user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Newest Ballots
Newest Blogs
Private Ballots
Joke Ballots
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
Rove is accused of giving this information to the press, intentionally, to punish Plame's husband by destroying his wife's CIA career. As the to the hair-splitting and nit-picking by the Rove apologists, all that should be decided in a court of law. And Rove certainly should be indicted. At the very least, Rove should be fired. If not because he is absolute scum of the earth, then because George W. Bush pledged to the American people that he would fire anyone in his Administration who leaked such information. Let Bush live up to his word--for once.
Like the guys on the left that cranky supports!
Nice comeback, Miss Sabotage.
And you [italicize:dared] to be outraged at ["It depends on what the definition of *is* is?!?!" Shameless. Just shameless.
Well since he hurt the CIA by uncovering one of their agents for the sole purpose of malice then it can quite easily be said that he committed treason.
Here goes MS Sabotage, changing the subject. While he may "technically" get away with it, what he did was certainly unethical.
Only through the legal definition of the crimes stated has he done nothing wrong. What he did may not have endangered Valerie Plame's life and work but, at this moment, anyone she ever associated with during her husband's posting as an ambassador is now under suspicion of being a CIA informant, even if they did nothing more than have lunch with her once a week. In a few years, I'd love to see a list of her associates, casual and otherwise, and whether they're alive or not. Anyone innocent who suffered even a little by this has Rove to thank. And, if you think he's a choir boy, I'd advise you to google his life history. He's been pulling dirty works for a long time. This was just a drop in the bucket.
same reason why clinton shouldn't have been impeached, from what I understand he didn't put it in.
by LCD on Wed Jul 13, 05 6:44pm
[+]
^ hee hee! ^
by mojo on Thu Jul 14, 05 8:59am
[+]
BTW, Corrupt, your gymnastics with semantics did get me motivated to do some research. It seems that even if Rove is able to weasel out of being convicted on the 1982 statute that makes it a crime for people with authorized access to classified information to knowingly identify covert agents (on technicalities), he is still in deep trouble.
It seems that you (and those seeking to rationalize anything and everything Rove does) have overlooked the duties assigned to individuals, like Karl Rove, who receive national security clearance. Administration officials who are given the national security clearance to receive classified information are required to sign the "Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement," also known as the SF 312.
The SF 312 Briefing Booklet helps answer questions about the practices and procedures that should be followed by individuals given top national security clearance. Here's what question #19 in that booklet says: Q19: If information that a signer of the SF 312 knows to have been classified appears in a public source, for example, in a newspaper article, may the signer assume that the information has been declassified and disseminate it elsewhere? Answer: No. Information remains classified until it has been officially declassified. Its disclosure in a public source does not declassify the information. Of course, merely quoting the public source in the abstract is not a second unauthorized disclosure. However, before disseminating the information elsewhere or confirming the accuracy of what appears in the public source, the signer of the SF 312 must confirm through an authorized official that the information has, in fact, been declassified. If it has not, further dissemination of the information or confirmation of its accuracy is also an unauthorized disclosure.
I believe that breaking that rule constitutes a criminal act *and* forever disqualifies him from holding a Security Clearance. Thus making his termination or resignation required. HTH.
PS: He did break the 1982 statute, as well, your Johnny Cochrane semantics, notwithstanding.
He outed a CIA agent. If a democrat did that you neocons and especially fox news would be all over him.
by seon on Fri Oct 07, 05 11:45pm
[+]
|
|