The quote of the day came on NBC’s Today show this morning. Tim Russert said he spoke to a Republican source last night who told him:
“If this was a Democratic White House, we’d have congressional hearings in a second.”
It’s a no-brainer. There’s a White House scandal in which national security was compromised and laws may have been broken. Some semblance of congressional oversight is obviously needed. As Henry Waxman said in a letter to Committee on Government Reform Chairman Tom Davis (R-Va.) yesterday:
The recent disclosures about Mr. Rove’s actions have such serious implications that we can no longer responsibly ignore them. The intentional disclosure of a covert CIA agent’s identity would be an act of treason. If there were evidence of such a serious breach during the Clinton Administration, there is no doubt that our Committee would have immediately demanded that the Deputy Chief of Staff testify at a hearing. This would have been the right course of action then, and it is the right course now.
The question then becomes how to convince congressional Republicans to do the right thing here. I have a plan: take them up on the offers they made two years ago.
Way back in July 2003, when this story first broke, Newsday ran a story about Dem reactions to the controversy. The link isn’t available anymore, but the article includes a few helpful tidbits.
Democrats yesterday denounced the alleged disclosure by administration officials of the identity of an undercover CIA officer, and members of both parties indicated a congressional investigation is likely.
Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.), an Intelligence Committee member, said it plans to investigate who revealed the identity of undercover CIA agent Valerie Plame, who is married to former Ambassador Joseph Wilson. In a move that sparked the current controversy over allegations that Iraq was trying to buy uranium in Niger, Wilson revealed two weeks ago that he had warned the Bush administration the reports were unfounded.
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), vice chairman of the intelligence panel, called the disclosure of Plame’s identity “vile” and “a highly dishonorable thing to do; highly, highly dishonorable.” He, too, said a probe is probably necessary and accused the White House of strong-arm tactics aimed at those who question their policies. “To go after him [Wilson] is one thing, but to go after his wife is another thing,” Rockefeller said. […]
Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) said he agreed the committee will probably investigate the matter (emphasis added)
Hatch went on to criticize Dems for raising a fuss about this, but that doesn’t change the bottom line. Hatch realized, even then, that the Senate has a responsibility to take a serious look at this controversy. Of course, over the last two years (hell, over the last two days), we’ve learned a lot more about the White House’s role in the scandal, so naturally the need for hearings is far greater now than it was when Hatch first made this acknowledgement.
It’s time to put Hatch on the spot. If he agreed hearings were worthwhile in July 2003, he should try to explain to the nation why hearings are not necessary now. If he can’t, we should expect Hatch to join Dems in demanding a Senate investigation.
As for the House, I’m also reminded of a comment then-House Intelligence Committee Chairman Peter Goss (R-Fla.) made two years ago.
“If somebody sends me a blue dress and some DNA, I will have an investigation,” Goss said.
On its face, this is absurd. Goss, now the CIA director, was insisting that evidence was necessary before Congress would begin an investigation. Goss had everything backwards — evidence is supposed to be a product of an investigation, not a prerequisite.
But putting that aside, even if we accept that standard now, Cooper’s email about Rove’s leak is evidence of White House wrongdoing. If the House GOP said evidence was needed before a hearing could be convened, now there’s plenty of grounds for the House to start asking questions.
Hearings could be critically important to understanding this story. Dems need to keep up their demands.