Libby also testified that an administration lawyer told him that Bush, by authorizing the disclosure of classified information, had in effect declassified the information. Legal experts disagree on whether the president has the authority to declassify information on his own.

"If there's a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is."

"If the person has violated law, that person will be taken care of."

"I welcome the investigation. I am absolutely confident the Justice Department will do a good job."

"I want to know the truth. Leaks of classified information are bad things."

And, so far, not a Bush defender anywhere near this thread.

"Declassification authority" means: (1) the official who authorized the original classification, if that official is still serving in the same position; (2) the originators current successor in function; (3) a supervisory official of either; or (4) officials delegated declassification authority in writing by the agency head or the senior agency official.

"The President has set high standards, the highest of standards for people in his administration. He's made it very clear to people in his administration that he expects them to adhere to the highest standards of conduct. If anyone in this administration was involved in it, they would no longer be in this administration." [White House Briefing, 9/29/03]

"You know, there's a lot of leaking in Washington, DC. It's a town famous for it. And if this helps stop leaks, this investigation in finding the truth, it'll not only hold someone to account who should not have leaked -- and this is a serious charge, by the way. We're talking about a criminal action. But also hopefully we'll help send a clear signal we expect other leaks to stop as well. And so I look forward to finding the truth." [Bush, 10/06/03]

high crimes and misdemeanors - whatever that means.

It's probably reasonable that the president can declassify whatever he wants, or at least I haven't really seen an especially strong argument to the contrary, but that doesn't mean that the president can declassify stuff, show it to Judy Miller, and then turn around claim the stuff is still classified. That's where this argument falls apart.

The court papers from the prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, do not suggest that Mr. Bush violated any law or rule.

MORE: Either Andrew Sullivan can't read, or he can't write:

Bush Nailed We have a missing link. No, I don't mean the post-fish. I mean the Bush connection in the Plame leak. It turns out that, according to Libby, it was the president who first sanctioned the leak of the NIE data to discredit Joseph Wilson. Money quote: ..."Defendant testified that the vice president later advised him that the president had authorized defendant to disclose the relevant portions of the NIE," the prosecution filing said.

Emphasis added to what will surely become the rave-up lefty talking point. However, as Mr. Gerstein noted, and as the excerpt printed by Mr. Sullivan makes clear, we *don't know* what Cheney and Bush discussed before Bush authorized the partial disclosure of the NIE. President Bush may have been vitally interested specifically in discrediting Joe Wilson (and rebutting one's critics is not a crime); he may not have heard that name, and simply authorized the disclosure to help with the White House side of the press coverage. That said, Bush's involvement preceded the July 8 meeting with Judy Miller, (p. 19/20 of .pdf), which is not great news. So, was "Bush Nailed" for helping with a White House PR pushback? I'll bet he gets involved with White House message management pretty regularly

et al - Maybe you should consider this:

The court papers from the prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, do not suggest that Mr. Bush violated any law or rule.

I disagree vehemently about this being an impeachable offense. The president (possibly even the VP) can classify and de-classify at whim. If the president chooses to use a classified piece of information in a speech, it immediately becomes unclassified. The agency involved traditionally has input the final say is the president's and the president's alone. And I agree about new leadership--there is a definate need. Thankfully we have elections every 4 years in the country that give the people the choice to pick whom they would like to lead them.

3) a supervisory official of either; or

The leaking of both the NIE info and Plame's identity were federal crimes

You guys are chasing your tails. Enjoy the run, but you still wind up in the same spot.

You guys are chasing your tails. Enjoy the run, but you still wind up in the same spot.

Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales suggested on Thursday for the first time that the president might have the legal authority to order wiretapping without a warrant on communications between Americans that occur exclusively within the United States.

On the plus side, Bush never made the Naked Gun movies seem kinda creepy.

as I have commented time and again, that is sad because we have some deep problems in this country that can not be addressed due to your actions so completely turning off many people to these problems.

Said another way, your actions have made "Liberal" a dirty word to many people

All he wants is a response. Of any kind...

The trouble, as in our concious moments we all know, is that we are terrifyingly ignorant. The most learned of us are ignorant.

outlandish national defense posture of the Left outrages people.

Overall, the poll results indicate only 30% of the public approves of the Republican Congress and by a huge 49-33 margin, voters now want Democrats to control Congress. According to GOP pollster Tony Fabrizio, "These numbers are scary. We´ve lost every advantage we´ve ever had.

A White House spokesperson, who wished to remain anonymous, expressed that the administration anticipated a slow news day on Friday, and had confidence that the issue would dissolve over the weekend by the time the Sunday morning news shows had concluded. "President Bush is relieved to be free of the burden of the deception that he has had to maintain for a number of years for national security reasons," said the spokesperson. "While the loss of Mrs. Plame's undercover status is regrettable, the president is unapologetic about his decision to sacrifice her... this is what great leaders must be able to do without hesitation."

Cymro, Edger, et al - It has been my observation that you don't want a debate, what you want is an echo chamber. That is typical of people with weak positions. And, as I have commented time and again, that is sad because we have some deep problems in this country that can not be addressed due to your actions so completely turning off many people to these problems.

Jondee - Thanks for making my point. I mean, where do you think the clones come from?

President Bush's approval ratings hit a series of new lows in an AP-Ipsos poll that also shows Republicans surrendering their advantage on national security -- grim election-year news for a party struggling to stay in power. ... As bad as Bush's numbers may be, Congress' are worse. Just 30 percent of the public approves of the GOP-led Congress' job performance, and Republicans seem to be shouldering the blame. "These numbers are scary. We've lost every advantage we've ever had," GOP pollster Tony Fabrizio said. "The good news is Democrats don't have much of a plan. The bad news is they may not need one."

From a political perspective, separate from the illegality, there is the hypocrisy: The Bush Administration has prosecuted and sent to jail officials who leaked far less serious information - as I discussed in detail in a prior column. It is actively, and currently, threatening to prosecute others who have leaked information about the president's illegal electronic surveillance of Americans.

Why do I keep thinking of the St Louis Browns when I see your name?