OT Bush the leaker

Actually, I can find fault. You were astonded?! Pardon my cynicism, but much as I would have wanted to I hardly expected less. "May you live in Interesting Times", eh?

Mickey

Who really cares...except it give me enjoyment to banter about it rather than changing clothes and going back in the shop and working. I should be on the BP watching grass grow and breathing mist coolant. But, but, but...didn't Hillary just get caught for not disclosing funds received? The liberal press put it on page 162, below the fold, in 4 point type.

"John Emmons" wrote in news:rXkZf.67891 $ snipped-for-privacy@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:

Among others.

Well, nobody in the White House is denying the allegations and their spokesman Scott McClellan was telling everyone at the press conference today that the leaking of classified information by Bush was legal. The reason for that is because anytime the president decides to give out classified information that automatically makes it declassified because as president he's authorized to declassify information simply due to his position as president. However, by making this excuse and admitting he was the source of the leak to the NY Times he's also admitting the allegations by Libby are true. Unfortunately for him, it also means he's guilty of lying when he said he wouldn't tolerate leaks in his administration and anyone that did it would be dealt with appropriately. I guess he meant that to apply to everyone but himself.

Hawke

You forgot to add the standard request for cites.

Hawke

So I take it you are not going to vote for Bush a third time?

Snicker....

Gunner, posting from a wifi hotspot, in his truck

"The importance of morality is that people behave themselves even if nobody's watching. There are not enough cops and laws to replace personal morality as a means to produce a civilized society. Indeed, the police and criminal justice system are the last desperate line of defense for a civilized society. Unfortunately, too many of us see police, laws and the criminal justice system as society's first line of defense." --Walter Williams

Cites?

Are you still having sex with your dog?

Gunner

"The importance of morality is that people behave themselves even if nobody's watching. There are not enough cops and laws to replace personal morality as a means to produce a civilized society. Indeed, the police and criminal justice system are the last desperate line of defense for a civilized society. Unfortunately, too many of us see police, laws and the criminal justice system as society's first line of defense." --Walter Williams

Hint Dicky boy....neither Bush nor Cheney outed or allowed Plame to be outed. Not that she was much of a spook after her hubby outed her in his book, and she wound up running a work processer in the Puzzle Factory long before Libby coughed up her name.

Now dont you feel stupid?

Gunner

"The importance of morality is that people behave themselves even if nobody's watching. There are not enough cops and laws to replace personal morality as a means to produce a civilized society. Indeed, the police and criminal justice system are the last desperate line of defense for a civilized society. Unfortunately, too many of us see police, laws and the criminal justice system as society's first line of defense." --Walter Williams

Isn't it funny how right wingers minimize crimes and and overlook bad, unethical acts when the administration in power is republican but are total sticklers and uncompromising on upholding all laws when Democrats are in the majority? Some might even see this as two-faced, hypocritical behavior. Nah, right wingers wouldn't be that way. Would they?

Hawke

OK, so what? That's pretty much SOP in any organization: The HMFIC makes the rules for the HMFIC's administration -- and can observe them himself or not as he chooses, subject only to law, which itself is subject to the HMFIC's lawyers' interpretation -- and the results of lawsuits by opposition lawyers.

So he's not "tolerating leaks in his administration:" He's doing what HMFICs always do, what he pleases as the head of his administration.

If they're claiming Bush broke some law, that's a different kettle of shad. Head for the appropriate authority and file charges.

Bush may or may not come off as some kind of twit at times, but he's the Head MF-ing Twit in Charge of his administration.

Democrat or Republican administration, this sort of thing is depressingly normal in D.C. and elsewhere. Does the CEO of a corporation have to obey all the rules its line staff has to follow?

Hang 'em all! Throw the bums out! Fire the bastards and hire a new batch of bastards -- you still get bastards. The Federal Government now seems to be "ruled" by a professional political class, whether citizens like it or not.:)

Use your word processor and find/replace Democrat and Republican back and forth and see if your statment changes...I DON'T THINK SO!!!. The only difference is the Republicans have a twinge of conscience when they do it...but not enough to sytop them.

True. there's really no proof either way, and nobody involved can be expected to act in a predictable or trustworthy manner. This will likely turn into yet another one of those things that a third of the population believes is gospel truth, a third thinks it's a wicked machination of the enemy, and the other third simply doesn't give a shit. Over time the "don't give a shit" crowd will grow.

Information gets declassified all the time and released to the public but it isn't called a "leak". Could it be that the leak label is used to make a normal occurrence sound sinister? GW

"Gus" wrote

If you call a press conference and announce a previously secret bit of information, then you have "declassified and released to the public". If you tell the same thing to a hand-picked reporter "on background", that's a "leak".

Could it be that the Bushies chose to leak, rather than announce, because they were trying to get away with something?

-- TP

Ho Lee Cow ! Is that what happened ?

That sounds like a good idea but there is a problem. Even though the Congress has an approval rating of 29% ,when polled, 57% of people say they are happy with their own representative. So between the horrible way districts have been gerrymandered, and the fact that the majority of people are satisfied with their own representatives, it's not likely there's ever going to be a big blow out of incumbents.

What needs to happen is for about 50% or more of the people in congress to be sent home. That would send a message to the rest that their normal corrupt business practices wouldn't be tolerated any more and the new 50% wouldn't know how to cheat the public for a few years. But our problem is us. The American people simply won't vote the people in Congress out of power. As long as they keep sending the same people back to do the same thing year after year nothing is going to change. Funny isn't it, Americans complain to high heavens about the government and about the corrupt people in Washington but when they get the chance to put someone else in office they refuse to do it. So maybe the problem isn't the folks in office but it's the people voting for them. What's that line of Einstein's about doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results? Americans must just be insane.

Hawke

Maybe it sounds sinister because the "declassification" was not made known to anyone but Judith Miller of the NY Times. Therefore, the information was "planted" in the Times by the Bush administration in order to counteract Joe Wilson's rebuttal of Bush's claim that Iraq was seeking uranium in Niger. If the declassified information was simply made public no one would have thought anything of it. But the fact that it was surreptitiously let out and was done so in order to foster Bush's political agenda is more than enough for a reasonable person to believe that it was indeed "leaked" information and was not simply a dissemination of declassified information to the public. When you do something sneaky there is usually a reason for it an not usually a good one. Clearly Bush was trying to pull one off here but Libby's testimony in court exposed his duplicity.

Hawke

I think you're on to something. How about term limits?

At least we know that's one way to force a turnover, probably the only way too.

Hawke