More from the White House conspiracy that isn’t there
The cover up, dirty laundry, and [insert Watergate pun here] is kind of made up:
President Bush demanded his staff meet a Tuesday deadline to turn over documents for the Justice Department’s investigation into who leaked the identity of an undercover CIA officer.
He said he hoped the probe would send a clear message to administration officials that other leaks must stop.
“I’d like to know who leaked,” Bush said on Monday after meeting with the president of Kenya.
“I have told my staff, I want full cooperation with the Justice Department. And when they ask for information, we expect the information to be delivered on a timely basis. I expect it to be delivered on a timely basis,” he added.
The demand came as about 2,000 White House employees scrambled to meet Tuesday’s 5 p.m. deadline to hand-deliver documents for the department’s investigation into who disclosed the identity of a CIA officer whose husband had challenged Bush’s claims about Iraq’s weapons threat.
So, it’s unreasonable to have your lawyers peruse documents that you’re turning over to law enforcement authorities? I think not.
Via AlphaPatriot. Good thing it doesn’t involve a game of grab-ass or oral sex.
October 7th, 2003 at 1:33 pm
Uncle, you should know better.
These documents should be going to the Justice Department at the same time. This is simply a way for the White House to stall and plan a cover-up. And more to the point, Bush lied about where those documents were going. He clearly said that they would be turned over to the Justice Department at 5pm on tuesday, not to White House Council, and certianly not two weeks down the road.
October 7th, 2003 at 1:41 pm
The documents must also be reviewed for national security or executive privilege concerns and to ensure the filings are responsive to Justice Department requests for information, White House aides said.
Seems to be pretty standard operating procedure to me.
And the deadline was self
imposed anyway.
October 7th, 2003 at 4:25 pm
And what it emans is that the White House is not acting as asomeone investigating to find out who did the leak, they are mounting a legal defense – whihc, of course, they are entitled to do. but the only reason NOT to turn over the documents is to see what they contain so the President can mamage the damage, or submarine them. Period.
And, no, actually, in a case like this, there would be a hard and fast deadline and it would just be long enough to gather, not peruse, the documents.
October 7th, 2003 at 4:30 pm
And what it emans is that the White House is not acting as asomeone investigating to find out who did the leak, they are mounting a legal defense
I’m afraid that’s a claim you have to prove. Bush has been open about this issue and has stated that the culprit should face criminal action.
Granted, as more info comes to light, it could indicate a cover up. But as of now, it doesn’t seem to be.
October 7th, 2003 at 5:15 pm
I find in cases like these, it’s instructive to swap all the D’s and R’s and see if the story would read any differently. It seems to me that something smells rotten, regardless of which way the D’s and R’s are arranged.
October 7th, 2003 at 5:25 pm
I say forget about the Ds and Rs, compare the actions of the sitting president to the ones whose faces are on our money. Perhaps I am not well informed enough on my history (although I try), but I just can’t imagine those guys not getting to the bottom of something like this between breakfast and lunch.
October 7th, 2003 at 5:54 pm
Well, etc, those guys weren’t quite that saintly, but they did have an established history of putting what’s good for the country ahead of what’s good for them personally. I haven’t seen a single example of that from our current pres.
October 7th, 2003 at 6:02 pm
I don’t focus on Ds and Rs because they are almost equally contemptable. The Ds being slightly more so in some areas and th Rs being slightly more in others.
October 7th, 2003 at 7:31 pm
That’s a copout, Uncle. You’ll find that there are a lot of contemptible people in politics regardless of D, R, L, I, G, or whatever other letter you might put in front of it. And again, you’re painting with broad brushes that don’t necessarily apply. Herb Kohl > Trafficant, even if they both have a “D.” Elizabeth Dole > Trent Lott, even if they both have an “R.”
And regardless of your assessment that they’re “equally contemptible,” your blog tends to lean decidedly to the right. We lean left, but we admit it. 😉
October 7th, 2003 at 8:16 pm
That’s a copout, Uncle.
Not at all. Both major parties don’t fit my ideals.
You’ll find that there are a lot of contemptible people in politics regardless of D, R, L, I, G, or whatever other letter you might put in front of it.
Yup! BUt i’d rather see more L, I, and G doing well 🙂
And i admit fully that i lean to the right. But the new republicans are about as far right as carter era democrats.
October 8th, 2003 at 12:50 am
The Gweilo Diaries has an excellent post on this subject. (Completely non-partisan)