Critics line up to accuse Bush of hypocrisy!!

[AGENDA21]

SENIOR Democrats have described as "breathtaking" testimony that President George Bush personally authorised the leaking of classified pre-Iraq war intelligence to a reporter.

Democrats lined up to accuse Mr Bush of hypocrisy - and worse - after the revelation that the Vice-President, Dick Cheney's former chief-of-staff, Lewis Libby, told a grand jury that he was authorised by the President, through Mr Cheney, in July 2003 to disclose key portions of a sensitive assessment in a bid to discredit former ambassador Joseph Wilson, a persistent critic of Mr Bush and the Iraq war.

"If the disclosure is true, it's breathtaking," said Jane Harman, the senior Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee. "The President is revealed as the leaker-in-chief."

Senator Charles Schumer said the revelation showed that the attempt to discredit critics and to distort intelligence on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction was a project run "at the top levels of the White House".

http://smh.com.au/news/world/critics-line-up-to-accuse-bush-of-hypocrisy/2006/04/07/1143916718075.html

[wordpix]

1. ah-hahaha, "leaker-in-chief," that's a good one, Jane Harman

[npincus]

2. 'Leaker-in-Chief' is sticking... the MSM keeps repeating it!

tee hee

[laheina]

4. Maybe we can get some other things to stick too.

All of them are deserved. ;)

[w8liftinglady]

5. lol..even on washington journal

[napi21]

3. I heard Kerry jump in that line last night during an interview.

He was a guest on one of the talking head shows last night.

[laheina]

6. He deserves to get that in,

after that whole flip-flopper BS. :eyes:

[w8liftinglady]

7. they better grab on to this like pit bulls...and tear it up.

I am tired of these milque toast wimps.

[neoblues]

8. Two things...

First, the prick should/must not be able to/allowed to declassify anything willy-nilly, on-the-fly; it must require a formal procedure (even if it doesn't). And, even if he has the legal ability to do this...
Second, even if he can declassify on demand, no one should be allowed to declassify anything for "political" purposes--especially for unethical political gain or to cause malicious harm for political purposes. Not that there are any "ethical" guidelines, much less "laws", much less "laws that apply to a Pretend President under a Pretend State of War".

Congress needs to be held accountable; we should hold their private parts to the fire on this and demand they put limits on this absurdity we call a "President".

[napi21]

9. I listened to John Dean on Olberman last night. He said

as CIC Shrub does have the authority to declassify anything, BUT he also must abide by the law that is in place. The law against releasing covert agent info was put in place via Executive Order many years ago. Shrub could have changed that law, but he didn't, so he is obligeted to obey the one in place.

[neoblues]

10. Okay, good; however the main point of my remarks are

describing what the laws should be. Even if it seems superfluous and unfortunate that they should have explicit codes in the law to address the prevention of the misuse of any right to declassify--well, such is just what we've come to. If Bush insists on doing such malfeasance and malicious abuse of the laws that gird his 'powers', then they have to be addressed. Again, that means a formal process for such declassifications and limits on the conditions or circumstances or purposes for such actions.