It's enough to make you recall the multiplicity of Bush stories about why we invaded Iraq.
Yesterday Bush said:
"[I]f someone committed a crime, they will no longer work in my administration."
Bush meant to add, "Unless that someone is my brain. Obviously, I can't fire my brain, that would be a lobotomy."
Bush's new position is that it matters not that Rove has been identified by Cooper as the leaker, all that matters is the day that Rove is indicted and convicted of a crime. At the rate our justice system moves, Bush should be safely back in Texas if Rove is, in fact, indicted and convicted. (Visualize leg shackles)
In 2004, Bush said he would fire the person who leaked the identity of the CIA operative.
In 2003, White House spokesperson Scott McClellan said:
"If anyone in this administration was involved in [the leak], they would no longer be in this administration."
Just like the Bush rationale for invading Iraq, the rationale for firing a high placed official who has jeopardized national security changes according to how much the public knows.
Bill Diamond at Huffington Post notes a few other stipulations that Bush meant to add:
"In order for the firing to take place, Bush said it would need to be shown that an actual crime had taken place and that the act had been perpetrated while the leaker was hopping on one foot, simultaneously patting his head and rubbing his belly, and while he (or she) was listening to an iPod (specifically the special 20 gb U2 version and not the less expensive Mini or Shuffle models). The President went on to stipulate that the illegal act must have been committed on either a Monday or a Wednesday, unless the day in question fell during a week containing a national holiday, in which case the applicable days would switch to Tuesday or Thursday.
It could not be confirmed at press time whether Secretary's Day, Flag Day or the festival of Lag B'Omer would apply."
Tags: Karl Rove
