Suddenly, the White House is shy

July 11, 2005

White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan took questions from reporters twice today, once in an informal gaggle this morning, and again in the formal briefing room this afternoon. Those of us who’ve lamented the fact that the WH press corps was negligent in following up on the Plame scandal last week have nothing to complain about today. The reporters smell blood.

On MSNBC, Bob Kur reported out of this morning’s off-camera gaggle with McClellan: “Well, they’re being pummeled with questions here this morning. Very interesting turn of events. The White House spokesman just a few minutes ago was asked about the latest developments about Karl Rove and he says he can’t comment because it’s an ongoing criminal investigation — and yet reporters went after him with questions saying that during this ongoing investigation at earlier stages, he was willing to stand at the podium and say flat out that Karl Rove was not involved in the leak of the C.I.A. operative’s identity.

“Well, so those are some tough questions to be answered here at the White House today.”

There have been literally dozens of briefings over the last two years in which McClellan responded to hundreds of questions about the Plame scandal, Karl Rove, the president’s knowledge of the situation, White House efforts to identify the leakers, the Justice Department’s probe, etc. Today, with Rove’s role in the controversy on the front page, all of a sudden McClellan doesn’t want to comment on the criminal investigation. How terribly convenient. McClellan didn’t mind commenting before, but now he’s shy.

Make no mistake: this is a sign of White House panic. If they had a persuasive spin to get out of this jam, they’d use it. They don’t, so we’ve entered “no comment” land.

Update: Think Progress has the full transcript of today’s briefing and C&L has video. It’s almost comedic.

Here’s my favorite question, which came by way of CBS’s John Roberts, right after McClellan said the White House policy is not to comment on an ongoing investigation:

“Contradictory to that statement, on September 29th of 2003, while the investigation was ongoing, you clearly commented on it. You were the first one to have said that if anybody from the White House was involved, they would be fired. And then, on June 10th of 2004, at Sea Island Plantation, in the midst of this investigation, when the president made his comments that, yes, he would fire anybody from the White House who was involved, so why have you commented on this during the process of the investigation in the past, but now you’ve suddenly drawn a curtain around it under the statement of, We’re not going to comment on an ongoing investigation?”

McClellan responded, “No one wants to get to the bottom of it more than the president of the United States.” Yeah, and OJ won’t rest until he catches the real killer….

Maybe soon they’ll be entering “On the advice of counsel I must invoke my Fifth Amendment rights and refuse to answer on the grounds it may incriminate me” land. Oh joy, oh rapture.

  • Exactly right, CB. Things have started to get out of control, and–if we’re lucky–people will begin to start distancing themselves from the administration and covering their asses. In Scottie’s case, it’s too late. He already has a long record of categorical denials of Rove’s involvement in this.

  • Not to mention “I’d like to congratulate my opponent on their successful campaign to oust me from my Congressional position and thus finally bring my and my party’s reign of terror and stupidity to a fit and lasting end” land.

    Forgot to mention that part.

  • From American Progress: McClellan, in the 9/29/03 briefing, said that he had “spoken with Karl” about the leak, but then added, “I didn’t even need to go ask Karl, because I know the kind of person that he is, and he is someone that is committed to the highest standards of conduct.”

    That kicked in the gag reflex big time. The greatest argument for atheism is that McClellan sits up there saying things as outrageous as this day after day and lightning doesn’t strike him dead. What’s really pathetic is that there is no indication that after this statement the press corps was incapacitated by a sudden attack of vomiting. They’ve got a tough job, I’ll admit. I mean, if I was in the room listening to Scotty’s bullshit day after day, I’d at least feel compelled to throw something. These reporters sit there day after day and act as if his responses deserve their attention. What a sad, sad farce!

  • Thismodernworld.com has a great rundown of previous White House statements that have been proven ridiculous. Check it out.

    While Rove should be toast over this, it’s more important to go after Bush and what he knew and when. Bush dodged previous questions about his conversations with Rove concerning the Plame case. I wonder why?

    The MSM needs to demand answers to the questions that McClellan was dodging today. Maybe reporters at the White House should stage a “walkout” in protest of McClellan’s stonewalling. They at least need to start framing their questions in ways such as “Don’t you owe the American people…” etc.

  • Ted has a good point re: framing the question to make dodging difficult–if not impossible.

    Does anyone have info on who’s in the press corps and how to get their email? Some targeted support on this issue, even with some suggestions, might get a good question or two lobbed Scotty “the artful dodger� McClellan’s way.

    I hope this debunks some of the “media’s not on our sideâ€? theories. No, the media is not on “ourâ€? side, or “theirâ€? side (except Fox–those guys are nuts). They’re on their own damn side, and CB is right to say they “smell blood.â€? If they get tricked into thinking there’s no story, then they’re dumb, but if there is a story they want it.

    It’s like lawyers, everyone hates ‘em till they need ‘em.

  • Well, this all seems to make Fitzgerald’s arm-twisting of Cooper and she-who-will-not-be-named that much more understandable. Fitzgerald no doubt knew it was Rove who provided the “Wilson’s wife/CIA member/WMD investigator” info, outing of Plame–may have received that from Pincus or even Novak himself. And as the law does not require a name actually be provided, just sufficient info to identify the person as a covert agent, that information is probably enough as to the identity part of this. What he probably did not have was the “knowingly” outing prong of the law down pat. He probably had Pincus to say he heard from Rove. He may have had Novak as well (depends)–but 2 people testifying does not necessarily remove Rove from the benefit of the doubt of being innocent/coincidence. However, if two additional reporters say they heard the same story from Rove, within a few days of Pincus/Novak, all of a sudden this does not seem like coincidence and instead it shows an intended pattern, especially when at least one of the additional reporters highlights the fact that Rove steered from the conversation they were having to the off-subject of Wilson/Plame.

  • I just think it’s all kind of sad. Hell, me and my co-worker bitched about the Downing Street memos back when they were written. We tagged Rove over Plame over beer, for crying out loud. If a couple of drunks (one American, one German) can have conversations (which have borne themselves out entirely) which seemed at the point to be not far-fetched, how THE FUCK can the press be so naive??????????
    I mean, damn, between all of this shit, everything that we were getting was from the damn reporters, and even we, the simple, stupid people, could draw the lines between. What sort of press do we have where you have to spell out every small piece to them before they finally get it?

  • Thanks for the update. I hope John Roberts continues in this line of questioning every time he gets a chance.

  • I’ll give the press kudos for today, but they still have a long way to go to show they aren’t Rove’s lackeys. I mean, how many cases can we say, “If this was Clinton…” and imagine starkly different behavior. I fear there will be a good many more times the double-standard can be fairly pointed out before this story is over.

    I fear the press won’t demonstrate their ability to speak truth to power, as they say, until a Democrat is in control again. Then you’ll see some reporters holding the administration’s feet to the fire the first day a scandal breaks, and use it to show how independent they are.

  • I saw Suzanne Malvo on Lou Dobbs about an hour
    ago. She still doesn’t get it. Duh!

  • Possibly even more repetitive than the average McClellan performance. He actually used “No one wants to get to the bottom of it more than the President of the United States” three times.

    • Comments are closed.