Bush Changes Statement On Firing Promise.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

If he doesn't fire Rove and others involved in this it will just further prove his penchant for lying to Americans.

---------------------------------------------------


By PETE YOST, Associated Press Writer 8 minutes ago

WASHINGTON -
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."
ADVERTISEMENT

At the same time, Bush yet again sidestepped a question on the role of his top political adviser, Karl Rove, in the matter.

"We have a serious ongoing investigation here and it's being played out in the press," Bush said at an East Room news conference.

Bush, appearing at a news conference with visiting Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of India, spoke a day after Time magazine's Matthew Cooper said that a 2003 phone call with Rove was the first he heard about the wife of Bush administration critic Joseph Wilson apparently working for the CIA.

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 be shown that a crime was committed.

Asked at a June 10, 2004 news conference if he stood by his pledge to fire anyone found to have leaked Plame's name, Bush answered, "Yes. And that's up to the U.S. attorney to find the facts."
(CONTINUED)
http://tinyurl.com/crunx

[Crushaholic]

Rove hasn't been found guilty of anything, no matter what you guys on the left say. Therefore, it hasn't been established he's committed a crime. If Rove found out about the leak from Robert Novak, then someone NOT NAMED Karl Rove may have been the guilty party.

[Spider]

Yeah he changed his stance ........
It has been said Clinton wouldnt do anything without Consulting a poll ......
Well now let it be said Bush cant do anything without consulting a lawyer Hilarious!

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Rove hasn't been found guilty of anything, no matter what you guys on the left say. Therefore, it hasn't been established he's committed a crime. If Rove found out about the leak from Robert Novak, then someone NOT NAMED Karl Rove may have been the guilty party.
According to Bush's statement in 2004 anyone involved in the leak would no longer be in his administration. Apparently, he lied when he made that statement if he now says they have to be convicted of a crime to be removed from his administration.

[Rascal]

How do those quotes suggest he changed his promise on the firing?

All he said was that he basically won't act until the investigation is resolved.

Wait for the report and then decide. If he doesn't fire him then and the report suggests he should have been, then you can complain. But not until then. Quit going off the deep end trying to fire people before all the facts are known. It's no secret the democrats want Rove's head on a pike, since he has continued to beat them senseless in elections, but your hatred is going to have to wait until the facts are known (ie report finished). Then you can bitch and moan depending on what the report says.

[Spider]

How do those quotes suggest he changed his promise on the firing?

All he said was that he basically won't act until the investigation is resolved.

Wait for the report and then decide. If he doesn't fire him then and the report suggests he should have been, then you can complain. But not until then. Quit going off the deep end trying to fire people before all the facts are known. It's no secret the democrats want Rove's head on a pike, since he has continued to beat them senseless in elections, but your hatred is going to have to wait until the facts are known (ie report finished). Then you can b**** and moan depending on what the report says.
It was Bush that said , if anyone in his admin had Anything to do with this leak , they would be dismissed ....... Long ways from .....if only
a crime being commited

[Rascal]

Got a link with the original quote? I wasn't aware he said "anything".

But my point about waiting for the report still stands.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

How do those quotes suggest he changed his promise on the firing?

.
Wrong, he just raised the bar for Rove being fired. Now Rove or anyone else would have to be convicted for Bush to fire them. So that's how those quotes say he lied in 2004.
I want them all (everyone involved in this slimy act) to be held accountable, don't you? All Americans should.

[Spider]

Got a link with the original quote? I wasn't aware he said "anything".

But my point about waiting for the report still stands.
so many different quotes ...... I guess you guys in Oklahoma have trouble getting news ....... Everyone is aware of what Bush Said , but here
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/07/11/cia.leaks.ap/

[Spider]

"The White House promised if anyone was involved in the Valerie Plame affair, they would no longer be in this administration," said Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada.

"I trust they will follow through on this pledge. If these allegations are true, this rises above politics and is about our national security."

[Bronco_Beerslug]

The New York Times reports this morning:

A 1982 statute makes it a crime for people with authorized access to classified information to knowingly identify covert agents. If officials learned the information solely from reporters rather than from confidential files, they probably did not violate the law. Even if they came to know the information in both ways, the fact that it was in public circulation would suggest that it was not particularly secret.

That’s not quite true. This characterization by the Times fails to report the duties assigned to individuals, like Karl Rove, who receive national security clearance. Administration officials who are given the national security clearance to receive classified information are required to sign the “<a href="http://www.fas.org/sgp/isoo/new_sf312.pdf">Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement</a>,” also known as the “SF 312.” The SF 312 Briefing Booklet helps answer questions about the practices and procedures that should be followed by individuals given top national security clearance. Here’s what question #19 in that booklet says:

<a href="http://www.fas.org/sgp/isoo/sf312.html">Question 19</a>: If information that a signer of the SF 312 knows to have been classified appears in a public source, for example, in a newspaper article, may the signer assume that the information has been declassified and disseminate it elsewhere?

Answer: No. Information remains classified until it has been officially declassified. Its disclosure in a public source does not declassify the information. Of course, merely quoting the public source in the abstract is not a second unauthorized disclosure. However, before disseminating the information elsewhere or confirming the accuracy of what appears in the public source, the signer of the SF 312 must confirm through an authorized official that the information has, in fact, been declassified. If it has not, further dissemination of the information or confirmation of its accuracy is also an unauthorized disclosure.

The answer makes clear that Rove not only had a duty not to disclose the identity of a covert CIA agent, but he also had an affirmative duty prior to confirming Plame’s identity with a reporter to first “confirm through an authorized official that the information has, in fact, been declassified.” Thus, the argument by Rove allies, as reported by CNN, that “Rove was the recipient of information, not a provider” is irrelevant. Instead of saying “I heard that, too,” Rove’s answer to Novak should have been “no comment” when Novak said he heard Plame worked at the CIA. But that answer of course would have prevented him from engaging in the smear campaign against Wilson

[Rascal]

Your link doesn't have the quote of Bush saying anyone.

[Spider]

Your link doesn't have the quote of Bush saying anyone.
LOL ...... I see ....

[Rascal]

I've seen lots of reporters say it but never the direct quote which is what I'm looking for.

[Spider]

I've seen lots of reporters say it but never the direct quote which is what I'm looking for.
Hilarious! ... Someday you guys in Oklahoma will get cable TV , then you too can see Bush talking on TV

[Rascal]

I choose not to get cable TV as we hardly watch TV.

I guess that means you don't have a link.

[Spider]

I choose not to get cable TV as we hardly watch TV.

I guess that means you don't have a link.
I provided you a link , you chose to say I dont see a bush quote..... Thats on you , everyone else has a clue ....... They know Bush said it , it is up to you if you remain in the dark and assume everyone is making this up .......

[Rascal]

Show me in the link you provided where it has Bush's direct quote.

[Spider]

Show me in the link you provided where it has Bush's direct quote.
From Henry Ried He quoted Bush word for word ...... I realy dont give a damn if you believe it or not ..sorry just how I feel....***edit Harry Reid not Henry *******

[Rascal]

So I'm suppose to believe a democratic senator who wants Rove ****canned? I don't think so.

I've looked and I haven't seen it. Maybe you can't find it but maybe slug or LABS can. I'm just looking for the direct quote where he said anyone.

[Spider]

So I'm suppose to believe a democratic senator who wants Rove ****canned? I don't think so.

I've looked and I haven't seen it. Maybe you can't find it but maybe slug or LABS can. I'm just looking for the direct quote where he said anyone.
Hilarious! so if I dont drag up a link from 3 years ago it never happened .. Hilarious! .....

[bronco_diesel]

So I'm suppose to believe a democratic senator who wants Rove ****canned? I don't think so.

I've looked and I haven't seen it. Maybe you can't find it but maybe slug or LABS can. I'm just looking for the direct quote where he said anyone.

i think this is a fair request, especially since his comments are broken down to the word "anyone" and "anything"

if you can't provide a link to the exact comments where he used both of those words in the context of someone being fired - then i don't understand how you can break down his statements to such definites.

[Rascal]

I'm not saying it didn't happen, I just want to see the direct quote.

[Rascal]

i think this is a fair request, especially since his comments are broken down to the word "anyone" and "anything"

if you can't provide a link to the exact comments where he used both of those words in the context of someone being fired - then i don't understand how you can break down his statements to such definites.

Bingo, we have a winner.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I've seen lots of reporters say it but never the direct quote which is what I'm looking for.

Asked about the matter on nine occasions over the years, Bush has said he welcomed the investigation, called the name disclosure "a very serious matter," and declared that the sooner investigators "find out the truth, the better, as far as I'm concerned."

"I want to know the truth," Bush told reporters in September 2003 after news of the investigation had burst into headlines. "If anybody has got any information, inside our administration or outside our administration, it would be helpful if they came forward with the information so we can find out whether or not these allegations are true and get on about the business."

In 2003, McClellan said it was "a ridiculous suggestion" that Rove was involved. "I've made it very clear, he was not involved, that there's no truth to the suggestion that he was," he said. He also said that any culprit in the White House should be fired "at a minimum."

At one point, McClellan vowed: "The president has set high standards, the highest of standards, for people in his administration. He's made it very clear to people in his administration that he expects them to adhere to the highest standards of conduct. If anyone in this administration was involved in it, they would no longer be in this administration."

Bush replied "yes" when asked in June 2004 if he would fire anyone who leaked the agent's name.
http://tinyurl.com/dgkwr

[Rascal]

ah, thanks slug.

So McClellan said it not Bush. And I think you are going to find it wasn't Rove who leaked the name but one of Cheney's aides. Again, wait for the report to see who leaked the name.

[Spider]

i think this is a fair request, especially since his comments are broken down to the word "anyone" and "anything"

if you can't provide a link to the exact comments where he used both of those words in the context of someone being fired - then i don't understand how you can break down his statements to such definites.
LOL what is it with you guys on the right you hear only what you want to hear ? Selective memories ? I know you can afford Cable , get some , just like today Bush had a press confrence withthe leader of India , Again he was asked about what he said in 2003 ..... I guess that was another reporter just making stuff up hey Hilarious!

[Spider]

ah, thanks slug.

So McClellan said it not Bush. And I think you are going to find it wasn't Rove who leaked the name but one of Cheney's aides. Again, wait for the report to see who leaked the name.
LOL ... you are out there Bro ... seeing only what you want to see or you would have seen this part ..... Bush replied "yes" when asked in June 2004 if he would fire anyone who leaked the agent's name. ....... Hilarious!

[Rascal]

Again, wait for the report Spider. I'm sure your lynchmen can wait that long.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

ah, thanks slug.

So McClellan said it not Bush. And I think you are going to find it wasn't Rove who leaked the name but one of Cheney's aides. Again, wait for the report to see who leaked the name.
And where would an "aide" get this classified information? I have to tell you all who don't see this for what it is (blatant attempt by the Bush administration at retaliation for an unfavorable report supporting Bush's attempts to fix intelligence for attacking and invading Iraq), that this kind of s*it by anyone or any party is completely unacceptable!!!!

[Spider]

Again, wait for the report Spider. I'm sure your lynchmen can wait that long.
LOL . it has been established that Rove was a Leak , and appearnetly not the only one , a confirming source is just as bad ... Tim Russert broke it down .....
MR. RUSSERT: This is the cover of your magazine: "Rove on the Spot," subtitled "What I Told the Grand Jury," by Matthew Cooper. And here is an excerpt from your article, which will be available tomorrow in Time magazine.

"So did [Karl] Rove leak Plame's name to me, or tell me she was covert? No. Was it through my conversation with Rove that I learned for the first time that [Joe] Wilson's wife worked at the CIA and may have been responsible for sending him?"--to Niger. "Yes. Did Rove say that she worked at the `agency' on `WMD'?"--weapons of mass destruction. "Yes. When he said things would be declassified soon, was that itself impermissible? I don't know."

For the record, the first time you learned that Joe Wilson's wife worked for the CIA was from Karl Rove?

MR. COOPER: That's correct. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8565312/
Hilarious!

[Rascal]

I'm not saying it's not unacceptable. I'm just going to wait till the report comes out before I point my finger at who should be lynched. I think there are going to be several things shown by this investigation 1) who leaked the name; 2) how did they get the name; and 3) why did they leak the name.

[Rascal]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/07/15/cia.leak.rove.ap/index.html

[Spider]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/07/15/cia.leak.rove.ap/index.html
I will take Coopers word .. Rove and the Whitehouse has been less then honest in everything

[Rascal]

Wait for the report. If it implicates Rove then can his ass, but no point in doing anything now until the report is finished.

[Spider]

Wait for the report. If it implicates Rove then can his ass, but no point in doing anything now until the report is finished.
I see buy time wait it out defense , maybe Bush will be out of office by then Hilarious! .......

[Rascal]

Not making a defense. If the report says Rove leaked then can him. I'm just saying there is no point in doing it now.

[Spider]

Not making a defense. If the report says Rove leaked then can him. I'm just saying there is no point in doing it now.
I see so Cooper testifies , Rove was the one that made the CIA connection , WMD connection , you still want to wait for a report Hilarious! ......

[Rohirrim]

Congratulations W. That was a slick little change in emphasis. The Association of Trial Attorneys would be proud of you. BTW, do you know what the meaning of "is" is?

[Rascal]

I heard Clinton had finally decided on the definition but then he had a problem with "the".

[Mile High Shack]

I heard Clinton had finally decided on the definition but then he had a problem with "the".

lol

it was "is"

[errand]

Hilarious! so if I dont drag up a link from 3 years ago it never happened .. Hilarious! .....

Why not?

You think that WMD's that were in Iraq 5 years ago never existed.

[errand]

And where would an "aide" get this classified information? I have to tell you all who don't see this for what it is (blatant attempt by the Bush administration at retaliation for an unfavorable report supporting Bush's attempts to fix intelligence for attacking and invading Iraq), that this kind of s*it by anyone or any party is completely unacceptable!!!!

......you mean like forging documents that said Bush was AWOL while serving in the TANG?

.....or making stories up about the Koran being desecrated?

....or claiming that our guys are torturing prisoners in Getmo?

You really have no clue why nobody bothers to listen to your side anymore, do you?

[Spider]

Why not?

You think that WMD's that were in Iraq 5 years ago never existed.
LOL ...... Yeah we was tripping all over them on our way to Baghdad Hilarious!
Maybe some day errand you should vist the real world ..

[Traveler]

Bush Promised to "Take Care Of" Criminal Responsible for Leak If They Were Ever Found

Bush Said That If There Was A Leak In His Administration They Would Be "Taken Care Of." President Bush: "if there's a leak out of the administration, I want to know who it is. And if a person has violated law, the person will be taken care of...And so I welcome the investigation...I have told our administration people in my administration to be fully cooperative. I want to know the truth." [FDCH Political Transcripts, 10/30/03]

Bush Said If They Find The Leak They Will Be Punished. President Bush: "I don't know of anybody in my administration who leaked classified information. 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." [FDCH Political Transcripts, 10/30/03]

Bush Threatened Criminal Action If CIA Leak Came From His Administration. When asked about the severity of the CIA Leak George Bush Said,"this is a serious charge, by the way. We're talking about a criminal action." [Federal News Service, 10/6/03]

Bush Believed That We Would Never Find Out Who the Leak Was Because Reporters Would Not Reveal Leaks. Asked today if he believes the DOJ investigation will uncover the leaker who identified a CIA operative, President Bush replied, "You tell me. How many sources have you had that's leaked information that you've exposed or had been exposed? Probably none... And I don't know if we're going to find out the senior administration official... I have no idea whether we'll find out who the leaker is, partially because, in all due respect to your profession, you do a very good job of protecting the leakers. But we'll find out." [White House Bulletin, 10/7/03]

[Traveler]

I think Rove is scum, but I'm willing to wait and see how this plays out.
The "taken care of" statement is disconcerting. WHo knows exactly what that entails?

Also see:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,162161,00.html

Early in the probe, President Bush said those responsible would be held accountable.

"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," Bush said in September 2003.

Bush did not use the word "fired" to describe the fate of the leaker, but some reporters and Democrats seem to expect that response.

"The White House promised if anyone was involved in the Valerie Plame affair, they would no longer be in this administration, his administration. I trust they will follow through on this pledge," said Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid.

Democrats have already begun to call for Rove's scalp. Some want him fired, others want him suspended and his security clearances revoked. Still others want Rove to testify in congressional hearings.

"He's not getting away with this one," Democratic strategist Bob Beckel told FOX News.

"There can be no gray area here. Regardless of how he phrased it, regardless of how much detail he provided, he revealed the identity of an undercover CIA agent. What Mr. Rove did is reprehensible. Putting the life of an undercover CIA agent in jeopardy can not be tolerated. He clearly deserves his pink slip," Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-N.Y., said in a statement.

But former Republican National Committee Chairman Jim Gilmore told FOX News that he didn't think Rove would face much heat.

"Rove has said that he didn't break the law, it's a matter that's under investigation ... I think you just have to let the hand play out, I think he's going to be okay," he said.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Rove hasn't been found guilty of anything, no matter what you guys on the left say. Therefore, it hasn't been established he's committed a crime. If Rove found out about the leak from Robert Novak, then someone NOT NAMED Karl Rove may have been the guilty party.

:bs:

The dry drunk promised to fire the leaker.

It has already been established that Rove leaked Plame's identity to the press.

Whether or not Rove is charged with a crime is a seperate issue.

Also, Novak told Newsday that his WH source told him about Plame - not vice versa.

http://www.bartcop.com/so-fired-legacy.gif

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

And where would an "aide" get this classified information? I have to tell you all who don't see this for what it is (blatant attempt by the Bush administration at retaliation for an unfavorable report supporting Bush's attempts to fix intelligence for attacking and invading Iraq), that this kind of s*it by anyone or any party is completely unacceptable!!!!

Exactly.

This taxpayer-funded investigation has been ongoing for two years now.

If he had a clear conscience, then why didn't Rove come forward two years ago and tell Fitzgerald about his involvement?

Rove has been hiding his involvement for two years, and the WH has been lying in order to protect him.

This is obstruction.

http://www.bartcop.com/going-Down-ani.gif

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Rove and Libby Were Cooper's Sources, says Cooper

In a Time Magazine article and on MTP with Tim Russert, Time reporter Matt Cooper revealed that he first learned Valerie Wilson worked for the CIA from Karl Rove, info that was confirmed the next day by VP chief of staff Lewis Libby. The administration has previously denied the two were involved in the leak, even going so far as to call the idea 'ridiculous'. The President has said he would fire anyone involved in the leak.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1083899,00.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8565312/

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

http://www.bartcop.com/mayberry_machiavellis.jpg

[clarker]

I see buy time wait it out defense , maybe Bush will be out of office by then Hilarious! .......Well, I guess we can just skip a trial and hang him in front of the Washington Monument right now.

I have said from the start if he prove he did this then he should go to jail, but he does deserve a trail right?

[clarker]

"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," Bush said in September 2003.


How is this different from what he said on June 10th 2004 or yesterday?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

"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," Bush said in September 2003.


How is this different from what he said on June 10th 2004 or yesterday?
At one point, McClellan vowed: "The president has set high standards, the highest of standards, for people in his administration. He's made it very clear to people in his administration that he expects them to adhere to the highest standards of conduct. If anyone in this administration was involved in it, they would no longer be in this administration."

[clarker]

I know that McCullen is the White House spokesman, but I would take a direct quote from Bush over what McCullen says.

[Spider]

Well, I guess we can just skip a trial and hang him in front of the Washington Monument right now. I prefere pushing in front of a bus , but I can deal with the hanging ........

I have said from the start if he prove he did this then he should go to jail, but he does deserve a trail right?
Sure , but he should give up Secuirty clearence , L.O.A. type of thing ......

[Spider]

I know that McCullen is the White House spokesman, but I would take a direct quote from Bush over what McCullen says.
um McCellen is a spokesman for Bush , So what McCellen says is the official white house stance

[clarker]

um McCellen is a spokesman for Bush , So what McCellen says is the official white house stanceBut the quote of Bush from Sept of 2003 that if a law had been broken, they would be delt with, that is not a official White House stance?

I think Rove should get the ax, but Bush did say along time ago that if a law was broke he would deal with the person who did.

Now I think the standard should be a little higher. I stand by what I said at the start of this. If Rove broke the law he should go to jail, if Bush ordered him to do it, they can be roomates. But if he didn't break the law, he can't go to jail, just because I think he used very, very, very poor judgment.

I do think he can be fired for using said poor judgment. If Bush won't do that, then I agree with some of the Dems in Congress that at the very least he should have his security clearance revoked. I think they should do that even if he didn't break the law out right. He did use poor judgment. So I think he should be fired, but the left is misquoting Bush.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

How shameful is it that the question of whether or not Rove should be fired is being reduced by the bushbots to a question regarding the correct parsing of Bush's words?

For the delusional minority who are still covering for the frat boy, politics trumps national security and accountability no matter what.

[clarker]

I prefere pushing in front of a bus , but I can deal with the hanging ........ No, I'd go with hanging. I'm old fashion that way. :thumbs:


Sure , but he should give up Secuirty clearence , L.O.A. type of thing ......I think that should happen at very least. I don't know the law, so I won't play expert. Perhaps what he did was not a crime. Ok, so be it. But it was very poor judgment, to put it kindly. So I still think he should at least get the ax. But if Bush won't do that, then he should have his secuirty clearance revoked.

[Spider]

I think that should happen at very least. I don't know the law, so I won't play expert. Perhaps what he did was not a crime. Ok, so be it. But it was very poor judgment, to put it kindly. So I still think he should at least get the ax. But if Bush won't do that, then he should have his secuirty clearance revoked.
We agree... I would like to see Bush take some steps here .......Crime or not you are right it was very poor judgment ,Some sanctions against Rove need to be implemented ......

[clarker]

We agree... I would like to see Bush take some steps here .......Crime or not you are right it was very poor judgment ,Some sanctions against Rove need to be implemented ......I agree with that. He shouldn't get off the hook totally. I think he should be fired, but Bush is pretty loyal to his friends, this time to a big time fault, so I don't think he will.

I don't know if he broke the law not, from what I've read and some interviews I've seen with a couple people who wrote the law in question.

BUT, it was a very, very, very stupid thing to do. If it were me I'd fire him. That isn't going to happen, so I think I side on the Dems on this one, who say then if Bush won't fire him, his security clearance has to go.