Waxman: New Bush Statement on Rove Conflicts with Executive Order

Yubanet.com ^ | July 18, 2005 | Rep. Henry A. Waxman

[Maceman]

Dear Mr. President:

In June 2004, you said that you would fire anyone found to be involved in the disclosure of Valerie Wilson's identity as a covert CIA agent.1 Today, you significantly changed your position, stating that you would remove Karl Rove or other White House officials involved in the security breach only "if someone committed a crime."2

Your new standard is not consistent with your obligations to enforce Executive Order 12958, which governs the protection of national security secrets. The executive order states: "Officers and employees of the United States Government ... shall be subject to appropriate sanctions if they knowingly, willfully, or negligently ... disclose to unauthorized persons information properly classified."3 Under the executive order, the available sanctions include "reprimand, suspension without pay, removal, termination of classification authority, loss or denial of access to classified information, or other sanctions."4

Under the executive order, you may not wait until criminal intent and liability are proved by a prosecutor. Instead, you have an affirmative obligation to take "appropriate and prompt corrective action."5 And the standards of proof are much different. A criminal violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, which Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald is investigating, requires a finding that Mr. Rove "intentionally disclose[d]" the identity of a covert agent.6 In contrast, the administrative sanctions under Executive Order 12958 can be imposed without a finding of intent. Under the express terms of the executive order, you are required to impose administrative sanctions – such as removal of office or termination of security clearance – if Mr. Rove or other officials acted "negligently" in disclosing or confirming information about Ms. Wilson's identity.7

I have enclosed a fact sheet on Karl Rove's Nondisclosure Agreement and its legal implications, which provides additional detail about the President's national security obligations. I urge you to act in compliance with Executive Order 12958 and your responsibility to safeguard national security secrets.

Sincerely,

Henry A. Waxman Ranking Minority Member

1 Press Conference: President Discusses Job Creation With Business Leaders (Sept. 30, 2003). 2 Bush: CIA Leaker Would Be Fired if Crime Committed, Reuters (July 18, 2005); Bush: Any Criminals in Leak to Be Fired, Associated Press (July 18, 2005). 3 Executive Order 12958, sec. 5.5(b). 4 Id. at sec. 5.5(c). 5 Id. at sec. 5.5(e). 6 50 U.S.C. sec. 421(a). 7 Executive Order 12958, sec. 5.5(b).

[marylandrepub1]

Conyers organizing online against Rove/Bush:


http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1446202/posts

[lepton]

But the real poll question is whether Rove should be fired if he leaked classified information?

As a generality, of course he should..however there are some complications to that. The first of these complications is that the evidence keeps getting stronger and stronger that he did no such thing. The second of which was that Wilson was attempting to abuse the law by using it to lie each about his actions, his wife's actions, and the actions of the administration.

It was certainly not in the nations interest to allow Wilson to use the prestige of the United States (His previous appointment as Ambassador) to cause the United States harm, which he was doing by lying and claiming (both directly and indirectly) that the United States sent him.

[gathersnomoss]

Waxman, another character from The Little Shop of Horrors. Who in the h--l votes that guy into office? Liberal crack smokers?

I apologize to the crack smokers that I may have offended.

[gathersnomoss]

Thanks for the pic.

[reagan_fanatic]

Henry Waxman - what the offspring of Helen Thomas and Mr. Potato Head would look like.