If the leak came from Bush/cheney

[cushla_machree]

So, say it is found that Bush delibertly declassified the intelligence in order to discredit wilson, how does one prove that a crime was commited?

I've already had a taste of the right wing response. Bush declassified it, so it is not a crime. Therefore, Bush is protected by the executive order in March 2003.

I think there is a reason why they aren’t too concerned about this. Because this administration believes that the executive branch holds ultimate authority, and if the president declassified something, it’s not a crime.

But for me, there is a problem with that. There is a criminal statute about outing CIA agents. This administration leaked highly classified intelligence to journalists in an effort to bolster their case for war. Intelligence must never be classified or declassified for political purposes. And that appears to be what happened. Whoever authorized the declassification did so purposely to discredit Wilson. Not for the public’s right to know.

I think the real problem for bush is going to be, he promised to get to the bottom of it and vowed that anyone in his administration caught leaking would be dealt with accordingly. He said, “And if the person has violated the law, the person will be taken care of."

If no crime was committed, then i would ask why were going to keep us from knowing who was behind this? In Washington, it’s not the crime that gets you in trouble but the cover-up.

I think it is deplorable that a sitting president would abuse his powers and declassify highly classified intelligence for the sole purpose of getting someone back for speaking out. I think there is something really wrong when the president, sworn to uphold the oaths of office, aids and abets a crime.

I feel like the Bush team is going to try to swing the debate around about how leaks always happen in washington, Bush declassified it so its ok. But isn't the real issue the outing of a covert CIA agent? Its not that a leak occured, its WHAT was leaked. Can they really say the president has the authority to do that? According to them he can eavesdrop too. Why don't we just get rid of the constitution then.

[C_U_L8R]

1. Is there proof that Bush declassified the info?

just because freeps say it doesn't make it so.

republicans are general full of shit.

[cushla_machree]

5. didn't

he declassify intelligence in 2003?

I think they are going to use the executive order defense. then claim he had no idea it included information on plame. Play the stupid card!

[Jack Rabbit]

2. Whether or not it proves a crime was comitted is beside the point

It proves Bush was lying. Again.

He said he didn't know who the leaker was and that if he found out, that person would be fired.

[dweller]

3. then he should fire himself!

crap, he'd fuk that up too.

dp

[Jack Rabbit]

4. Yes, but he should fire Cheney first.

!!

[dweller]

6. well, Cheney could fire him first!!

maybe they'll go out hunting together ...

dp

[EVDebs]

7. Lives of intelligence personnel associated with Ms Wilson are at stake...

yet Chimpy went ahead with his vengeance. Let justice take its rightful course and expose the characters who would expose our intelligence personnel to danger for craven political gains.

BTW, related thread at DU with 60 'greatest' votes at last count...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x863042

[Cleita]

8. Demagoguery. Change the rules so you never are at fault.

Change the laws so that everything you do is legal. This president thinks he is a king but he's subject to the rule of law like the rest of us. He's been changing the law since he invoked the Supreme Court to stop the Florida count so he could be king. The Supreme Court overstepped their authority because elections legally are the provenance of the states. This man is an illegitimate ruler from the beginning of his reign and he keeps breaking and changing laws to suit himself. When are our legislators going to get fed up with him and make him accountable?

[ramblin_dave]

9. It's a crime to expose the identity of a CIA agent, so if

someone, including Bush, declassifies some document that then exposes a CIA agent, then that would violate the law. The crime would not be leaking classified info, but blowing the cover of a CIA agent. How could you argue otherwise, what am I missing?

[cushla_machree]

10. Could they argue that there is no proof of intent? Whoops! n/t

[dweller]

11. they could argue he's a *moron

and doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground.

it'll probably fly. Polls will support he's a *moron.

dp

[Marr]

12. What would they be saying if this were Clinton?

Somehow, I doubt that executive privilege would come up. Even their moronic followers can see how sleazy this whole thing is.

They're trying to deflect and reframe the argument, as you said- but it all comes back to the same thing: Bush exposed a CIA agent and lied about it. He put his own agenda ahead of the country. He sold ALL of us out.

They can mince words and play semantics all day, but they're only defending treason.

[cushla_machree]

13. i agree

But i just don't understand why the public does not see this.

All i get is, you can't prove he did it on purpose, hes the president so he can do what he wants basically. Unless it involves relations with an intern.