Bad or Worse Think about w bravely uttering that he'll fire anyone who is accused of a crime in Plamegate or Rovegate or Libbygate or Dickgate. That he's oozed away from his original proclamations that he'd fire anyone who leaked the information, regardless of legal questions, should surprise no one and illicit no real outrage - frustration and exasperation, yes, outrage, no. Bush's famous loyalty to his own magical political ride and those that have made it possible have never been doubted.
Still, there are levels of cynicism in his statement today that need remarking. First, he risks nothing in this statement; it's theater. Of course he would have to fire someone if that person(s) committed a crime. Note that he didn't say indicted, he didn't say if charges were brought against that person(s). He said committed a crime, meaning, in parse-e, that person(s) could continue on the job until convicted and, more importantly,
if that person(s) cuts a deal with the DA that does not include prosecution for a crime he need not be fired. But more important, his statement today means that after days of examining the evidence available to Bushco, Buscho has determined that in the strictest legalese no crime was committed. I've sort of thought this might be the case: for Rove to have said "Joe Wilson's wife" instead of "Valerie Plame" shows that someone had clued him into the law, and the smugness with which Bushco mouthpieces have spouted the "Rove never mentioned her by name" red herring further demonstrates this. And I have no doubt whatsoever that those above Rove who both provided the information and authorized its dissemination tried as best they could to cloak themselves in plausible deniability.
Including w, who by his statement this morning, clearly knows more, or knows someone who knows more who told him, then they will admit. That the attack against Wilson was thought out and coordinated is beyond doubt. They've examined what they did and think that it will slither past strict illegality. Who doesn't doubt that Bushco knows more than they've told Fitzgerald since they've examined not only all they told him but also all that they didn't?
Which makes today's statement by w a candidate for one of his most cynical, a crowded contest for sure. If a person(s) is convicted of a crime w can claim to have been stalwart, if a person(s) is not convicted of a crime w can join in the communal giggling on the Right. Ethics, smethics.
One More Wafer?
