified information not relating to Plame is premature, partisan, and unpatriotic.
By
Anonymous, at 8:45 AM
G,
You are much more coherent than Rollie. Even though I don't agree with you, I hope you stick around on this site.
By
Anonymous, at 9:40 AM
Geoff, I want to compliment you on your well reasoned comments. It is nice to see Macswain unable to make a cogent comeback. Keep up the good work.
Rolly
By
Anonymous, at 1:09 PM
Macswain's silence says it all.
Rolly
By
Anonymous, at 1:09 PM
Rolly,
Silence? Hardly, look at my latest post.
By
Macswain, at 1:15 PM
Explain to me again how it is unpatriotic for an American to question their governments motives?
Questioning the motives is fine, to a point, but reveling in imagined contrary outcomes is unpatriotic and unseemly. I have quite a bit more to say about liberals and patriotism, but that'll have to wait for another time and place. It's been fun, all. Perhaps Macswain's comments on RWS will fire me up to come back again.
By
Anonymous, at 1:26 PM
Geoff: you write that
"it's my job to follow Macswain back to his miserable little hovel and shine light on his sordid speculations."
As seasoned readers of this blog know, Macswain does not live in a "hovel." By his own admission, he resides in a "compound." He has servants, and forces them to live in a shack across the river. In every sense of the word, Macswain is a limousine liberal.
By
Anonymous, at 1:31 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home