Perhaps. Maybe I'm thinking too hard over this one, but when you consider the wordsmithing that goes on with this White House, perhaps my theory isn't that far from the truth. It might be dead-on.
September, 2003 - Bush promises to fire "anyone involved" with the leaking of a CIA agent. Key words there....ANYONE INVOLVED.
Yes, now he's changed it so that he only has to fire someone if they're convicted. Sure, it seems like he's backpedaling away so he doesn't have to fire Rove.
But perhaps he's backpedaling so he doesn't have to do MUCH more.....
It's now been published widely that a State Department memo was onboard Air Force One that carried details of Valerie Plame. Ari Fleischer's name has been bandied about as someone who browsed the memo. So has Colin Powell.
But let's not kid ourselves. This White House was doing EVERYTHING it could to get a war started in Iraq and Joe Wilson was a HUGE thorn in their sides.
You know it and I know it. There was a meeting onboard AF1 that day and they discussed how to handle Joe Wilson's report. You can't tell me that trying to effectively counter the Niger report wasn't high priority, especially since they KNEW Wilson was the one who would prove they were lying.
EVERYONE in that meeting would be considered "involved" in the outing of Plame if it was AT ALL discussed in the aforementioned meeting.
Bush didn't move the goalposts because he was protecting Rove. He moved them because he was protecting EVERYONE.
Think about it....if he held up his "anyone involved would be fired" promise, it would go much deeper than Rove eventually. And all it would take is one songbird to emerge from that meeting, be it Fleischer or Powell or whomever. It would mean that everyone would be held under the spectre of firing.
Or maybe I'm thinking way too hard???