Originally Posted by The12thMan";p=&quot

Nearly two years ago, Bush said those responsible would be held accountable. "If there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is and if the person has violated the law, the person will be taken care of," he said in September 2003.

Originally Posted by amepro";p=&quot

First Bush said: "If the peron has violated the law"

Then Bush said: "leaked information that exposed the identity"

Now Bush says: "committed a crime"

It is hypocritical to have one standard for someone like Kerry and another for Bush.

Originally Posted by BroncoBilly";p=&quot

See this is what lying does to politics, it twists and adds the context to any sentence. Getting to the facts is not your intent amepro. You find a word like "involved" which in the context of a sentence, it can be very subjective.

2 a : to engage as a participant <workers involved in building a house> b : to oblige to take part <right of Congress to involve the nation in war> c : to occupy (as oneself) absorbingly; especially : to commit (as oneself) emotionally <was involved with a married man>

Ask yourself about the exact wording of the Rove comment, was it casual or committed and absorbed? This is where you pound an absolutely pointless point. Then you go and post from other news services that again like to embellish context like the post above, and what do you have?
LIARS
I guess that is the black and white you are looking for. Anyway read exactly what Bush said and see if you can twist every syllable.

Proving intent will determine who the liars are, because the intent is the noun that will also determine whether it was a casual or committed involvement.

We shall see what is to unfold in the investigation.

Monday, July 18, 2005 10:43 p.m. EDT

Press Fudges Bush Plamegate Pledge

The press is claiming that President Bush has changed his pledge to fire anyone in his administration involved in leaking Valerie Plame's name - saying he's now added the qualifier, "If someone committed a crime."

But that's exactly what Bush said when he was first asked about the Plame case on Sept. 30, 2003. "If there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is," the president told reporters back then. "And if the person has violated law, the person will be taken care of."

Dozens of news organizations quoted Bush's Sept. 2003 proviso, "if the person has violated law", including USA Today, the New York Times, the Washington Post, NBC, CBS, Fox and CNN.

On Monday, Bush made it clear his position hadn't changed one bit. Asked about the Plame case, he explained: "If someone committed a crime, they will no longer work in my administration."

Still, that didn't stop the Associated Press from charging: "On Monday, however,[Bush] added the qualifier that it would have be shown that a crime was committed."

The AP cited a June 10, 2004, news conference, where according to the wire service, a reporter simply asked if Bush stood by his earlier pledge to fire anyone found to have leaked Plame's name. Bush answered, "Yes. And that's up to the U.S. attorney to find the facts."

But the full June 10, 2004 exchange was somewhat more complicated:

REPORTER: Given recent developments in the CIA leak case, particularly Vice President Cheney's discussions with the investigators, do you still stand by what you said several months ago, suggesting that it might be difficult to identify anybody who leak the agent's name? And do you stand by your pledge to fire anyone found to have done so?

BUSH: Yes. And that's up to the U.S. attorney to find the facts. [End of Excerpt]

Any honest reading of that exchange would acknowledge that when Bush answered, "Yes" - he meant he was standing by his earlier statement, not the reporter's distorted version: "Do you stand by your pledge to fire anyone found to have done so?"

Bush hadn't offered any such pledge.

But what he had said several months previous was that if the leaker had "violated the law," he'd be "taken care of."

Originally Posted by BroncoBilly";p=&quot

..."do you stand by your pledge"? Please post where Bush made a pledge. He made a comment not a pledge, but then again it is pretty easy to twist words isn't it.
We will see where this will unfold, and I can bet that Bush will keep his word about dealing with anyone involved criminally.
Whoops, the word dealing, now that has a broad concept, heh amepro? It has so many different meanings, let's dissect them shall we?

Originally Posted by catzmeow";p=&quot

Try to read it, Amepro...I know it's hard to get out of San Fran and it's unbiased coverage of world events, but try.

What the media hasn't told you about Plame's "outing"....

http://www.nationalreview.com/mccart...0507180801.asp