Tuesday, July 12, 2005

Circling the wagaons

Can anyone explain to me why Karl Rove still has a job? Oh yeah, he's bestest buddies with the president and politicians like to circle the wagons instead of dealing with bad behavior--or, you know, criminal behavior--in their ranks.

The White House refused on Monday to repeat earlier assertions that any administration official who leaked classified information would be fired, days after Karl Rove, one of President Bush's top aides, was fingered as the source of a news leak that exposed a CIA undercover officer in 2003....

Recent news reports have identified Rove as the source of at least one leak to the news media in July 2003 that exposed undercover CIA agent Valerie Plame's identity. Such a disclosure could be a felony. A special prosecutor is mounting an investigation into her exposure that appears to be reaching a head after more than 18 months.


You can almost feel the undertow from the furious backpedaling. And remember, this is the same party that went after Clinton for Whitewater and lying under oath about Monica Lewinsky. Now, I agree that a president lying under oath is a huge problem that deserves investigation, even if the lie was about something so incredibly stupid. But the hypocrisy of my party is just stunning here, that they would go after Clinton with such self-righteousness while continuing to deny and protect their own from far worse crimes.

I'm no Clinton fan, but if I had to choose between a president who lied about marital infidelity and a president who protects someone who lies about WAR, I'm gonna have to go with the former.

4 Comments:

At 2:13 PM, Blogger Jess said...

If the upstanding folks in your party don't eventually force their way over the questionable Bush II legacy with integrity, they'll be sucked under with it. --adam

 
At 4:44 PM, Blogger the-unintentional-blogger said...

I haven't followed the story extremely closely, but your right; If he's found to have leaked the name, even if it did not break the law, he should resign or be fired. But my understanding is that they're still investigating it, so a dismissal now is premature, dont' you think?

 
At 5:49 PM, Blogger Bad Methodist said...

What concerns me is that the administration has stopped saying it will fire the person who leaked it. If the White House were saying "We need to investigate further, but yes, we will still fire WHOEVER leaked this info" then I'd feel a lot better about this.

 
At 10:13 PM, Blogger the-unintentional-blogger said...

I understand your concern, but you started your blog with "why does he still have a job?" I just think it's prudent to wait until all the facts are in. And it really doesn't bother me that the admin is not saying they'll fire him. What'll bug me is if he did something illegial and they don't fire him. THEN I'll be pissed.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home