Cross posted from The 10,000 Things:
There are some very basic rules of logic that ought to be applied to Karl Rove’s current employment status.
First, for Mr. Rove himself there are two options:
- Rove is guilty of outing an undercover CIA agent
- Rove is not guilty of outing an undercover CIA agent
Second, Karl Rove is employed as the Deputy Chief of Staff in the Office of the President of the United States of America. I do not know what his security clearance is but it is safe to assume that it is fairly high and that he has a great deal of access to highly classified information.
Third, for President Bush there are three options:
- Bush knows that Rove is guilty
- Bush knows that Rove is not guilty
- Bush does not know whether Rove is guilty or not
Fourth… the If-Then construct…
If President Bush knows for a fact that Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove is guilty then it is obvious that Rove must be fired immediately, security clearances revoked, documents and computers confiscated, and all pertinent information handed over to Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald and the police.
If President Bush knows for a fact that Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove is not guilty then the pertinent facts ought to be shared with Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald and both Mr. Fitzgerald and Mr. Bush ought to be able to state categorically that Mr. Rove is not guilty and the pertinent facts will be revealed at the appropriate time.
If President Bush does not know for certain whether Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove is guilty or not then it is President Bush’s duty and obligation in defense of the United States of America to place Mr. Rove on temporary leave from all of his duties, revoke all security access, confiscate all documents and computers that might contain classified information Mr. Rove would have normal access to until such time as Mr. Rove’s guilt or innocence can be determined.
There are no other choices.
The Summary:
Mr. Rove is guilty, not guilty, or it is not known.
I assume that if Mr. Bush knew that Mr. Rove had knowingly and willfully compromised the security of the United States of America that he would already have acted accordingly, fired Mr. Rove, and requested that charges be brought up against him.
To not do so would make President Bush complicit in Mr. Rove’s actions.
Likewise I assume that if Mr. Bush had proof that Mr. Rove is innocent of all charges that he already has gladly come to the defense of one of his most trusted friends and aides, shared that proof with the prosecutor, and that both the Mr. Fitzgerald and Mr. Bush can publicly declare Mr. Rove’s innocence.
To not do so would make President Bush a disloyal man.
Since neither of these of occurred then it must be assumed that it is not known whether or not Karl Rove is guilty or not.
President Bush therefore has no choice… no choice… but to defend the United States of America against a potential enemy within and place Mr. Rove on temporary leave of absence.
To not do so would make Mr. Bush negligent in his duties as President and show willful disregard for the security of the United States of America.
The question:
Which is it Mr. President? There are only three choices. Which is it?
Thanks for the analysis – if only we were functioning logically!
Just trying to help them along. I know Mr. Bush has problems with multiple choice questions.
Too many people involved to focus on one. State, Defense, NSC, and WH advisors and counsellors were all there. Bolton was at State when the VP asked for verification of the yellocake story, and virtually all of the players had security clearances. Who had the ball? Who dropped it?
Gonzales’ memos (3) requiring staff to submit all documentation requested by the Special Prosecutor resulted in volumes of data, so far requiring two years of investigation to sort through.
Nice exercise for a dead-news summer, but I think I’ll wait for Fitzgerald’s indictments.
Certainly in the long term this story and it’s eventual outcome are larger then just Karl Rove.
The point is that at this particular moment there are three possible scenarios and these are Mr. Bush’s three, six, possible answers.
1a. Rove is guilty and Bush is equally guilty by knowingly covering for him.
1b. Rove is guilty and Bush knowing this, fires him.
2a. Rove is innocent and Bush knowing this is disloyal by not divulging this to the prosecutor and public.
2b. Rove is innocent and Bush knowing this proves it to the rest of us.
3a. Bush doesn’t know if Rove is guilty or not and Bush is negligent in his duties by not removing a suspected traitor from his administration and revoking his access to sensitive and classified information.
3b. Bush doesn’t know if Rove is guilty or not and therefore performs his duties as defender of the nation by requiring Rove to temporarily step down until such time as he is proven innocent or guilty.
At the moment, given the current statements and actions, option 3a is the operative one which means that Mr. Bush is negligent in his duties and obligations to the nation by not removing a potential high security risk from his government.
My question is simply: guilty of what, exactly? Like I said on another thread, there are too many players in this game, and no indictments issued. The left runs a serious risk of blowback by emphasizing Karl Rove to the exclusion of the rest of the people in the WH.
Boomerangs hurt when they come back and hit you on the head. First indict, then unite. <grin>
The legal question will be settled once Fitzgerald finishes his investigation, issues indictments and trials ensue. That is not part of the equation here.
For the purpose of the decision making process Bush faces today it doesn’t matter what exact charge is eventually levied. The question is whether knows if Rove is guilty or not. If he doesn’t know for sure then he has no choice but to place Rove on temporary leave of absence or be guilty himself of negligence.
The legal question will be settled once Fitzgerald finishes his investigation, issues indictments and trials ensue.
What I’ve been saying all along, and above. And in my view, that is exactly the equation. The rest is politics and bullshit.
There we disagree. The rest is not politics and bullshit. If the guy is seriously suspected of treason or anything remotely close to it then he has business working in the White House. That’s no bullshit and it’s negligent for the administration to wait.