> Matthew  wrote:
> So what's your beef?
> 

Assuming that no crime was committed:

1.) Mr. Rove's disclosure violates SF312 (?), the confidentiality
agreement that all staffers sign and agree to.  Having violated this,
all his clearances should be immediately revoked.

2.) Mr. Bush could easily solve this matter by calling his staff into
his office, asking who specifically leaked the data, and then
disclosing this to the public (and taking appropriate discipline
measures).  He's not doing that and that makes a fool out of every US
citizen.  It also highlights the tremendous amount of "spin" coming
from the Whitehouse and the say-anything-to-to-kill-the-story policy.

3.) The Whitehouse spokesperson lied to the US public or was lied to. 
He specifically stated that neither Mr. Rove nor Mr. Libby had
anything to do with this matter and now we find out they do.  That's a
serious transgression of the public's trust and deserves immediate and
swift action.  That's not happening.

4.) It is not the job of Mr. Rove to comment, or leak, information to
the press.  If Mr. Bush wanted this information public he has a
spokesperson for that.  By saying what Mr. Rove did was ok the
administration is essentially saying, "We approve of any staffer
telling any reporter any information as long as it's not a crime."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support 
efficiency by 100%
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:165191
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Reply via email to