October 30, 2005
WASHINGTON – Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid said Sunday that President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney should apologize for the actions of their aides in the CIA leak case.Reid, D-Nev., also said Bush should pledge not to pardon any aides convicted as a result of the investigation into the disclosure of CIA officer Valerie Plame’s identity.
“There has not been an apology to the American people for this obvious problem in the White House,” Reid said. He said Bush and Cheney “should come clean with the American public.”
Reid added, “This has gotten way out of hand, and the American people deserve better than this.”
Uh oh, the MINORITY leader in the Senate says Bush should apologize, I guess that means he better do it.
Danny Carlton—alias "Jack Lewis" linked with Is Harry Reid really that stupid, or does he just think everyone else is?
The Deconstructor linked with Democrats Opine
Generation Why? linked with So Much for that "Innocent Until Proven Guilty" St
Don Surber linked with They Wanted A Hog, But Got A Scooter
16 Responses to “Idiot of the Day: Harry Reid Demands Bush Apology”
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Register to comment here.
1:25 pm [ Quote ]
Bush should do it! He should say, “I apologize for setting up a special prosecutor. This is entirely my fault, since even if Scooter is guilty as charged, no laws were broken until after I did that.”
2:11 pm [ Quote ]
They Wanted A Hog, But Got A Scooter
UPDATE: Political Teen on Reid’s demand for a Bush apology: “Uh oh, the MINORITY leader in the Senate says Bush should apologize, I guess that means he better do it.”
3:08 pm [ Quote ]
I agree with Kevin, if anything there should be an apology to the taxpayers for wasting their money on this irrelevant investigation.
3:19 pm [ Quote ]
Wow, you called him an idiot! That’s a cogent political argument right there
Hey, anybody else remember when Bush said the following?:
Bush promises high ethical standards
United Press International
Jan. 23, 2001
WASHINGTON (UPI) – President Bush witnessed the swearing-in of his White House staff Monday and said he expected them to avoid even the appearance of impropriety and to conduct themselves with humility and civility at all times.
Bush warned that he expected his White House staff to meet the highest ethical standards, avoiding not only violations of law, but even the appearance of impropriety.
“We must remember the high standards that come with high office,” he said. “This begins [with] careful adherence with the rules. I expect every member of this administration to stay well within the boundaries [that] define legal and ethical conduct.
“No one in the White House should be afraid to confront the people they work for over ethical concerns, and no one should hesitate to confront me as well.”
Bush told his staff that he sees civility as a central part of the required behavior of White House staff. “There is no excuse for arrogance and never a reason for disrespect toward others,” he said. “I expect each of you to be an example of humility and decency and fairness.”
Merely escaping indictment isn’t exactly the same standard of behavior he promised, is it? But I guess at the Waffle…erm, White House, anything goes just so long as there’s a Republican to protect. This goes far beyond the appearance of impropriety, doesn’t it? Or do Republicans have a “Non-Clinton presidency” set of standards they’re adhering to lately?
4:16 pm [ Quote ]
I’m sure just as soon as the right apologizes for spending 70 million dollars and 7 years pursuing Bill Clinton, you can expect an apology for this investigation which, by the way has cost to this point less than 1 million dollars(around 750,000). At least you’re consistent…
7:43 pm [ Quote ]
But Clinton actually committed crimes…
7:48 pm [ Quote ]
So Much for that “Innocent Until Proven Guilty” St
Aren’t these the same liberals that first laughed, then questioned the timing of the report of a former National Security Advisor stealing and destroying documents that could shed light on negligence of an administration in protecting the country fro…
8:33 pm [ Quote ]
Democrats Opine
Reid wants Rove gone, as well as an apology from Bush and Cheney over the “leak” that revealed the identity of Valerie Plame.
10:49 pm [ Quote ]
Clinton committed crimes? What was Clinton ever indicted for and found guilty of? I eagerly await your answer.
This is really a great blog. As though calling someone an “idiot’ is punditry. Bush vowed to find whoever leaked the information about Plame, whether it was a crime or not, and throw them out. Cheney was certainly aware of who did the leaking, so he owes us an apology if not a resignation. Calling for Rove to resign is appropriate; Rove was closely involved in what Bush himself called “a very serious crime.” He may not have been indicted (yet) but his association with such underhanded, contemptible behavior calls into question his integrity and judgment. Is this the best we can expect from our leaders?
10:52 pm [ Quote ]
Oh, and here’s what conservative John Cole wrote about the same article. Guess he’s a “jerk” as well. Be careful in tossing out the ad hominems. It’s a sign of immaturity and amateurishness.—————————————-
Couple of quick things. First, I agree completely that Bush should apologize. At the very least, WH staffers were ‘involved’ in something Bush claimed they were not, whether that be because Bush himself thought it would blow over, or Rove and Libby lied to Bush. Either way, an apology is necessary, if for no other reason than the hundreds of hours of McClellan press conferences in which denials were issued repeatedly.
Two, I am of mixed minds on a Rove resignation. I don’t necessarily agree with the opposition party getting to decide who works for the President. I also don’t believe Rove in the White House is a good thing, and I don’t know if I want him there anymore. From what I can tell, the WH has been rudderless for a while now, so a shake-up might get rid of some of the rot and provide some new blood and focus. Don’t count on it though, as Bush sees no need for changes.
Third, Sen. Reid is out of line with the bit about pledging not to pardon. The pardon is an executive privilege, and it is really none of Reid’s business whether or not Bush exercises that privilege. If Reid wants to make sure that Presidents do not have the right to pardon their staffers, he knows what he can do- write an Amendment to the constitution forbidding it. I don’t think he really cares whether Libby is pardoned or not (should Libby be convicted), and he is just making political hay, but he shouldn’t really try to decide how the President uses his power.
At any rate, I really do feel an apology is necessary, if for no other reasons than purely political.
11:51 pm [ Quote ]
Actually lying under oath, as opposed to “forgetting the order of the reporters he spoke with”. Convincing Monica to file a false affidavit. Coercing Hillary into destroying files in a successful attempt to obstruct justice. Selling defense secrets to the Communist Chinese government. Accepted numerous bribes from various individuals and corporations. He violated Arkansas campaign finance reform law, but wasn’t indicted for it as Tom DeLay recently was. Money laundering, drug trafficking, etc. Not to mention all of the strange deaths of people who got in the Clintons’ way; some of which are conspiratorial, but several of which are disconcerting to say the least.
Of course he wasn’t convicted of anything; he’s a Democrat. So naturally he never committed any crimes…
12:35 am [ Quote ]
Ah yes, the “Clinton Body Count.” And of course, no Democrats ever get indicted and are never found guilty of anything. First of all, that’s complete nonsense. but let’s pretend for a moment that you know what you’re talking about (a huge leap of imagination, I admite). If it were true no Dems were indicted or found guilty, why would that be? The only logical answer to this fantastical statement is that they are more honest. After all, many if not most of the law enforcers are conservative and most of the lawmakers are Republicans, as are a significant number of the judges.
So you believe Libby is being indicted only for forgetting what he told reporters? Did you read the indictment? Did you see how he concocted a false story and repeated it multiple times to different reporters, and lied under oath multiple times about it? You know the clichee – Clinton lied about a blow job. And it’s true. Libby lied about something much more sinister, and with implications for our decision to go to war in Iraq. Any lie is bad (although all of us lie on occasion), and under oath is lie is unaceptable. Clinton got severely slammed for it, but the Congress realized it wasn’t enough to merit impeachment – it was a victimless “lie” and no one cared. In Libby’s case, there are grave consequences, and it reveals a web of deception and gameplaying. But we don;t have to argue this now; just wait until the trial when they call Dick Cheney and others to the stand. let’s see how the Bush house of cards collapses. And all because he’s a Republican and not a Democrat! Brilliant.
2:31 am [ Quote ]
pholubz,
do you honestly believe that Libby was only indicted for “forgetting the order of the reporters he spoke with”? If you do, then I urge you, read the indictement again, read what Fitzgerald said at the press conference. There is much more to it than that.
6:23 am [ Quote ]
Is Harry Reid really that stupid, or does he just think everyone else is?
From the Associated Press… President Bush would be making a mistake if he were to nominate a hard-line conservative to…
3:05 pm [ Quote ]
Bunny, are you mixed up on your presidents or are you making a comparison between Nixon and Reagan?
1:16 am [ Quote ]
reid and pelosi should not be impreached but arrested for slander, defamation of character, and stupidity, not to mention treason. It is still legal to arrest people who break the law, especially if their sole objective is to regain power by breaking the law they pretend to pretend to support