- Feb 8, 2005
- 5,839
- 107
- 38
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Others
Treasongate: Beyond Karl Rove
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Treasongate:_Beyond_Karl_Rove
"In October of 2003, the White House, in a statement regarding the Valerie Plame affair, said that "if anyone in this administration was responsible for the leaking of classified information, they would no longer work in this administration." President Bush himself said, "If there is a leak out of my administration ... the person will be taken care of."
Apparently, he didn't mean it.
Assuming that Karl Rove was indeed responsible for the leak, which the investigators will determine, his was not only an illegal act; it was an act of treason. Former President George H.W. Bush calls people who do such things "the most insidious of traitors," for whom he has "nothing but contempt and anger" (April, 1999). President Bush should make good on his word: he should revoke Rove's security clearances, fire him, and see that he is prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. But if the White House statement of July 12 that Rove "has the confidence of the president" is any indication, that won't happen."
http://www.in-forum.com/articles/index.cfm?id=98371§ion=Opinion
"In the United States Code the penalty (for treason) ranges from "shall suffer death" to "shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treason#United_States
Whether one supports it or not, we are fighting a war on terrorism. In such a time, the leak of a secret agent can endanger lives. To oust a CIA operative for temporary political advantage is not only shameful but treasonous, if we are to follow the definitions of the law.
Peace.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Treasongate:_Beyond_Karl_Rove
"In October of 2003, the White House, in a statement regarding the Valerie Plame affair, said that "if anyone in this administration was responsible for the leaking of classified information, they would no longer work in this administration." President Bush himself said, "If there is a leak out of my administration ... the person will be taken care of."
Apparently, he didn't mean it.
Assuming that Karl Rove was indeed responsible for the leak, which the investigators will determine, his was not only an illegal act; it was an act of treason. Former President George H.W. Bush calls people who do such things "the most insidious of traitors," for whom he has "nothing but contempt and anger" (April, 1999). President Bush should make good on his word: he should revoke Rove's security clearances, fire him, and see that he is prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. But if the White House statement of July 12 that Rove "has the confidence of the president" is any indication, that won't happen."
http://www.in-forum.com/articles/index.cfm?id=98371§ion=Opinion
"In the United States Code the penalty (for treason) ranges from "shall suffer death" to "shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treason#United_States
Whether one supports it or not, we are fighting a war on terrorism. In such a time, the leak of a secret agent can endanger lives. To oust a CIA operative for temporary political advantage is not only shameful but treasonous, if we are to follow the definitions of the law.
Peace.