Men of Honor
Or maybe knaves and poltroons
By streiff Posted in The White House — Comments (43) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Today the Washington Post’s editorial board took the extraordinary step of acknowledging what a lot on this site have argued for a couple of years. The Plamegate investigation was a fraud and Joe Wilson is a liar.
This editorial is startling because one of the Post’s own reporters – Bob Woodward - provided a prima facie case that Fitzgerald’s press statement concerning the Libby indictment was so careless with the truth that it was perilously close to being a blatant falsehood and because few papers have done more to flog this nothingburger than the Washington Post even though it now appears they, along with Michael Isikoff and David Corn and others, knew the truth all along.
When one gets past the sheer chutzpah it does have a good point, it is long overdue that someone in the national media call Joe Wilson out for what he is, a liar and poltroon. The point it misses is that it speaks volumes about Richard Armitage and Colin Powell as well.
Read on.
But all those who have opined on this affair ought to take note of the not-so-surprising disclosure that the primary source of the newspaper column in which Ms. Plame's cover as an agent was purportedly blown in 2003 was former deputy secretary of state Richard L. Armitage.
Mr. Armitage was one of the Bush administration officials who supported the invasion of Iraq only reluctantly. He was a political rival of the White House and Pentagon officials who championed the war and whom Mr. Wilson accused of twisting intelligence about Iraq and then plotting to destroy him. Unaware that Ms. Plame's identity was classified information, Mr. Armitage reportedly passed it along to columnist Robert D. Novak "in an offhand manner, virtually as gossip," according to a story this week by the Post's R. Jeffrey.
The key to this story are the actions of Richard Armitage and Colin Powell. When the Justice Department launched its internal probe of the now notorious Robert Novak column we know that Armitage immediately informed Colin Powell that he was the source. We also know that the State Department counsel concurrently informed the Justice Department of Armitage’s involvement. The mystery of this leak was conclusively solved no later than October 2003.
The fact that Armitage maintained his silence as this non-scandal gathered steam speaks to a lack of character. A simple written statement or a news conference would have stopped the story in its tracks. One is left with the inescapable conclusion that Armitage did not take those actions, and as of this writing he still has not personally spoken on the subject, because he was getting some vicarious pleasure as Fitzgerald, in the role of an addled Nemesis, pursued one of the men, Scooter Libby, who had rolled him on Iraq policy and reduced the White House political operation to a shambles as everyone awaited the imminent “frog marching” of Karl Rove.
Unfortunately, Colin Powell had the same options open to him as Armitage. He could have persuaded, or failing that directed, Armitage to give a public accounting of his actions. He could even have asked Armitage to step down. He failed to do anything. It confirms the worst that many of us have had about Powell, that his only real loyalty is to his own image, and it gives credence to the speculation that much of the anonymous criticism of foreign policy coming out of the State Department during the first Bush Administration was either from or at the direction of Colin Powell.
Indeed, the utterly deranged vendetta that Colin Powell’s long time consigliore, Larry Wilkinson, has carried out against the Bush White House since 2005 makes much more sense when viewed in the context of how Powell and Armitage handled this episode. It seems clear that they hated the Administration they served and lacked the guts to resign.
Whatever their motivations, their actions did tremendous harm to the White House and to the nation. To the White House because they owed loyalty, as presidential appointees, to the man at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and they cravenly allowed a minor kerfuffle mutate into a scandal that could have cost Bush the 2004 election and put an total poseur in the Oval Office. To the nation because the investigation conducted by Fitzgerald, an investigation of an incident to which he already had the answer when he received his charter, had a tremendous impact on the ability National Security Council staff to function at a time when Iraq, Iran, and North Korea all needed urgent attention.
One hopes we have seen the last of these two men, and I use the term merely in the most basic biological sense, in public life.
Finally, let’s address Joe Wilson. Despite his deification on the left a Congressional investigation found that he had materially misrepresented the results of his trip to Niger. This might have had something to do with the publication of his op-ed shortly after signing on as a foreign policy advisor with the Kerry campaign. But it might not. Let’s face it, given Wilson’s track record thus far we cannot vouchsafe that his name is actually Joe Wilson. A friend of mine describes his brother-in-law as someone who lies for the sake of lying, “just to stay in practice” is the way he describes it. Wilson seems to be this type.
Nevertheless, it now appears that the person most responsible for the end of Ms. Plame's CIA career is Mr. Wilson. Mr. Wilson chose to go public with an explosive charge, claiming -- falsely, as it turned out -- that he had debunked reports of Iraqi uranium-shopping in Niger and that his report had circulated to senior administration officials. He ought to have expected that both those officials and journalists such as Mr. Novak would ask why a retired ambassador would have been sent on such a mission and that the answer would point to his wife. He diverted responsibility from himself and his false charges by claiming that President Bush's closest aides had engaged in an illegal conspiracy. It's unfortunate that so many people took him seriously.
« McClellan Originally Wanted to Attack Media, Defend Bush — Comments (5) | Armitage leaked Plame, but Fitzgerald blames Bush? — Comments (46) »
Men of Honor 43 Comments (0 topical, 43 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
Colin Powell and his puppet Richard Armitage do not need to escape from this travesty without a huge dose of criticism and examination. Both leaked copiously to the Washington press corps for reasons petty and large. Our nation suffered as a result.
Further, and I think this will emerge later, I don't think Joe Wilson's Niger trip has been explored in enough depth. The Post admits Wilson's "findings" were false. What I want to know is what connections existed between Wilson and Armitage and Powell, and whether the later two's silence was craven or coordinated.
Let's give the Post a little due, because unlike bloviators such as Chris Matthews and outright propaganda rages like the NYT, it did step up to the plate and almost apologize.
...you're not holding your breath until the MSM does anything remotely resembling "investigative" re: Powell (and Armitage) that has the slightest chance of making him look like the self-serving piece of filth that he is...sure would be nice, but never gonna happen. He's as teflon-coated an any American political figure I can think of...
but I imagine there will be many books that scorch Powell and Armitage in the months and years ahead. St. Colin can control Andrea Mitchell and Co. but he can't stop the books and non-traditional media deluge that will follow this revelation.
...and some shine finally comes off the gold-plated jerk, but I keep hoping that and keep getting disappointed (esp. related to the truly putrid advice he gave Bush I before, during and after Iraq I)...much as I despise the guy - and I *really* despise the guy - to me he combines the worst of self-serving politicians and political REMF's in military - but he always seems to be better at political infighting and backstabbing than those taking shots at him are
Unlike the NYT, the Post still takes itself seriously as a purveyor of fact and serious opionion, while the Times has become a parody of itself. The Times is written as if P.J. O'Rourke was actually typing it up every night for conservatives to laugh at.
Someone once told me how devoted to his own career Powell actually was; Bush realized that too late, unfortunately. He kept Powell around, like George Tenet, long after their "sell by" dates.
Anyone ever thought that Powell is keeping himself available for the Clintons? I do.
"History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it"-Winston Churchill
Byron York at NRO reports the Joe Plame and the Missus are still proceeding with their lawsuit against the Dark Destroyers in the WH. You see, what the Destroyers did was malevolent, what Armitage did wasn't. And there you have it! It's not the act per se, it's the thought.
There must be a liberal somewhere in Washington who can pull himself out of the bar long enough, or stop clubbing the G W Bush inflatable doll, and consul these two people. Save them from themselves as it were.
I suggest Helen Thomas, Voice of Reason, to sit down with the Missus [" one of the most beautiful women in Washington"]. You might say, one beauty talking to another.
Meanwhile the left, their fevors slightly abated, sit in their rat infested cellars awaiting their next marching orders from the media. No charge to wild not to require impeachment, no number of farces to frequent to sink in to their mouldy, mildewed, semi-brains, that they would realize that they are never endingly being played for fools.
And we are supposed to be the dumb ones !
"a man's admiration for absolute government is proportinate to the contempt he feels for those around him". Tocqueville
into obscurity? The MSM and their liege always do a great job of headlining half truths and gossip which reflects their worldview. Along with dishonorable dolts like Armitage and Wilson, they perpetrate an enormous counter factual Houdini act on the public. Fitzgerald also looks, well, incompetent. As the real story revolves around him in pieces he will come to the rescue with a comprehensive view when it’s already a fait accompli.
Liberals realize the public has a short attention span that coincides with news cycles. They advantageously get the false story placed as a headline and never shed the same amount of attention on facts. This causes issues such as “PlameGate” to become embedded in liberal platitudes and fallacious fodder for anti Bush-Cheney diatribes. Further aggravating the situation are liberal blogs which sycophantically repeat mindless and intellectually dishonest nonsense. Then we spend an inordinate amount of time correcting the facts as they actually exist, not as they are envisioned to be through the jaded prism of liberal fantasyland.
Why would any person vote or support this group? Do they not have any self respect, intellectual capabilities or are they just too engrossed in life to care? I am not sure. However I am certain Democrat’s get a good laugh behind their backs every time they step into a voting booth.
"Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori"
while correct, probably puts you next on the lawsuit list.
After all, they like seeing their names in news publications. I can see the headline now, "Wilson's Sue Neo Conservative Blogger".
"Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori"
I have no fears or either Wilson or Armitage.
But maybe I can get a book deal out of it.
if this happens. The title will be:
"Strife and Assault by the Wilson's: Tales of a Neo Conservative Blogger"
The "Neo" part will lure liberals like bugs to light.
"Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori"
Moreso by the fact that it appears in the WaPo.
And with that yet another patron saint of leftist moonbattery bites the dust.
-------------
"I don't know." -- Helen Thomas, when asked by White House spokesman Scott McClellan, "Are we at war, Helen?"
Before complimenting the WaPo, note that they are still beating at least one dead horse.
Unaware that Ms. Plame's identity was classified information, Mr. Armitage reportedly passed it along to columnist Robert D. Novak ..
The evidence that Mrs Wilsons identity was classified is nonexistent to this day.
If the Republicans had a spine the House would hold hearings on this matter and have Wilson, Corn, Amritage, Powell, and several others testify under oath.
This is the WaPo, after all.
-------------
"I don't know." -- Helen Thomas, when asked by White House spokesman Scott McClellan, "Are we at war, Helen?"
Holding hearings would just reopen the opportunity to spin it from the Left; only God knows what might come out or be said to have come out. There's no way anybody's going to do anything to any of these guys, especially Powell, and sacking Armitage et al. would just make them martyrs. I think urinating contests with skunks is something to be avoided.
In Vino Veritas
I notice that the WaPo adopts the common tactic of speaking of this case as a bystander while failing to mention Armitage's earlier mention of Plame to Bob Woodward, as well as the role of Walter Pincus.
"No compromise with the main purpose, no peace till victory, no pact with unrepentant wrong." - Winston Churchill
Except Joe Wilson is outside with his tongue stuck to the flagpole and the WaPo is inside wondering who Joe is.
...Valerie should have warned Joe that he would "Shoot his eye out" if he kept relentlessly pursuing his delusional "truth to power" obsession.
Out of curiosity, did Valerie "I Spy" Plame own an Ovaltine decoder ring?
"Your audience, which will clap at apparently anything, is frivolous." - Christopher Hitchens (to Moonman Maher)
Powell and Armitage told the people who mattered (or, at least, should have mattered) - specifically, the FBI and the Justice Department. They did so immediately, directly, and, from what I understand, did not so much as even hide behind a lawyer.
Is it somehow their fault that editors in the newsrooms of the Washington Post and New York Times launched a media jihad? Is it their fault that rather than close the investigation, that the Justice Department caved in and appointed a special prosecutor? Is it their fault that the special prosecutor went rogue?
I don't think the answer can even be close to the affirmative in any of these cases. Not unless the original poster or other critics can come forward with information proving Powell and Armitage had become capable of predicting the future.
I am not a blind apologist for Colin Powell. On the contrary, I have (figuratively) taken him out to the woodshed when I felt one of his decisions (specifically, the designation of the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia as a terrorist organization) was a mistake.
Nothing has changed this opinion since that review was written and submitted a year ago. I still feel it was a mistake on Powell's part – one that did a gross injustice to the founder of that organization, who assisted in the takedown of the Medellin drug cartel at no small physical risk to himself. To paraphrase Bill Murray in Ghostbusters, when somebody is waging a private war against a group you have already designated a terrorist organization, you say, "Keep it up."
I also supported the liberation of Iraq - placing myself in agreement with Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Feith, and the neoconservatives. I still think it was the right decision - and applaud Rumsfeld's speeches over the past week.
However, back then, I drew the line at the personal criticism that got directed at Powell from the likes of Richard Perle and Frank Gaffney. I still think that sort of criticism was not necessary and in fact weakens those who are pushing for the liberation of Iraq. The arguments that the neoconservatives have laid out for the war on terror generally are strong enough to stand on their own without personal cheap shots, which only help the mainstream media distract people from the big issue of our time.
The only things that Powell and Armitage really seem guilty of is are holding a belief that telling the FBI the truth early on would be enough to end matters, and for their failure to commit the 24-hour news cycle's version of seppuku in front of the Fox News cameras for their critics to chortle over.
Joe Wilson - and only Joe Wilson - is responsible for the lies that started the mess. Patrick Fitzgerald - and only Patrick Fitzgerald - is responsible for going rogue. Those decisions were out of the hands of Colin Powell and Richard Armitage, and blaming them for the witch-hunt and the lies of Joseph C. Wilson IV is just as unfair as the witch-hunt itself was.
Armitage did nothing wrong apparently, in telling Novak about Plame. An Armitage Presser would have killed this thing in its infancy.
No one here, absolutely no one, is disputing Joe Wilson's venality. He was responsible for this scam, and in the end, it will round on him.
Even Markos will disown him in the end. Watch, it will happen.
"History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it"-Winston Churchill
I think Armitage has shown that he is an ideal candidate to run Page Six for the New York Post - or to maybe run the "Reliable Source" at the Washington Post. I'm certainly not going to be telling him which actress I've had a long-running crush on.
That said, he went to the FBI. He told them what happened. And this leads to the question too many on the right seem all too willing to ignore in favor of taking unwarranted potshots at Powell: What about the conduct of Fitzgerald? I don't know about anyone else, but when the culrpit comes forward, and says, "I was the source of the leak," I expect that to herald the end of the matter (save for the wrapping up of loose ends).
Why did Fitzgerald ignore it and persist on the witch-hunt of Rove/Libby instead? I'd like answers.
I think Fitzgerald's conduct needs scrutiny. What are the ethics of forcing mid-grade staffers to hire attorneys when you already know they don't have any information of use to your investigation? What are the ethics of knowingly materially misrepresenting the underlying facts of a case in a press conference? What are the ethics of spending millions of dollars to investigate something you knew from Day One was not a crime?
I don't have the answers but I certainly have some opinions.
All this begs the question, is a red herring, a non sequitur, any number of logical fallacies because Armitage and Powell, by publicly announcing what they knew, could have stopped this dead in its tracks.
They didn't and it is to their shame.
Your criticism could just as easily be leveled at FBI Director Bob Mueller, the Attorney General (John Ashcroft), or Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, any one of whom could have held the same presser - and who could have made the announcement at the same time as he closed down the investigation.
It's no more a non sequitor than pointing at the big issue, and not some sideshow (which is what going after Powell and Armitage is).
evidence that Mueller was involved in any material way in the investigation, got a link on Ashcroft's involvement.
But either of those men had a real obligation to not talk about the investigation.
But I'm through with you on this Harold, now I understand why Leon always wanted to ban you.
Do you really think he doesn't get briefed in on major investigations?
which he has proven beyond doubt that he isn't, he would have stopped this at the beginning and sold his lackey down the drain. Fitz proved to be a typical, lowlife prosecutor and used what he knew to be a non issue as a fishing expedition from which all he could catch was a trumped up charge on Libby. You do yourself a disservice defending this glop of pond scum.
Envisioning when all that is Left is the Right.
You have got to be off your rocker.
There's no doubt at least that the man broke confidences, leaking like a sieve, as soon as the administration policy turned away from what he wanted.
--
If you're seeing shades of gray, it's because you're not looking close enough to see the black and white dots.
The conduct of Fitzgerald was atrocious. The conduct of Powell and Armitage was abysmal, disloyal, and reprehensible.
Yes, Fitzgerald should have dropped the investigation immediately. However, Armitage and Powell had an obligation either through the forum they love, leaks, or through an outright press conference to admit who Novak's source was. Why those of you on the Left feel the need to continue to circle the wagons for Powell, a grotesque and dishonest little man, continues to boggle the mind but speaks volumes about why you need to be permanently kept locked away in the GOP's basement.
Had Armitage come forward, then there wasn't a story. Period. Had Powell come forward, there wasn't a story.
The matter was completely within their hands and within their control. I simply don't see how this can be denied because all the speculation was around "who" had leaked and they knew the source.
I don't draw the line at personal criticism of people who despeerately need it.
He went straight to the FBI. No lawyers, no middlemen, no nonsense.
It should have ended with NO special prosecutor, or Fitzgerald should have had the integrity to say, "No harm, no foul." Fitzgerald could easily have cleared all involved with a presser of his own.
The fact that Fitzgerald turned into a rogue prosecutor is not the fault of Powell or Armitage. And I certainly don't think that their failure to grovel for the entertainment of the Perle-Gaffney clique of neoconservatism is a hanging offense.
Yes, the fact that Fitzgerald was able to be a rogue prosecutor is no one else's fault.
The fact that there should have been no investigation ignores the monumental fact that there was one and that they could have stopped it and the only plausible reason for them not stopping it was that they were laughing it up.
What is your issue with Perle and Gaffney, who cares about them?
According to the Newsweek story;
Taft, the State Department lawyer, also felt obligated to inform White House counsel Alberto Gonzales. But Powell and his aides feared the White House would then leak that Armitage had been Novak's source—possibly to embarrass State Department officials who had been unenthusiastic about Bush's Iraq policy. So Taft told Gonzales the bare minimum: that the State Department had passed some information about the case to Justice. He didn't mention Armitage. Taft asked if Gonzales wanted to know the details. The president's lawyer, playing the case by the book, said no, and Taft told him nothing more. Armitage's role thus remained that rarest of Washington phenomena: a hot secret that never leaked.
The picture that emerges of Powell and Armitage from all this is simply damming. They kept their mouths shut while the WH was slimed for their actions. Information leaks out of State like a sieve, yet this was kept secret for the past three years. In fact Armitage still has not come forward himself to acknowlege his actions and answer questions about them.
1. Powell did not want to risk a second leak. Perfectly undertsandable gien the furor over the original.
2. Taft asked Gonzales if he wanted the details. Gonzales said, "No", because, as the quote you highlighted pointed out, the White House was "playing the case by the book".
Powell did not want to risk a second leak. Perfectly undertsandable gien the furor over the original.
How is this any different than saying, "Powell did not want the truth about this matter to become known"? It's true, but it still makes Powell look shabby.
The same holds for your second point. I'm not sure what your point is. Yes, the WH played it by the book. Yes, State kept information about its role in the leak pretty quiet. Again, I fail to see how this makes State look anything other than disgraceful. It was engaged in a political war with the WH it supposedly serves.
about State being at war with the White House?
In Vino Veritas
is that they've been publicly caught out.
That is all.
-------------
"I don't know." -- Helen Thomas, when asked by White House spokesman Scott McClellan, "Are we at war, Helen?"
Someone will need to help me with a link, but I read yesterday that the team pursuing the lawsuit against Cheney, Rove, and Libby responded to all of this by announcing that they were not going to go after Armitage, because he wasn't viscious in attacking Plame and the others were.
Joe Wilson gets more like Mother Sheehan every day. I wonder if they will end up dribbling watery gruel in the same asylum together. BDS, when it's not amusing, can be tragic.
--
"It is a sordid business, this divvying us up by race." - Chief Justice John Roberts
Sadly, how do the victims get their reputations back?
Colin Powell can kiss goodbye to the prospects that anyone will trust him again. Never mind, he has his mirror to look at.
There are liars, damned liars, statisticians, politicians, novelists and finally the MSM
spent an awful lot of time on this non-story. Bet he goes silent this Sunday.
This has been so juicy that he's sure to mention it.
I think Russert gets too little credit from the right sometimes.
--
"It is a sordid business, this divvying us up by race." - Chief Justice John Roberts
That left of center and unprincipled don't have to be synonymous.
Good for them, but I'm not surprised.
--
"It is a sordid business, this divvying us up by race." - Chief Justice John Roberts