1) The overly-cocky Rove committed the unpardonable, mortal (Bush) sin of LEAKING!
2) Bush clearly stated (unless you allow Clinton like qualifications) that the leaker would be CANNED!
Botta Bing, Botta Boom!
PS ....... who the hell do you think you are, the FR Pope?
Assumes facts not in evidence.
(1) If Plame wasn't an active, covert agent, the leak wasn't illegal.
(2) Even the WP reported that reporters might have told government officials (possibly including Rove, but this isn't mentioned) Plame's name. In which case, Rove isn't the leaker, even notwithstanding (1).
(3) What's up with Miller and the NY Slimes? They asked for an investigation, and now their own reporter sits in jail for failure to testify before a grand jury. Gee, do you suppose Plame (or Wilson) told Miller of Plame's employment, and then Miller told Rove, who then told Novak? This scenario explains at least two things: Why Rove and Bush are so confident, and why Miller refuses to testify.
No, but I am the spelling champion of VF-143.
How could Rove "leak" something that apparently was told to him by a reporter? A "leak" is something that comes from a government employee TO a reporter, not the other way round.
2) Bush clearly stated (unless you allow Clinton like qualifications) that the leaker would be CANNED!
No Clinton tricks required. Bush said he'd "take care of" someone who broke the law. Rove didn't break the law. End of story.
You should quit listening to the MSM. It will warp your brain.
How did he "leak"?
1) The overly-cocky Rove committed the unpardonable, mortal (Bush) sin of LEAKING!
2) Bush clearly stated (unless you allow Clinton like qualifications) that the leaker would be CANNED!
You are utterly wrong on both statements. Try reading the facts and then forming an opinion.
Leaking: Taking information from inside a system and getting it outside the system. There can be no "leaking" if the information is already widespread outside the system.
2) Bush clearly stated (unless you allow Clinton like qualifications) that the leaker would be CANNED!
The statement had a context, and presupposed a set of circumstances - none of which appear to be true.