Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dems Want Law Forcing Rove Firing
Fox News ^ | July 14, 2005 | Fox News

Posted on 07/14/2005 11:55:22 AM PDT by CarlEOlsoniii

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 141-145 next last
To: Moral Hazard

When do we start arresting democrats, like Leahy?


61 posted on 07/14/2005 12:19:54 PM PDT by KC_Conspirator (This space outsourced to India)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody
I realize the dims are the majority Party

Huh?

The Dems are running the show. Period.

62 posted on 07/14/2005 12:21:04 PM PDT by Phantom Lord (Fall on to your knees for the Phantom Lord)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: CarlEOlsoniii
Just imagine if they oozed this type of integrity when the White House attacked Linda Tripp. Maybe they would have voted for Impeachment of the Xlintoon!

NOT!

63 posted on 07/14/2005 12:21:57 PM PDT by Young Werther
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wristpin

Then why does Sandy Berger still have his ?


64 posted on 07/14/2005 12:25:30 PM PDT by cinives (On some planets what I do is considered normal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Buke
Give me one second...I read it somewhere, although I believe that your words are true. Bush said they would be dealt with, which means some sort of punishment would occur...firing just seems like the logical punishment. Taking away someones security clearance would pretty much be the same as firing them. How good would someone in that position be if they had without a security clearance?

Bush's quote: "If anybody broke the law, they will be dealt with".

To me, that means that they will be dealt with the same as most lawbreakers: in a court of law or plea bargain with a prosecutor, not by their employer.

65 posted on 07/14/2005 12:25:54 PM PDT by rocklobster11
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Phantom Lord

It must have been a different Harry Reid.


66 posted on 07/14/2005 12:26:29 PM PDT by dearolddad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: CarlEOlsoniii

Well, that's ok. Plame was NOT a covert agent at the time Rove spoke to Cooper. Even 36 news organizations agree with that in their legal briefs filled to keep their reporters from being compelled to testify before the grand jury.


67 posted on 07/14/2005 12:26:33 PM PDT by Jackson57
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kaktuskid; All

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1442958/posts


68 posted on 07/14/2005 12:27:51 PM PDT by bitt ('We will all soon reap what the ignorant are now sowing.' Victor Davis Hanson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: cinives

It might be different with high ranking politicos. As long as you have a current 5 year back ground investigation on file, the clearance can be reactivated within days.


69 posted on 07/14/2005 12:28:39 PM PDT by Wristpin ( Varitek says to A-Rod: "We don't throw at .260 hitters.....")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody
How else can one explain the actions, or rather inactions, of this completely flustered and outmaneuvered Republican Party?

"Huh?" ... indeed!

70 posted on 07/14/2005 12:31:22 PM PDT by G.Mason
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: bitt
RE: "...think Kerry should lose his security clearance?"

Yes indeed...right along with Leahy...and NOT just temporarily, either.
...but I am still trying to figure out why this turkey is still in the Senate at all... since he's OBVIOUSLY not eligible to hold any Federal OR State public office (...in THIS country at least.)


71 posted on 07/14/2005 12:32:51 PM PDT by Seadog Bytes (“The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion.”—Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Moral Hazard

72 posted on 07/14/2005 12:33:05 PM PDT by bitt ('We will all soon reap what the ignorant are now sowing.' Victor Davis Hanson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 1Old Pro



I'm thinking about making this image with interchangeable heads...
just about any cRAT head will work (along with a few rinos)

73 posted on 07/14/2005 12:33:10 PM PDT by Zacs Mom (Proud wife of a Marine! ... and purveyor of "rampant, unedited dialogue")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Buke

I think they know what Bush said. Scott McClellum is the one who was most forceful hence the questions to him do you regret stating that Rove had any knowledge of this. I do wish McClellum was a little better than he is.


74 posted on 07/14/2005 12:33:21 PM PDT by newconhere
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: SERKIT
The Dem and media story line from Day 1 has been that there was a carefully orchestrated White House plan to "get" Wilson. But if the Cooper memo is all they have, to quote Bill Clinton, "There's no 'there' there." Cooper called Rove, late in the day, just as Rove was going on vacation, to purportedly ask about welfare reform. Then he switched to the Wilson topic, and Rove mentioned - in response to some unspecified question - that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA and apparently had a role in getting Wilson the Niger assignment.

That's it, that's all they've shown as far as Rove is concerned. Even if one admits he shouldn't have mentioned Wilson's wife, and that is arguable, we do not have anything at all resembling a smear campaign. In fact, this is not a smear at all, just a simple fact about how Wilson ended up going to Niger. But the story line is that Wilson was smeared and punished and attacked, and this offhand comment about his wife is no such thing.
75 posted on 07/14/2005 12:34:17 PM PDT by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: CarlEOlsoniii

Ok. :-)


76 posted on 07/14/2005 12:34:20 PM PDT by processing please hold (Islam and Christianity do not mix ----9-11 taught us that)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: bitt

77 posted on 07/14/2005 12:35:12 PM PDT by Zacs Mom (Proud wife of a Marine! ... and purveyor of "rampant, unedited dialogue")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: CarlEOlsoniii

I can agree with this legislation. "Deny security clearances to officials who disclose the identity of an undercover agent." Undercover agents should remian undercover at all cost. Including the arrest and conviction of a spouse revealing the identity on a personal website.

Can someone elplain to me how a person who is seen walking into the CIA offices in Langley on a daily basis is considered an Undercover Covert Operative?


78 posted on 07/14/2005 12:36:09 PM PDT by Parthalan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Buke
"How good would someone in that position be if they had without a security clearance?"

Rove is a political strategist, not a national security advisor, so IMHO he could function quite well without a high security clearance.
79 posted on 07/14/2005 12:36:11 PM PDT by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: CarlEOlsoniii

Do they honestly think if he is fired he will stop working against the Dems? Perhaps he will start operating outside the constraints of being a government employee and then he will be REALLY dangerous to the Dems. They should be careful what they wish for.


80 posted on 07/14/2005 12:38:15 PM PDT by msnimje
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 141-145 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson