Will President Bush Fire Himself?

[Charade]

I'm tired of all the government secrets. What I REALLY want them to declassify is what is going on in Nevada, in that area "Groom Lake." Awfully sneaky...I want to go on a roadtrip this summer and investigate.

AMEN!!!

 

[momof2inPA]

The president endangered a CIA agent overseas for no good reason, and all the righty's think it's ok? I, for one, think any U.S. agents or military on top secret maneuvers or missions deserve better from the president of the United States. Shame on him.

 

[Charade]

The president endangered a CIA agent overseas for no good reason, and all the righty's think it's ok? I, for one, think any U.S. agents or military on top secret maneuvers or missions deserve better from the president of the United States. Shame on him.

No, he didn't. That would be a crime. The court papers said nothing about Plame being the leaked.

 

[salmoneous]

No, he didn't. That would be a crime.

It would be a crime? I thought the president could do whatever he wants, so long as he claims it is the interest of national security? Are there really things the president can do that are crimes?

 

[Charade]

It would be a crime? I thought the president could do whatever he wants, so long as he claims it is the interest of national security? Are there really things the president can do that are crimes?

Yes, it would be and yes, there are.

 

[dadto1]

It's been a few hours, so I'm bumping to see if people still in the "36%" missed the thread, or if there's just no way to spin this....

 

[JudicialTyranny]

Excerpts from the NY Post:

Yesterday, breathless news reports suggested that President Bush had directed the "leak" of classified information in July 2003. Yet the "leak" in question was from a document called the National Intelligence Estimate, or NIE - and by the time this "leak" occurred, the contents of the NIE as they related to Iraq were almost entirely public.

On Oct. 7, 2002, nine months before Bush's supposed "leak," the administration released an unclassified version of the very same NIE at the urging of Senate Democrats. And in early 2003, reporters hostile to the administration (primarily John Judis and Spencer Ackerman of The New Republic) were being told all sorts of things about the still-classified portions of the NIE.

And this "leak" wasn't a leak in any case. A "leak" is the unauthorized release of government information. The leak of classified information is a crime. But according to Scooter Libby, the former chief of staff to the vice president who gave the information from the NIE to a reporter, he only released it because he was authorized to do so by the president himself.

Constitutionally, the authority to declare documents "classified" resides with the president. So, under the terms of an executive order first drafted in 1982, he can declassify a document merely by declaring it unclassified.

The language of the executive order reads as follows: "Information shall be declassified or downgraded by the official who authorized the original classification, if that official is still serving in the same position . . . [or] a supervisory official." In the executive branch, the president is the ultimate "supervisory official."

 

[escape]

If the President wanted to declassify the information, then why be sneaky about it? Why not hold a press conference and be upfront with the American people instead of releasing the information in a back alley somewhere.

Something is not adding up here!

 

[bsnyder]

The president endangered a CIA agent overseas for no good reason, and all the righty's think it's ok? I, for one, think any U.S. agents or military on top secret maneuvers or missions deserve better from the president of the United States. Shame on him.

The court papers said nothing about Plame being the leaked

Actually, this latest court document did. According to the Prosecutor, President Bush was unaware of Libby's leaking of Valerie Plame's name. Fitzgerald has never stated that before. You'd think THAT would be news (after all, it's been the Left's feverish hope and wish since this whole thing began, that the leaking of Plame's name would eventually be specifically tied to President Bush)

But the media won't report that new FACT, not when they can spin this in a way that suggests Libby is "fingering" Bush for Plame's leak. As momof2inPa's post, and a lot of the comments on Leftie blogs indicate, there are many people who can be easily manipulated on the facts.

The court documents are available online, for anyone to read. Why don't you do so for yourself?

 

[cardaway]

It's pretty clear that the days of it mattering what somebody did are behind us. It's all about the aftermath.

 

[bsnyder]

It's pretty clear that the days of it mattering what somebody did are behind us. It's all about the aftermath.

Could you be a little more specific?

 

[wvrevy]

Could you be a little more specific?

I will, bet. You and the other Shrub defenders will never admit to any wrongdoing from this administration. Nevermind the fact that Plame's cover was blown. Nevermind the fact than an entire dummy corporation that was used as a front for the CIA had it's cover blown. Nevermind the fact that the president lied about it numerous times, as did SCott McLellen, by saying that they were actively hunting for the person that "leaked" the information.

You just spin spin spin away, and pretend that nothing Shrub and company do could possibly be wrong. You wonder why people refer to the few left defending Shrub as "sheep" and "kool aid drinkers"? THAT is why. You're simply incapable of admitting that the man was wrong about anything, even when it is blatantly obvious to everyone else.

 

[bsnyder]

I will, bet. You and the other Shrub defenders will never admit to any wrongdoing from this administration. Nevermind the fact that Plame's cover was blown. Nevermind the fact than an entire dummy corporation that was used as a front for the CIA had it's cover blown. Nevermind the fact that the president lied about it numerous times, as did SCott McLellen, by saying that they were actively hunting for the person that "leaked" the information.

You just spin spin spin away, and pretend that nothing Shrub and company do could possibly be wrong. You wonder why people refer to the few left defending Shrub as "sheep" and "kool aid drinkers"? THAT is why. You're simply incapable of admitting that the man was wrong about anything, even when it is blatantly obvious to everyone else.

And you're setting up a strawman.

The usual tactic when someone can't defend the facts of what's being discussed....

 

[cardaway]

And you're setting up a strawman.

The usual tactic when someone can't defend the facts of what's being discussed....

Rude comments like that are why people don't bother being specific.

 

[nuke]

I'm sure God told him to do it so everything is okay.

 

[bsnyder]

Rude comments like that are why people don't bother being specific.

Spare me the high horse! I wasn't responding to you (as I'm sure you are aware) and the comment wasn't rude.

I assumed you had a legitimate line of reasoning relating to the leak when you posted:

It's pretty clear that the days of it mattering what somebody did are behind us. It's all about the aftermath.

I was curious, but unclear, about how you would relate that to this specific case. If you don't want to elaborate, why not just say so?

 

[cardaway]

Spare me the high horse! I wasn't responding to you (as I'm sure you are aware) and the comment wasn't rude.

High horse? You are the one who threw out the rude straw man comment when somebody tried to give you your answer. So your opinion is the only solid one? Please.

 

[wvrevy]

And you're setting up a strawman.

The usual tactic when someone can't defend the facts of what's being discussed....

Um...where is the strawman? Yes, the president is allowed to declassify information. Does that make it "right" ? If Shrub were to get up in front of the press and list all of our "nucular" capabilities, our weapons targets, and the names and locations of agents we have operating in hostile countries, would you be "ok" with that as well? All of that is classified information, too.

The FACTS are as I stated them. I can't help it that they don't support your argument or fit your version of spin control.

 

[salmoneous]

Yes, it would be and yes, there are.

I think you are wrong here. The Attorney General of the United States has said the President has both the Consitutional Authority as well as specific Congressional Authorization to do whatever he wants as long as he claims it is in the interest of National Defense. President Bush has said in his signing statements that he does not feel bound by any law passed by Congress. Congress continues to rubber stamp Bush's statue-breaking actions. The Courts have backed up the Bush administarion.

With all three branches of government seeming OK with the idea that the Presdent can break any statute he wants as long as he claims it has something to do with National Security - and the President's supporters seeming OK with the idea as well, it seems clear to me we have now put the role of President above the law.

 

[punkin]

I'm sure God told him to do it so everything is okay.

Are you doubting God? Unbeliever, Heretic. You will be stoned.....

Oh wait, we're not the Taliban, we were the ones fighting the Taliban. OK, we'll just tap your phones without a warrant then.