So will Bush keep his promise?

Remember back in the fall of 2003 when White House spokesman Scott McClellan made the following statements when questioned if Karl Rove may have been involved in the leaking of Valerie Plame’s identity?

“The president knows that Karl Rove wasn’t involved,” “It was a ridiculous suggestion” and “It’s not true.”

So now that it appears that Karl Rove was involved will Bush keep his promise to fire anyone in his administration that was involved in the leak? That’s been the question lots of reporters are asking McClellan and there’s no shortage of Democrats calling for Rove’s head.

I’m not surprised in the least to find out that Rove may have been the source of the leak, it’s the sort of thing I’d expect from him given some of the campaign tactics he’s used in the past, but I was surprised when Bush made his promise to dismiss anyone found to be involved in it. I can only think he must have assumed that the chances of finding out who leaked the info were probably minimal so even if someone in his administration was responsible it would be unlikely to ever see the light of day. In addition to the political problems this will cause, Rove could be in some legal trouble if the investigation shows he is the source of the leak. I’m willing to bet that in a couple of days he’ll offer his resignation if it becomes clear he’s a liability for the President.

For the moment, Bush says he still has confidence in Rove. He may be the only one at this point.

13 thoughts on “So will Bush keep his promise?

  1. Don’t hold your breath. If I were a betting man, I’d give even money for Rove staying after a whitewash or being sponsored to some comfortable job elsewhere if the heat gets oppresive.

  2. The Bush Rules:
    1. Bush is infallible
    2. Bush Hired Rove
    3. Bush cannot fire Rove for mistakes as that would invalidate Rule #1
    4. When in doubt, bump up the terrah warnings…


  3. Even if this turns out to actually cause some serious damage to the WH and criminal indictments are handed out, I can’t help thinking of two words:

         Presidential Pardon.

    Bush would likely rather risk that kind of political damage than a full-on trial.

  4. Couldn’t Rove have simply fucked an intern and lied about it? Why does it always have to be so difficult and sneakey with those Republicans?

  5. Dubya has lied about bigger things so why to expect him keep his promises on this?
    …even less propable considering stupidity of people…

  6. Today John Dean wrote and article for FindLaw on the Rove situation—part of which reiterates the technical difficulty of successfully prosecuting under the Intelligence Identities and Protection Act. Dean cautions against speculating about indictments.

    Only the Special Counsel, Patrick Fitzgerald, and his staff have all the facts on their investigation at this point, but there is increasing evidence that Rove (and others) may have violated one or more federal laws. At this time, it would be speculation to predict whether indictments will be forthcoming.

    And then proceeds to do just that.

    Suggesting a precedent that Fitzgerald might use, Dean links to a previous article of his describing how, in 2002, John Ashcroft’s Justice Department morphed an existing law into an Official Secrets Act in order to prosecute a DEA employee for leaking information about rich Brit.

    I have heard that Fitzgerald is very tenacious, and, further, there is speculation that one or more of the Judges who have issued (redacted) rulings in the appeals by Judith Miller and Matt Cooper appear to believe that Federal Law has been broken. We shall see.

  7. Bush is not going to fire Rove.  He just said today that he will fire anyone involved in a crime.  I am sure all the testimony is so convoluted by now that while some nefarious stuff was going on, it can’t be defined as a crime as the law states.

  8. Uber gets the kewpie doll!!! grin  At least after all the crap the real GOP might get tired of the neocon takeover of their party and jettison the fools.

  9. Politics…such a fine(evil) thing. It can be abused beyond beleif, twisting the various goverment documents to say what you want does not seem too big a challange;they are open to “interpretation”. They might as well not exist as far some politicians are concerned. Well, at least that’s my humble opinion.

    Cheers BunBun

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.