New York Times moves the ball forward

Way back when, John DiIulio, the head of Bush’s White House faith-based office, said of his administration colleagues:

“There is no precedent in any modern White House for what is going on in this one: a complete lack of a policy apparatus. What you’ve got is everything — and I mean everything — being run by the political arm. It’s the reign of the Mayberry Machiavellis.”

The New York Times had a report today on the Plame story, considering Rove’s and Libby’s mess from a slightly different angle. In the process, the Times helps highlight just how right DiIulio was.

At the same time in July 2003 that a C.I.A. operative’s identity was exposed, two key White House officials who talked to journalists about the officer were also working closely together on a related underlying issue: whether President Bush was correct in suggesting earlier that year that Iraq had been trying to acquire nuclear materials from Africa.

The two issues had become inextricably linked because Joseph C. Wilson IV, the husband of the unmasked C.I.A. officer, had questioned Mr. Bush’s assertion, prompting a damage-control effort by the White House that included challenging Mr. Wilson’s standing and his credentials. A federal grand jury investigation is under way by a special counsel to determine whether someone illegally leaked the officer’s identity and possibly into whether perjury or obstruction of justice occurred during the inquiry.

People who have been briefed on the case said the White House officials, Karl Rove and I. Lewis Libby, were helping prepare what became the administration’s primary response to criticism that a flawed phrase about the nuclear materials in Africa had been in Mr. Bush’s State of the Union address six months earlier.

They had exchanged e-mail correspondence and drafts of a proposed statement by George J. Tenet, then the director of central intelligence, to explain how the disputed wording had gotten into the address. Mr. Rove, the president’s political strategist, and Mr. Libby, the chief of staff for Vice President Dick Cheney, coordinated their efforts with Stephen J. Hadley, then the deputy national security adviser, who was in turn consulting with Mr. Tenet.

At the same time, they were grappling with the fallout from an Op-Ed article on July 6, 2003, in The New York Times by Mr. Wilson, a former diplomat, in which he criticized the way the administration had used intelligence to support the claim in Mr. Bush’s speech.

The work done by Mr. Rove and Mr. Libby on the Tenet statement during this intense period has not been previously disclosed.

No, it hadn’t, which is part of why this is so interesting.

In terms of the Bush White House, what we see here is a complete breakdown between the executive branch’s national security interests and political interests. There is, unfortunately, no difference between them, which is why we see Rove writing statements for the director of the CIA. It explains quite well why everything — from 9/11, to Iraq, to intelligence — has been politicized by the Bush gang.

In terms of the Plame scandal, this report also helps demonstrate the extent to which Rove was involved in the coordinated effort to smear Joseph Wilson. Rove was dealing with the entire story from start to finish and, it appears, may have learned about Plame’s identity while working on Tenet’s statement.

And then there’s that press secretary’s name again…

Among those asked if he had seen the memo was Ari Fleischer, then the White House press secretary, who was on Air Force One with Mr. Bush and Mr. Powell during the Africa trip. Mr. Fleischer told the grand jury that he never saw the document, a person familiar with the testimony said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the prosecutor’s admonitions about not disclosing what is said to the grand jury.

Mr. Fleischer’s role has been scrutinized by investigators, in part because his telephone log showed a call on the day after Mr. Wilson’s article appeared from Mr. Novak, the columnist who, on July 14, 2003, was the first to report Ms. Wilson’s identity.

If Fleischer did see that document, and Fitzgerald seems to think he did, he’s in a world of trouble.

Go get them ALL………and don’t just get them fired, send them to prison. Otherwise they will just be rewarded with million dollar paying jobs somewhere

  • In terms of the Bush White House, what we see here is a complete breakdown between the executive branch’s national security interests and political interests. There is, unfortunately, no difference between them, which is why we see Rove writing statements for the director of the CIA. It explains quite well why everything — from 9/11, to Iraq, to intelligence — has been politicized by the Bush gang.

    Not to go too far off topic here, but I have to admit that I think Bush (or, whoever was jerking his strings that day) made a great decision to keep PR/political advisors at the top of the hierarchy. In politics, perception is everything, and the ability to effectively manage perception is key to getting things done in DC.

    In my opinion the real problem was that we were dealing with a political group of extremists interested in pursuing their own interests ahead of our nation’s interests, or even the world’s, and that this included taking Iraq at any cost. What if they were interested in ending starvation, reducing abortion rates, improving education? What if they cared about this country?

    Kerry ran a joke of a campaign precisely because he, along with the Democratic leadership, failed to realize that the truth will not set us free. That’s what Lakoff is all about: becoming effective in managing perception. It is a tool, not a morality, and we shouldn’t ignore this common-sense strategy just because it was employed by these idiots.

  • This would go a long way to explain why from start to finish, absolutely EVERYTHING undertaken by these fools becomes the manifestation of incompetence. From the war in Iraq, to the Dept of Homeland Security, to our porous borders, goofy TSA, and failure to find bin Laden, the expenditure has been what? A Trillion Dollars? And can anyone point to a single result?

  • But Eadie, didn’t Bush have the PR-tail wagging the national security-dog? In the end, PR should be about packaging something of real substance, not just selling the empty suit that that is Bush. We have a bunch of guys in the White House AGAIN sacrificing national security (by outing Plame) to make Bush look good AFTER Bush sacrificed national security the first time — or maybe the second if you count his failing to act on the August 6, 2001 PDB — by lying us into the Iraq war. PR is about putting the best light on something of value; it is NOT — or shouln’t be — about selling a lie or incompetence.

    I’ll concede that Bush’s team led by Rove WAS indeed very successful in selling what they were selling. The trouble is that they were selling us “blue sky”, snake oil or laetrille cancer cures, just like the securites hucksters of yore that led to the development of what we today refer to a Blue Sky Laws to prevent such kinds of fraud. Rove has been a fraud all of his political life. Kerry at least was honest if incompetent. I would have prefered that he had won by taking the high road. He didn’t. If there is any karma-like justice in the universe, Rove’s lying will finally come back to bite him — hard — right on his ass, and take him and lot of his cronies/minions down with him!

  • Comments are closed.