Sometimes, when political figures are in trouble — having to testify before a grand jury about a criminal matter, for example — they refer questions to their attorneys. In former White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer’s case, that won’t work — he won’t tell anyone who his attorney is.
I hear that the former White House press secretary — who’s been a grand-jury witness in the CIA- Karl Rove-Robert Novak leak brouhaha — refuses to reveal the name of his bill-by-the-hour legal adviser. Fleischer recently told a Washington reporter, “I’m not going to give you the name. It’ll end up costing me money.” I urge Fleischer’s lawyer: Come forward and identify yourself. I want to have a long conversation with you.
For what it’s worth, the New York Times suggested yesterday that Fleischer is not among the candidates most likely to be indicted.
One person familiar with Mr. Fleischer’s testimony said he told the grand jury that he was not Mr. Novak’s source. And Mr. Fleischer, who was never shy about championing his Republican bosses, seems not to fit Mr. Novak’s description, in a subsequent column, of his primary source as “no partisan gunslinger.” […]
The people who discussed the testimony of Mr. Fleischer and other witnesses asked not to be named because Mr. Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor, has asked anyone involved in the case not to talk about it. At least one person who provided an account of Mr. Fleischer’s role did so in the belief that it would remove suspicion from Mr. Fleischer.
I’m not entirely sure if Fleischer should consider himself “in the clear” — there’s still some question as to whether he did or did not see the classified State Department memo that identified Plame — but the NYT report strongly hints that Fitzgerald has other fish to fry.
The New Republic’s Jason Zengerle had a good item yesterday explaining why that’s a real shame.
For all of Rove’s dastardly deeds, even his harshest critics have to concede that he’s smart. Liberals don’t call him a genius (albeit an evil one) for nothing. But Fleischer seems to be an absolute doofus — an absolute doofus who, thanks to his time in the White House, is now rich and famous. […]
Now, there are some people out there, like my colleague Jonathan Chait, who saw a peculiar brand of genius in Fleischer’s daily performances in the White House briefing room — a rare ability to never give a straight answer. But what Chait sees as malevolent brilliance, I see as malevolent buffoonery. I think Fleischer was too dumb to know any better. To the Bush administration, Fleischer was a useful idiot.
All of which, in some ways, should make him a sympathetic figure. But it doesn’t, because, ever since leaving the White House, Fleischer has cashed in on his time there. He’s written a memoir of his experience and gone on the lecture circuit, where, for reportedly up to $50,000 a speech, he’ll discourse on “A Day in the Life of the White House Press Secretary” or “America and Israel: The Path to Stability in the Middle East.” And last year he signed up with the sports marketing agency IMG, which will pitch his p.r. skills to professional athletes, coaches, teams, and leagues. Already, Major League Baseball’s commissioner has hired Fleischer to help him deal with the steroid scandal fallout.
It reminds me a bit of my favorite line from Spinal Tap: There’s such a fine line between clever and stupid.
A criminal indictment would bring an abrupt end to Fleischer’s unwarranted-yet-highly-lucrative fame. At a minimum, we can hope the Times report is wrong.