http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/758/1246/1600/student%20radio%20station%20attacked.jpg LIAR PARADOX: NEO-CON, YOU GOT IT ALL WRONG

LIAR PARADOX

Whatever Bush says is a lie? That MUST be a truth!

Saturday, July 16, 2005

NEO-CON, YOU GOT IT ALL WRONG


"How many people have been in a position like Karl's?" said [Pie-In-the-Face] William Kristol, the editor of The Weekly Standard, a neoconservative magazine. The standard of proof, he said, is much higher than it would be for the average staffer, who could be dismissed just for bringing negative publicity to the administration. See: New York Times Article

No no, Kristol. You are wrong. All law students learn in their first year of law school that the more "official" your status, the higher the STANDARD of Conduct you are held to, and therefore, the LOWER THE STANDARD OF PROOF NEEDED to find that you stepped out of line.

Therefore, where an average staffer might have leaked Plame's name to the media, one would have a higher burden of proving that the average staffer had the pernicious intent to harm the CIA, whereas, Karl Rove could just leak the name in passing without even knowing that Plame's status was a covert CIA operative, and be found by the White House to have violated his nondisclosure agreement (click here to get to a PDF copy of it) and therefore should resign. Because of his high ranking status, he is held to a higher standard of conduct and therefore the burden of proving that he violated this standard is lower than if he was just an average staffer.

Why? What's the policy reason? There are many reasons. I'll give two of the most important reasons.

1. One policy reason for requiring those officials with a "higher status" to abide by a higher standard of conduct which requires a lower standard of proof, is because the higher your status the more of an EXAMPLE you are to set to those "beneath" you, in this case, "the average staffer." If Karl Rove is not found guilty of violating the law, particularly the Intelligence Identity Protection Act, then the precedent this sets is that it's ok to leak identities of covert CIA operatives, compromising our National Security.
Future violators of this statute will argue as a defense, "Hey! If Karl Rove can do it, I can do it!"

2. As has been shown, a high ranking White House official's conduct reflects poorly on the Bush Administration as a whole. Rove's poor judgment in leaking Plame's name to the press is a bad reflection on the Bush Administration and confirms what many on the left have been arguing for a long time: That George Bush should be impeached from office.

So Kristol, you have it backwards. There is a higher standard of proof for the average staffer and a lower standard of proof for Karl Rove. Rove knows what he did is wrong. In fact, Rove probably has an easier time keeping up with his ethical conduct than he does with his bad-faith, unethical conduct, seeing how in his career dating back to college, he so very rarely acts ethically.

I am sick and tired of these right wingers spewing to the media misinformation about legal analyses of this whole Rove scandal. What REALLY IRKS ME is that the media laps up whatever these right wingers say and takes it as gospel without questioning them one bit!

Haven't they learned yet that the right wing neocons are nothing but a bunch of scheming, devious LIARS!?!

They are WRONG about the Intelligence Identity Protection Act, when they say that Rove had to "know" that Plame was covert in order for Rove to be guilty of violating the Act; and Kristol is wrong about the standard of proof for Rove. I am guessing he is talking about the standard of proof to the public or the Bush Administration, because the only standard of proof for criminal trials is "Beyond a Reasonable Doubt."

RIDICULOUS NEO-CON QUOTE OF THE DAY:
Neo-con pioneer Irving Kristol, father of William Kristol:
"The notion that there should be one set of truths available to everyone is a modern democratic fallacy. It doesn't work."


BUSH ADMIN'S PLAN THAT ROVE SCANDAL WILL BLOW OVER:

How convenient for the Bush Administration that Iraq has brought its first charges against Saddam Hussein today while Bush insiders are on the hot seat.

Well if they think that this is going to divert us from getting to the bottom of the Plame leak, they have another think coming.

I say, let the Iraqis worry about their own war criminals and we will worry about ours!

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home