Our Leaker in Chief
Yeah, yeah, I know-- that twist on "Leader" is probably splashed across the title of every other blog this weekend. Not to mention quite a few newspaper headlines as well. So sue me.
The big news over the last couple days, of course, has been the somewhat surprising (but also somewhat unsurprising!) indication that Smirk leaked information from the NIE (National Intelligence Estimate, for those of you beyond the Beltway), ostensibly to support his case for war in Iraq. According to the WaPo, Fitzgerald "specifically said Bush was not aware of the leaking of a CIA agent's affiliation," but indeed knew "about efforts to disseminate sensitive information -- and also as orchestrating them."
This is all in the context of the Scooter Libby perjury case-- for those apologists reading this right now, the indictment has nothing to do with the validity of the intelligence, has nothing to do with Plame's status, has nothing to do with Iraq-- as yet. Scooter Libby was indicted on charges of perjury, making false statements, and obstruction of justice. In other words, Libby lied to Fitzgerald/the grand jury. Eventually, of course, there most likely will be other charges or additional aspects of the entire situation coming into play-- and at that point, we can have a grand ol' discussion about the deeper issues regarding Plame, Wilson, the Niger forgeries, and all of that.
However, the knowledge we now have so far indicates (to me at least!) that Smirk, Scowl (aka Buckshot), and crew have a whole lot of 'splainin' to do. Let's look at it.
1) AG Gonzales claims that Smirk has the "inherent authority to decide who should have classified information." In other words, it's okay for the President to determine what, if, and when information should be declassified. Given this administration's predilection for clamping down on presidential papers and allowing the ongoing re-classification of materials that were already available for public acccess, it strikes me as particularly funny that Smirk now has decided out of the goodness of his heart to let us know what's going on.
2) The material leaked was only bits and parts of the total NIE-- the portions conveniently left out included our intelligence agencies' acknowledgement that there was serious dissent over the legitimacy of claims that Iraq obtained or was trying to obtain nuclear materials from Niger. If there exists (or existed) a need for the public to understand the gummint process on determining how and why we went to war over these claims, then it would be the professionally responsible and ethical course to release the entire NIE. By sharing half-truths, the leakers lied to the country.
3) If, as Smirk and the rest of our gummint officials claim, Joe Wilson's assertions that the Niger information was bogus, then it would seem that our gummint would have more information or evidence from which to bolster their arguments for challenging Saddam Hussein and invading Iraq. Wouldn't it? I mean, our whole rationale for going into Iraq can't just hinge on the Niger documents, can they? The fact that our gummint leakers fought tooth and nail against Wilson just demonstrates to me that their "evidence" was a pack of cards, ready to fall at a moment's notice.
This doesn't even begin to touch on other questions. For example, let's assume the President has the right to declassify information. Isn't there some procedure in place for doing so? Who has to be informed of this? So far the only people mentioned are Smirk, Scowl, and... Libby. What about the good folks over at the CIA? Even if they're not legally required to be informed, wouldn't it have been professional courtesy to let them know information they gathered was going to be exposed to daylight? Assuming this was going straight to the press, don't our Congressional leaders deserve to know that portions of national intelligence are being shared with the Corporate Media? I find it hard to believe that only the President, the Vice-President, and the Veep's right-hand man can unilaterally make decisions on declassifying/sharing intelligence information.
Another consideration... why was this information being shared at all? The gummint is probably going to offer quite a few "explanations"/rationales on this in the next few days, desperately hoping the whole thing will go away. But when you look at the broad, big picture, the direct result of Libby's tete-a-tetes with various reporters was the disclosure of Valerie Plame's NOC status with the CIA, and an ultimately unsuccessful campaign to discredit Wilson. In other words, political payback.
There's that word: politics. This was a political game, a full-court press using leaked information, national intelligence, and national security, all for the sake of preserving official talking points on the war in Iraq, during an election year. The last time we had political games like this, it also occured during an election year. It also took a while to get out. But the end result? A president resigned. What was that about history repeating itself...?
Yet another point to this whole affair: it was our dear Smirk, in the last couple of years, who has emphatically decried leaks. Let's revisit some of Smirk's greatest hits:
* THE PRESIDENT: Yes. Let me just say something about leaks in Washington. There are too many leaks of classified information in Washington. There's leaks at the executive branch; there's leaks at the legislative branch. There's just too many leaks. And if there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is. And if the person has violated the law, the person will be taken care of. [Emphasis mine; Press conference, 30 Sep 2003]
* Q Given -- given recent developments in the CIA leak case, particularly Vice President Cheney's discussions with the investigators, do you still stand by what you said several months ago, a suggestion that it might be difficult to identify anybody who leaked the agent's name?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. [Press conference, 10 June 2004]
There are quite a few other quotes, but I think you get the picture. Funny-- guess all he had to do was look in the mirror... But it's really not all that funny. At best, our "President" is a hypocrite and untrustworthy; at worst, he actively orchestrated the misuse of intelligence for partisan political purposes. To my mind, it's Watergate redux.
The big news over the last couple days, of course, has been the somewhat surprising (but also somewhat unsurprising!) indication that Smirk leaked information from the NIE (National Intelligence Estimate, for those of you beyond the Beltway), ostensibly to support his case for war in Iraq. According to the WaPo, Fitzgerald "specifically said Bush was not aware of the leaking of a CIA agent's affiliation," but indeed knew "about efforts to disseminate sensitive information -- and also as orchestrating them."
This is all in the context of the Scooter Libby perjury case-- for those apologists reading this right now, the indictment has nothing to do with the validity of the intelligence, has nothing to do with Plame's status, has nothing to do with Iraq-- as yet. Scooter Libby was indicted on charges of perjury, making false statements, and obstruction of justice. In other words, Libby lied to Fitzgerald/the grand jury. Eventually, of course, there most likely will be other charges or additional aspects of the entire situation coming into play-- and at that point, we can have a grand ol' discussion about the deeper issues regarding Plame, Wilson, the Niger forgeries, and all of that.
However, the knowledge we now have so far indicates (to me at least!) that Smirk, Scowl (aka Buckshot), and crew have a whole lot of 'splainin' to do. Let's look at it.
1) AG Gonzales claims that Smirk has the "inherent authority to decide who should have classified information." In other words, it's okay for the President to determine what, if, and when information should be declassified. Given this administration's predilection for clamping down on presidential papers and allowing the ongoing re-classification of materials that were already available for public acccess, it strikes me as particularly funny that Smirk now has decided out of the goodness of his heart to let us know what's going on.
2) The material leaked was only bits and parts of the total NIE-- the portions conveniently left out included our intelligence agencies' acknowledgement that there was serious dissent over the legitimacy of claims that Iraq obtained or was trying to obtain nuclear materials from Niger. If there exists (or existed) a need for the public to understand the gummint process on determining how and why we went to war over these claims, then it would be the professionally responsible and ethical course to release the entire NIE. By sharing half-truths, the leakers lied to the country.
3) If, as Smirk and the rest of our gummint officials claim, Joe Wilson's assertions that the Niger information was bogus, then it would seem that our gummint would have more information or evidence from which to bolster their arguments for challenging Saddam Hussein and invading Iraq. Wouldn't it? I mean, our whole rationale for going into Iraq can't just hinge on the Niger documents, can they? The fact that our gummint leakers fought tooth and nail against Wilson just demonstrates to me that their "evidence" was a pack of cards, ready to fall at a moment's notice.
This doesn't even begin to touch on other questions. For example, let's assume the President has the right to declassify information. Isn't there some procedure in place for doing so? Who has to be informed of this? So far the only people mentioned are Smirk, Scowl, and... Libby. What about the good folks over at the CIA? Even if they're not legally required to be informed, wouldn't it have been professional courtesy to let them know information they gathered was going to be exposed to daylight? Assuming this was going straight to the press, don't our Congressional leaders deserve to know that portions of national intelligence are being shared with the Corporate Media? I find it hard to believe that only the President, the Vice-President, and the Veep's right-hand man can unilaterally make decisions on declassifying/sharing intelligence information.
Another consideration... why was this information being shared at all? The gummint is probably going to offer quite a few "explanations"/rationales on this in the next few days, desperately hoping the whole thing will go away. But when you look at the broad, big picture, the direct result of Libby's tete-a-tetes with various reporters was the disclosure of Valerie Plame's NOC status with the CIA, and an ultimately unsuccessful campaign to discredit Wilson. In other words, political payback.
There's that word: politics. This was a political game, a full-court press using leaked information, national intelligence, and national security, all for the sake of preserving official talking points on the war in Iraq, during an election year. The last time we had political games like this, it also occured during an election year. It also took a while to get out. But the end result? A president resigned. What was that about history repeating itself...?
Yet another point to this whole affair: it was our dear Smirk, in the last couple of years, who has emphatically decried leaks. Let's revisit some of Smirk's greatest hits:
* THE PRESIDENT: Yes. Let me just say something about leaks in Washington. There are too many leaks of classified information in Washington. There's leaks at the executive branch; there's leaks at the legislative branch. There's just too many leaks. And if there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is. And if the person has violated the law, the person will be taken care of. [Emphasis mine; Press conference, 30 Sep 2003]
* Q Given -- given recent developments in the CIA leak case, particularly Vice President Cheney's discussions with the investigators, do you still stand by what you said several months ago, a suggestion that it might be difficult to identify anybody who leaked the agent's name?
THE PRESIDENT: That's up to --
Q And, and, do you stand by your pledge to fire anyone found to have done so?THE PRESIDENT: Yes. [Press conference, 10 June 2004]
There are quite a few other quotes, but I think you get the picture. Funny-- guess all he had to do was look in the mirror... But it's really not all that funny. At best, our "President" is a hypocrite and untrustworthy; at worst, he actively orchestrated the misuse of intelligence for partisan political purposes. To my mind, it's Watergate redux.
posted by Mr. Sandman | 10:31 PM
<< Home