Specter Calls For Explanation; Bush Confirmed As "Leaker"
Monday April 10, 2006
The New York Times reports that a White House official (unnamed, of course) has confirmed that President Bush declassified parts of the National Intelligence Estimate in June 2003 to counter critics but denies that this information was authorized to share with reporters. Yet a January 2003 National Intelligence Council memo which has just come to light "was unequivocal: The Niger story was baseless and should be laid to rest."
Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter continues to distance himself from the White House. This time, the Judiciary Committee chair insists that Bush and Cheney should explain what was leaked and why, calling for a "detailed explanation."
While some editorial boards have reacted with dismay to the news of classified information being bandied about for political gain, the Washington Post calls it a "A Good Leak." There is no concern about motive, only a note that the effort was "clumsily" handled, making the President "look foolish."
One of the more striking points of the WaPo editorial was the assertion that this entire affair was business-as-usual:
And as Firedog Lake notes -- that mischaracterizes the Scooter Libby testimony. "[U]nique in his recollection" was one characterization ... "the only time he recalled in his government experience when he disclosed a document to a reporter that was effectively declassified by virtue of the President’s authorization that it be declassified" was another.
I'm not going to argue that declassifying the NIE was a bad move. It wasn't. But when documents are declassified, they should be available in toto to anyone who wants them -- not doled out in misleading bits and pieces to pet reporters.
Six Month After Intel Just Said "No"
Not only that, the op-ed ignores info from its own reporters. The information "leaked" had been discredited before it was used to try to discredit Joseph Wilson's commentary in the NY Times: (emphasis added)
Woodward Confirmed As First Choice
In other matters relating to the Valerie Plame affair, public filings last week confirm that the first reporter Scooter Libby tried to entice with these tidbits to counter Joseph Wilson was none other than Bob Woodward. Woodward, who described the prosecutor as a "junkyard dog." Woodward, the reporter who said this was not a smear campaign (October 2005, CNN).
When Woodward didn't rise to the bait, Libby turned to the New York Times and Judith Miller. Both writers had been willing vehicles for Adminstration messages: Miller on the build up to the Iraq conflict and Woodward for his precious books.
Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter continues to distance himself from the White House. This time, the Judiciary Committee chair insists that Bush and Cheney should explain what was leaked and why, calling for a "detailed explanation."
While some editorial boards have reacted with dismay to the news of classified information being bandied about for political gain, the Washington Post calls it a "A Good Leak." There is no concern about motive, only a note that the effort was "clumsily" handled, making the President "look foolish."
One of the more striking points of the WaPo editorial was the assertion that this entire affair was business-as-usual:
Rather than follow the usual declassification procedures and then invite reporters to a briefing — as the White House eventually did — Vice President Cheney initially chose to be secretive, ordering his chief of staff at the time, I. Lewis Libby, to leak the information to a favorite New York Times reporter. The full public disclosure followed 10 days later. There was nothing illegal or even particularly unusual about that ...The editorial exhibits a degree of Alzheimer's disease: the first reporter to be leaked this information was none other than the WaPo's own Bob Woodward. Miller came second, when Bob didn't bite.
And as Firedog Lake notes -- that mischaracterizes the Scooter Libby testimony. "[U]nique in his recollection" was one characterization ... "the only time he recalled in his government experience when he disclosed a document to a reporter that was effectively declassified by virtue of the President’s authorization that it be declassified" was another.
I'm not going to argue that declassifying the NIE was a bad move. It wasn't. But when documents are declassified, they should be available in toto to anyone who wants them -- not doled out in misleading bits and pieces to pet reporters.
Six Month After Intel Just Said "No"
Not only that, the op-ed ignores info from its own reporters. The information "leaked" had been discredited before it was used to try to discredit Joseph Wilson's commentary in the NY Times: (emphasis added)
Eventually, the Pentagon asked for an authoritative judgment from the National Intelligence Council, the senior coordinating body for the 15 agencies that then constituted the U.S. intelligence community. Did Iraq and Niger discuss a uranium sale, or not?Of course, the UN had discounted the info as a forgery in March 2003. And still, Bush and Tony Blair (after the above report) insisted that they had "secret" evidence proving the claims. "In June 2003, a British parliamentary inquiry concluded otherwise, delivering a scathing critique of Blair's role in promoting the story."
The council's reply, drafted in a January 2003 memo by the national intelligence officer for Africa, was unequivocal: The Niger story was baseless and should be laid to rest.
Four U.S. officials with firsthand knowledge said in interviews that the memo, which has not been reported before, arrived at the White House as Bush and his highest-ranking advisers made the uranium story a centerpiece of their case for the rapidly approaching war against Iraq.
Woodward Confirmed As First Choice
In other matters relating to the Valerie Plame affair, public filings last week confirm that the first reporter Scooter Libby tried to entice with these tidbits to counter Joseph Wilson was none other than Bob Woodward. Woodward, who described the prosecutor as a "junkyard dog." Woodward, the reporter who said this was not a smear campaign (October 2005, CNN).
When Woodward didn't rise to the bait, Libby turned to the New York Times and Judith Miller. Both writers had been willing vehicles for Adminstration messages: Miller on the build up to the Iraq conflict and Woodward for his precious books.
Join the US Politics Forum discussion.
Technorati Profile
Technorati tags:
Bush
Libby,
Plame
Politics
gada.be tags:
Bush,
Libby,
Plame,
Politics


Comments
Don’t you mean leaker and liar?
Re Bush & Blair and their “secret” evidence … you are correct … that assertion appears to have been a baldfaced lie.