> > He very clearly said what he would do if anyone in his Whitehouse was > INVOLVED.
He did? Have you looked at his actual statements? September 30th, 2003: "If there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is. And if the person has violated law, the person will be taken care of." During a subsequent interview in June of 2004, Bush was asked if he "stood by his previouse pledge to fire anyone found to have done so (leaked)?" He said "yes, and that is up to the US attorney to find the facts" Seems on both occasions he was requiring that the law had been broken. > > Now he is weaseling out of that, in a move I would expect from the > Clinton Whitehouse (or from one of Bush's operatives), but not from > the man himself. I still think he's weaseling, but the media, at least in this case, is trying to spin something that isn't really there (that Bush has changed his firing criteria) > > He has shown himself to be a man of limited integrity and less honesty > than I had given him credit for. Politics will do that to ya. > > Again, I am saddened and disappointed. Me too, at Rove. He's the ultimate slimeball, and I blame Bush for not firing him whether he's committed a crime or not. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble Ticket application http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:165376 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
