PLAMEGATE - It’s the Cover-Up

Now who’s ridiculous?

On October
1, 2003, during the "ongoing investigation" of the Valerie Plame leak
scandal, White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan said it was a "ridiculous
suggestion" that Rove was "involved in leaking classified information." Following
the recent revelations that Rove identified the undercover CIA agent in an
e-mail to a Time magazine reporter, McClellan refused to answer any questions
about Rove. NBC White House news correspondent David Gregory exclaimed, "this
is ridiculous" in response to McClellan’s silence. The leaking scandal,
similar to Watergate before it, demonstrates that the cover-up is sometimes
worse than the crime.

WHITE HOUSE STONEWALL: McClellan noted 23 times yesterday that he could
not comment because there was an "ongoing
investigation." But McClellan has previously cited that same investigation
and then gone on to answer the questions as they pertained to Rove. For example,
on October 1, 2003, he said, "There’s
an investigation going on ... you brought up Karl’s name. Let’s be very
clear. I thought — I said it was a ridiculous suggestion, I said it’s simply
not true that he was involved in leaking classified information, and — nor,
did he condone that kind of activity." Similarly, on October 10, 2003, McClellan
said, "I think it’s important to keep in mind that this
is an ongoing investigation." But he then added with regard to a question
about Rove’s involvement, "I spoke with those individuals, as I pointed out,
and those individuals assured me they were not involved in this."

MORE THAN A LEGAL MATTER, IT’S ABOUT CREDIBILITY: As the legal investigation
continues and the grand jury pores over evidence, any determination that an
individual has acted unlawfully is yet to be officially announced. What is
clear is that the White House has plenty of explaining to do about their own
cover-up. Yesterday, McClellan noted five times that it was the prosecutor’s
"preference"
that the White House not comment on the ongoing investigation, clearly indicating
that he could have answered the questions. Refusing to comment has never been
a problem for the White House before. As the Washington Post reports today,
"Asked
about the matter on nine occasions over the years, Bush has said he welcomed
the investigation, called the name disclosure ’a very serious matter,’ and
declared that the sooner investigators ’find out the truth, the better, as
far as I’m concerned.’" The fact that the White House seems unwilling to even
stand by bland assertions that the leak is a "serious matter" (which McClellan
did not say yesterday) or that the White House wants to find out the "truth"
(which also wasn’t stated) indicates how this matter has become one of credibility
for the Bush White House. The inability to stand behind those statements yields
little confidence that Bush will hold to his
pledge to fire anybody who leaked the agent’s name.

THE COVER-UP CONTINUES: McClellan only sunk the White House’s credibility
further by choosing not to answer questions that he most certainly could have
and should have. As Sen.
Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said, "The lesson of history for George Bush and
Karl Rove is that the best way to help themselves is to bring out all the
facts, on their own, quickly." With so many outstanding
questions lingering about the leak case, the White House has turned to
crafty
word games and carefully parsed statements to avoid any accountability
on this issue. The White House, in attempting to turn
conventional wisdom on its head by engaging in a cover-up rather than
disclosing, is failing to learn from history and is now repeating it. The
Associated Press notes today, "Even
if Rove didn’t violate the law, proof that he disclosed Plame’s identity
could damage his effectiveness in public life and tarnish the president for
tolerating it."

SOME UNANSWERED QUESTIONS: Even though the White House isn’t answering,
there are still important questions to be asked. When President Bush and Chief
of Staff Andrew Card elevated
Rove to his position of deputy chief of staff earlier this year, did they
know he had leaked this information? As Bush
campaigned on security and character last year, did he know of Rove’s
involvement? Has Bush or Card never discussed the leak scandal with Rove,
including the day the Cooper e-mail was revealed?

http://www.americanprogressaction.org/...

http://www.livejournal.com/users/mparent7777/970438.html