11 July 2005

Yet More about Reporters, Jail, and Free Press

Well well well. Every Presidential administration, it seems, has its scandal. Perhaps this will be the Bush administration’s.

We’ve been following the story of Matt Cooper and Judith Miller now for quite some time. Mr. Cooper, of course, was saved at the last moment by his mysterious source, who allowed Mr. Cooper to divulge the source’s identity to a grand jury. Mr. Cooper did so on Wednesday last week.

Well, since that time Mr. Cooper’s testimony has leaked into the open press. I’m not sure why or how this happened—I was under the impression testimony was to be sealed (this is why we’ve never heard what Bob Novak said to the jury when he squealed his guts out). Evidently that’s either not the case or this particular grand jury has a problem with preventing leaks (a problem the White House was heretofore assumed not to have).

And it turns out Mr. Cooper’s source was none other than (as I said earlier) Karl Rove, the President’s political advisor and patron saint (or patron demon, I suppose). Technically, of course, divulging the identity of a clandestine operative is a federal offense. This makes Karl Rove guilty of said federal offense.

Presumably, Rove said something along the lines of, “You know, Wilson doesn’t even wear the pants in his family. Guess what his wife does?” But he said it to a reporter, and he said it at all. In a White House notorious for keeping a tight lid on information, Karl Rove seems to have been quite cavalier with the identity of CIA operatives who’s husbands happen to be opponents of the administration. Hmm. Think Rove will be indicted? I’m opening the betting with odds at 1:50.

But like any good scandal, this one does involve the prez. Here you’ll find a transcript of a WH press briefing on 29 September, 2003, which is very very long. The first portion of it, though, is all about Valerie Plame, and includes WH press secretary Scott McClellan saying, in response to a question about how the President knew that Karl Rove was not involved, “And I said it is simply not true. So, I mean, it's public knowledge, I've said that it's not true. And I have spoken with Karl Rove.”

So was McClellan lying? Did the President know? If he didn’t, what is Karl Rove doing wandering about chatting up reporters about confidential information in the supposedly leak-proof Bush White House. And is this Bush’s idea of loyalty—or does his idea of loyalty extend only to peoples’ loyalty himself and not to American spies or to the country itself? And if Bush did know, why didn’t he immediately fire Rove, or turn him in to the Department of Justice, as Scott McClellan says should be done?

Interesting. Very interesting. Of course, Judith Miller’s the only one who’s in jail here, and the only thing she did was refuse to subjugate the rights of the free press to a political investigation. As it turns out, if Rove had just turned himself in as McClellan suggested Miller’s involvement wouldn’t have mattered.

Speaking of Judith Miller and the fallout (see yesterday’s post about the Cleveland Plain Dealer of all this, here’s a link to a petition you can sign (if you’re in journalism) in support of a reporter’s shield bill currently making it’s way through Congress. Also, if you support the concept of a free press, write your Congressman and Senators regarding the shield bills. In the House, the bill in question is H.R. 581, the Free Flow of Information Act, sponsored by Reps. Mike Pence and Rick Boucher. In the Senate, there are two bills, S. 340, also the FFIA, sponsored by Sen. Dick Lugar, and S. 369, Free Speech Protection Act, sponsored by Sen. Chris Dodd.

5 comments:

Unknown said...

It can be, but most such matters are a tradeoff. Which is worse? Sources declining to talk to reporters about secretive information because they know the reporter can be subpoenaed? So much for Watergate.
Or, reporters stepping over the line and publishing things that ought not to be published?

I'll the latter over the former. After all, it's the source's responsibility to know what not to talk about, not the reporter's.

Anonymous said...

As Observer said, this case has always seemed like a double edge sword to me, or what I termed a Catch 22 in my previous comment. I loved the way you said Novak squealed his guts out, that part was funny and it made me smile! I seriously don't know a lot about politics, so correct me if you think I'm wrong. But knowing the position that Rove has in the White House, I think he will probably shielded from any scrutiny, and especially from jail time. Will justice be served? How come Judith had to get jail time? Do "nice guys" really finish last? Is this going to be the new trend? I'm totally uphaled! And on that note, wish me luck on my job interview tomorrow at a publication! :-P How ironic huh? I hope it goes well.

Unknown said...

Well, I hope the interview went well. What publication (or is it a secret?)

I still maintain that the burden here lies with the sources. If they don't want information getting out, they should be careful who they tell it to--and they certainly shouldn't tell it to a reporter. I'm pretty sure Rove only made the comment because he WANTED the information to get out--and that, then, makes things even worse.

Anyway. I did some reporting once and have worked for the papers, and I can tell you from personal experience that not many reporters are physically intimidating enough to force a source to tell them anything. So, as I said, the burden here is on the source.

kubasio said...

Additional information has come out about the status of Valerie Plame's career that is noteworthy. She had not been actively working as a covert agent for some time, and there is evidence to suggest her name had already been revealed by Aldrich Ames to the Russians before his arrest in 1994. According to the Intelligence Identities Protection Act an agent must have undercover status that is classified in order for there to be a crime (News Max.com).

She has also made public appearances and did an interview in Vanity Fair since the story broke. My concerns for an agent's safety quickly diminish after voluntary public exposure like that.

Unknown said...

Well, she did make the appearance AFTER the story broke. But this is a fair point you make, we go on claiming Ms. Plame is an angel fallen to Earth.
After all, there's speculation (so far only on the right-leaning blogs, but I still don't think this needs to be a partisan issue) that Ms. Plame got her husband his diplomatic post through her CIA connections anyway.
Nepotism's nothing new in Washington, but it gives us some insight into Ms. Plame's ethics.
But, two wrongs scarcely ever make a right, and I don't think Rove's decision to "out" Plame is, because it may not technically be illegal, the greatest thing since sliced bread. I read one guy earlier today saying Rove was a bigger hero than Deep Throat.

Regardless of whether Rove was right or wrong or Plame is a good person or not, the bigger issue here is still the use of confidential sources.

And anyway, if Plame's outing as a spy is enough to cause a grand jury investigation and send people to jail, and if Rove is the source of the Plame story... then why exactly isn't Rove at fault here? Rove is personally culpable, at least, in sending Judith Miller to jail, if you like logical stretches. Is the White House going to speak to that?
And can I guess the answer is no?