Nadagate

Posted · Add Comment

Christopher Hitchens has a great article in Slate on the fallout from the Valerie Plame leak investigation.

As most of us have long suspected, the man who told Novak about Valerie Plame was Richard Armitage, Colin Powell’s deputy at the State Department and, with his boss, an assiduous underminer of the president’s war policy. (His and Powell’s—and George Tenet’s—fingerprints are all over Bob Woodward’s “insider” accounts of post-9/11 policy planning, which helps clear up another nonmystery: Woodward’s revelation several months ago that he had known all along about the Wilson-Plame connection and considered it to be no big deal.) The Isikoff-Corn book, which is amusingly titled Hubris, solves this impossible problem of its authors’ original “theory” by restating it in a passive voice:

The disclosures about Armitage, gleaned from interviews with colleagues, friends and lawyers directly involved in the case, underscore one of the ironies of the Plame investigation: that the initial leak, seized on by administration critics as evidence of how far the White House was willing to go to smear an opponent, came from a man who had no apparent intention of harming anyone.

In the stylistic world where disclosures are gleaned and ironies underscored, the nullity of the prose obscures the fact that any irony here is only at the authors’ expense. It was Corn in particular who asserted—in a July 16, 2003, blog post credited with starting the entire distraction—that:

The Wilson smear was a thuggish act. Bush and his crew abused and misused intelligence to make their case for war. Now there is evidence Bushies used classified information and put the nation’s counter-proliferation efforts at risk merely to settle a score. It is a sign that with this gang politics trumps national security.

After you have noted that the Niger uranium connection was in fact based on intelligence that has turned out to be sound, you may also note that this heated moral tone (“thuggish,” “gang”) is now quite absent from the story. It turns out that the person who put Valerie Plame’s identity into circulation was a staunch foe of regime change in Iraq. Oh, that’s all right, then. But you have to laugh at the way Corn now so neutrally describes his own initial delusion as one that was “seized on by administration critics.”

I’m still waiting to see the New York Times editorial page’s response to this massive waste of time, money and media credibility that they demanded. I’m getting dizzy already just anticipating the spin.

0 Responses to "Nadagate"
  1. Alexander Alt says:

    Those of us who followed the Plame Fauxstory have known for some time that 1) the “leak” did not come out of the White House, 2) that the Fitzgerald investigation was bunk, and 3) that Joseph Wilson’s story cannot stand any kind of scrutiny.

    The fact that all three of these statements are true, and yet the likes of David Shuster and the NY Times continue to bellyache about this fake story, shows how deluded and out of touch the left and the media are.

Comments are closed.

 
 
%d bloggers like this: