Bush Raises Threshold for Firing Aides In Leak Probe

Washington Post ^ | 7/19/2005 | Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen

[StudentsForBush]

President Bush said yesterday that he will fire anyone in the administration found to have committed a crime in the leaking of a CIA operative's name, creating a higher threshold than he did one year ago for holding aides accountable in the unmasking of Valerie Plame.

After originally saying anyone involved in leaking the name of the covert CIA operative would be fired, Bush told reporters: "If somebody committed a crime, they will no longer work in my administration." - Washington Post July 19th, 2005

This seems to be the hot topic, but lets compare what President Bush said a year ago and what he said yesterday ! It's the same policy !

---

 

George W. Bush:  September 30th, 2003

"If there is a leak out of my administration I want to know who it is, and if that person has violated law, that person will be taken care of. "

 

 

George W. Bush:  July 17th, 2005

"And if someone committed a crime they will no longer work in my administration."

 

---

Reject the Liberal Agenda and follow the Truth.

[StudentsForBush]

President Bush said yesterday that he will fire anyone in the administration found to have committed a crime in the leaking of a CIA operative's name, creating a higher threshold than he did one year ago for holding aides accountable in the unmasking of Valerie Plame.

After originally saying anyone involved in leaking the name of the covert CIA operative would be fired, Bush told reporters: "If somebody committed a crime, they will no longer work in my administration."

[NordP]

This is so good, I'm pinging myself!

[Echo Talon]

Liberals have been trying to put words in his mouth for 2 years now.

[StudentsForBush]

[Nachum]

Rush played the audio of the comments this morning. Nice to see the libs squirm on this one.

[Darkwolf377]

The thing is, when he was asked about this in 2004, I believe it was, the reporter said "Will you fire the leaker?" and Bush said he would. It's kind of a trick question, though, because of the phrasing, but...it's not this cut and dried, I'm afraid.

[mlstier]

Liberals have been trying to put words in his mouth for 2 years now.

Two? Try five.

[ex-Texan]

I listened to Rush today. He was playing sound bites from GWB two years ago responding to questions. GWB's policy has not changed one iota. He has not waivered or zigged or zagged. The AP reporter was trying to make it seem like Bush had changed his position by the terms of his question. Rush was saying that the White House media corps are desperate to regain their 'relevance' to the political mainstream.

It's all about over-hyped, manufactured or bogus news reports.

[advance_copy]

Bush Raises Threshold for Firing Aides In Leak Probe

Baloney. The left wants Bush to fire people for setting the record straight. Plame conspired with her husband to send him on an African junket so he could drink "sweet mint tea" and come back to write "Bush lied" in the New York Times.

[Echo Talon]

Two? Try five.

I stand Corrected. :D

[Echo Talon]

The thing is, when he was asked about this in 2004, I believe it was, the reporter said "Will you fire the leaker?" and Bush said he would. It's kind of a trick question, though, because of the phrasing, but...it's not this cut and dried, I'm afraid.

No, Bush said yes, but that it was all up to the prosecutor.(Implying that he needs to know if law was violated)

[carlr]

The thing is, when he was asked about this in 2004, I believe it was, the reporter said "Will you fire the leaker?" and Bush said he would. It's kind of a trick question, though, because of the phrasing, but...it's not this cut and dried, I'm afraid.

That is the exact point.The question was presented with the presumption that a crime had been committed and the President answered appropriately.The truth is that no crime has been committed so the thrust of the question changes.
What the libs(the MSM)is saying is that,we accused your administration of criminal activity,your answer cannot change even though the accusation was wrong to start with.

[muawiyah]

The WarshPost was advocating that we turn all the Gitmo terrorists loose in an editorial the other day.

Why should we credit them with any more sense when it comes to QUOTES.

[Chode]

[mlstier]

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/06/20040610-36.html

Subject: President Bush Holds Press Conference Following the G8 Summit

Q Given -- given recent developments in the CIA leak case, particularly Vice President Cheney's discussions with the investigators, do you still stand by what you said several months ago, a suggestion that it might be difficult to identify anybody who leaked the agent's name?

THE PRESIDENT: That's up to --

Q And, and, do you stand by your pledge to fire anyone found to have done so?

THE PRESIDENT: Yes. And that's up to the U.S. Attorney to find the facts.

Q My final point would be -- or question would be, has Vice President Cheney assured you --

THE PRESIDENT: It's up to the --

Q -- subsequent to his conversations with them, that nobody --

THE PRESIDENT: I haven't talked to the Vice President about this matter, and I suggest -- recently -- and I suggest you talk to the U.S. Attorney about that.

[goldstategop]

Raising threshold, huh? The MSM has lost it! I defy any one to tell me where Bush changed his views. Its the MSM that's moved the goalposts!

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[mlstier]

Plame conspired with her husband to send him on an African junket so he could drink "sweet mint tea" and come back to write "Bush lied" in the New York Times.

As Rush pointed out on the show today, Wilson wrote an anti-Saddam op-ed just weeks after the 2003 SOTU address, and didn't write his NYT op-ed until 5 months later. And what did he do in the mean time? Join the Kerry campaign.

[Darkwolf377]

As posted elsewhere on the thread:

...do you still stand by what you said several months ago, a suggestion that it might be difficult to identify anybody who leaked the agent's name?

THE PRESIDENT: That's up to --

Q And, and, do you stand by your pledge to fire anyone found to have done so?

THE PRESIDENT: Yes. And that's up to the U.S. Attorney to find the facts.

I'm not saying I think Bush said anything wrong, but you just know how they'll try to finesse it.

[Darkwolf377]

Thanks. We can be sure Terry Moran tries to finesse this.

[federal]

letters@washpost.com

Let them know you have emailed everyone you know with the truth because newspapers refuse to be truthful.

Then ask them how their circulation is BWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!