7/19    Rove _should_ be punished even if he is legally found innocent,
        because what he did was unethical, foolish, and dangerous.  If he
        didn't know better, he should have.  Bush came into office saying
        he would restore integrity.  He has an opportunity to do this by
        firing Rove.  He hasn't.  He's backed further and further from his
        "I will fire anyone involved" because he knows it was a definitive
        statement.  He's hoping for people not to notice.
        This is on par with the house eviscerating its ethics committee and
        rescinding the "get indicted, lose your leadership position" rules.
        Once upon a time the bar was "appearance of impropriety" but that's
        apparently too hard these days.
        In short, as soon as his lawyer said "by the way, yeah he did tell
        her name to these guys" his desk should have been packed and his
        WH badge pulled.  Anything less is pure hypocrisy. --scotsman
        \_ well said. -nivra
        \_ Ok, I haven't been following this very carefully, does someone want
           to summarize what was found for me? -- ilyas
           \_ I'm speaking to the thread below.  All this discussion is moot
              until Fitzgerald reports.  But the WH's statements that "anyone
              involved would be fired" should have been honored.
        \_ What if Rove was actually innocent (in the ethical sense as well as
           the legal sense)?  How do we decide if he were ethically innocent?
           \_ I'm tempted to say "doesn't matter".  The president said he
              would fire him.  He hasn't.  If Rove was ethically pure, then
              in terms of being entrusted with any sort of security clearance
              he was utterly incompetent.  I don't know which is worse.
              Actually, strike all of the above.  Do you know just how FUCKING
              STUPID you sound?
              \_ Why?  Because I'm still waiting for all the evidence to come
                 out before I pass judgement?
        \_ unethical how?  If he didn't know she was covert (or she wasn't even
           covert)  how is that unethical?
           foolish how?
           dangerous how?
           \_ eg. "I come across the information that X works at the CIA. Prior
              to revealing this information, it might behoove me to check _if_
              X's status is sensitive information."  The Jun 10 memo shows that
              Plame's status was sensitive.  Given your conditional, Rove
              apparently had been too _foolish_ to check.  This type of
              foolishness from an official privy to sensitive information is
              dangerous.
              \_ Oh give me a fucking break.  It's dangerous for the president
                 of the United States to lie under oath.  Why weren't you
                 calling for Clinton's head? -- ilyas
                 \_ Actually, I didn't support Clinton over the perjury charge.
                    I presume you or the op were calling for Clinton's head.
                    If so, why aren't you calling for Rove's head?  Revealing
                    the status of non official cover CIA assets is at least
                    as dangerous as the Clenis.
                 \_ The above wasn't me, but for me it's the same reason that
                    R's joined D's in voting not to remove him: because the
                    case brought wasn't weighty enough to warrant his removal.
                    (Okay, yes it's silly for me to suggest i know the
                    senators' reasoning) --scotsman
                    \_ So let me get this straight.  If Rove didn't do anything
                       legally wrong, he should still resign because he did
                       something 'unethical.'  Clinton, on the other hand,
                       despite not getting nailed on legal grounds, should
                       nevertheless have stayed despite doin something
                       clearly 'unethical.'
                       \_ No, Ilya.  Rove should resign or be fired because
                          the President said that's what would happen.  Clinton
                          isn't President right now, btw.
                          \_ I don't know how you managed to shout over my
                             response without waiting for me to finish,
                             _ON THE FUCKING MOTD_ but you did it.  Thanks for
                             pointing out Clinton isn't president now.  I rely
                             on hard working folks like you to keep me up to date
                             on world events.  You started your first post
                             talking about Rove doing something unethical and
                             foolish.  If you want to rag on Bush for not
                             following through on what you think Bush said,
                             that's fine, but if you want to rag on _Rove_, you
                             will have to explain why leaving Billy alone with
                             his foolishness and lack of ethics was ok. -- ilyas
                             \_ heh. you saved half your response (ending at
                                the second sentence), which Ben responded to
                                while you were constructing your last sentence.
                                He had no idea you were formulating a 3rd
                                sentence. -nivra
           \_ The purpose for his revealing this information to
              the public is to discredit a 3rd party, and advance an agenda.
              That is unethical.
              \_ Not necessarily.  Wilson still insists that his wife had
                 nothing to do with getting the trip, when she was the one who
                 recommended him.  Wilson looks pretty dirty to me.
                 \_ Every time you bring this up it sounds dumber and dumber.
                    You're FUD slinging.  Wilson has been a diplomat for
                    us for decades, has served in Iraq and African countries.
                    It doesn't matter that his wife may have recommended him.
                    You're asking us to believe that he and his wife, along
                    with the CIA, conspired to get sent over there just so he
                    could prove Bush wrong a couple years down the line.  You
                    need help.
                    \_ No, that's not what I'm saying.  I'm saying that Rove
                       was trying to discredit Wilson.  I don't think that Rove
                       offered a compelling reason ("don't believe him, he just
                       got the job because his wife recommended him").  And yet
                       he denies that she recommended him, even though the
                       Senate intelligence committee has a memo in her
                       handwriting recommending him.
                       \_ And to discredit him, he simply _had_ to reveal
                          a CIA agent's identity...
                       \_ danh's link says that this memo was a formality and
                          CIA folks are pretty pissed this memo is being
                          twisted.  Anyways, go back to what the other guy was
                          saying about it not mattering even if Plame
                          recommended Wilson.