Tuesday, July 24, 2012

Somebody Should be Fired, RIght?

When the Plame leaks became an item in the press George W. Bush vowed to fire anyone in his administration who was caught leaking classified information.  Libby was basically fired while Armitage was not rehired.

Fast forward to now; Senator Feinstein has released a cat from the bag.  Since we know there will be no Independent Prosecutor coming from the withHolder Department will anyone at least be fired?  Will anyone in high places even call for anyone to be fired?

They need to, even if for show.  Otherwise how will they withstand the pressure of being number one on the "we prosecute leakers" list--including Bradley Manning--while pretending such laws don't apply to them?

MORE  7/24/12

Some reactions from the comment section of Maguire's blog.  Obama, speaking about leakers:
The notion that my White House would purposely release classified national security information is offensive. It’s wrong and people, I think, need to have a better sense of how I approach this office and how the people around me approach this office.
And a flashback to Obama's take on the Libby commutation:
Barack Obama's campaign released a statement saying the decision "cements the legacy of an Administration characterized by a politics of cynicism and division, one that has consistently placed itself and its ideology above the law."
With a complicit and helpful media there is an easy way to handle this--fire someone. Do it quick, they will help everyone forget. Don't do it and all those leak prosecutions, and Manning, will become a symbol of unbridled presidential power crushing dissent.  In theory, at least.


Fox and AP characterize a statement late today as Feinstein walking back her assertion from yesterday that the administration needs to come to grips with the fact they leaked.  In reality her statement sounds more like a bash at Romney for seizing on her remarks since she didn't clear the administration, only clarified that she doesn't know any names.  Her comments yesterday were clear however--the leaks could hardly be coming from anywhere else.  That's why she said it. 

In classic mode both the NY Times and WaPo decided to pass on the original AP Feinstein story from last night, spending most of the day happily ignoring all the blog reports until finally going to press with stories about Romney's speech late this afternoon.  Neither mentioned Feinstein.  At all.  One wonders if they are right now trying to figure out how to get her walkback on the record without mentioning her while mentioning Romney, who mentioned her.  Or, perhaps both deliberately waited for DiFi to do her walkback so they could run then stories about Romney's speech complete with official administration retorts (Obama-approved?), all without the bi-partisan flavor.  Remember, both have been recipients of juicy leaks.

Even more hilarious, the vaunted ABC News also passed on the DiFi story today until reporting on Romney's speech later this afteroon, alluding to DiFi's comments by linking a HuffPo story (actually the original AP story).  Obviously they would have linked their own story had they had one.   


Right Truth said...

Feinstein cam out later and backtracked, said she misspoke. I guess she got a call from Barack's enforcers.

Right Truth

A.C. McCloud said...

Maybe they threatened to call her a racist.