Plame-gate: Who's guilty?

[alkaline9]

Obviously, everyone in the administration who had this knowledge prior to the leak. Obviously anyone in the media who assisted in leaking this info about Plame being CIA. Obviously, everyone in the administration that helped to try and cover this up!

Unfortunately, this whole mess is so covered up that we won't really know who did what until the investigation is over. It's no surprise that the WH has gotten tight lipped over this whole fiasco. The more the press repeats things that have been said, the more the American public goes on a Bush/Rove hunt.

It's fun for all of us to speculate as to who said what to who... and who is going to be indicted for what... but the fact is that we (the public) really have NO idea what's going on here. All we know is what a few leaks from the GJ testimony tells us (which who knows who leaked and if it's even true), and what attorneys protecting their clients tell us (like Rove's scumbag lawyer). Everything else is speculation.

Do I believe that KKKarl Rove is innocent? That he didn't "knowingly" out a CIA agent? HELL NO! But right now there just isn't enough public information to really make that leap.

Our biggest hope lies with Fitzgerald. With any luck he will force his way to the truth. Obviously he has been doing some good, considering Rove changed his original story that he had no involvement. But we (the public) really have no idea just how deep this leak/cover-up goes. It's hard to believe that every person in the WH didn't have at least some part of this leak and/or cover-up, and I sure hope that time will bring all the facts to the table.

But honestly, what's the point????

On to a slightly related issue... Presidential Pardons. This administration (assumingly Bush, but if he resigns, another crony) has the authority until January 2009 to issue full pardons (regardless of charges, no charges, or guilty verdicts) to anyone he desires (even himself) without any other check or balance to stop him. In fact the only restriction for presidential pardons is that one cannot pardon an impeachment. They are too smart for that though, just as Nixon was. All it takes is to resign (which honestly I only see shrub doing as a true "last resort") and have the newly enacted president give you a pardon. Bush could easilly pardon Cheney, then step down, then have Cheney pardon him. It sucks big time, but this is the way the Constitution is set up.

Bush is out of office and power in 2009 regardless of what he does now... Why wouldn't he give presidential pardons to everyone involved? Risk tarnishing the Republican name? HA! Already done over and over, yet repukes continue to follow. If he had any concern for anyone other than his group of friends, things in this country would be much better than they are right now.

To answer my own question above "what's the point?"... The more the public finds out about the corruption in the WH, the more reform (hopefully through Democratic leadership) can occur. That being said, I'm not trying to discourage ALL of us from continuing the Bush/Rove/Cheney/Libby/et al head hunt through speculation. It may not ever lead to even one conviction or indictment, but with any luck it WILL lead to a Democratic landslide victory in the 2006 and 2008 elections.

So keep on this story, don't stop until these idiots and criminals are out of the WH! (even if it takes until 2008)

Your thoughts?

[oldtime dfl_er]

1. I agree that a best case scenario

for this America , is to win back the House and Senate in '06. Sadly, I think the obfuscation from the WH (led, no doubt, by the very man being investigated) and the lack of candor and enthusiasm from the conservative-dominated Congress, will cause this issue to end up in a lack of indictments. But it doesn't pass the smell test, and the American public has a keen nose for a liar. I have a certain amount of hope for the next election cycle. That isn't to say we can sit back and let the votes roll in. We have to press hard and loud and smart, and not let up.

http://www.cafepress.com/scarebaby/702950

[seabeyond]

2. i watched the 9/11 commission from beginning to end

and their conclusion was full of holes and coverups. then we had investigation into iraq, we know how thorough and adaquit it was, NOT. we will wait and see. i dont have faith

[proud patriot]

3. It's Treason not "plame gate" ...Welcome Underground alkaline9

:-)

[alkaline9]

4. Happy to be here!

Glad I found this place! It sure makes my otherwise boring workday a LOT more enjoyable.

[TahitiNut]

5. Back in the days I had security clearance ....

... my ass would've been fried if I ever spoke with anyone without clearance about the classified data I accessed. It made absolutely no difference whether they knew, or appeared to know, anything about the classified data. It was NEVER my place to judge what they did or didn't know -- it was my job to keep my piehole shut! My butt would've been singed if I even discussed classified data with someone who, even with a clearance, had no "need to know."

It's fucking insane that these people aren't being held to such long-standing restrictions! There's only ONE response to a reporter inquiring about a CIA agent: "We can never discuss potentially classified information."