Too Little, Too Late
By streiff Posted in The White House — Comments (7) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
The last stitches are going into the shroud containing the putrescent corpse of the Plame Affair. Yesterday, David Broder demanded apologies from the marginal players while studiously ignoring the central role of his own paper's reporters and editorial board in this sordid nothingburger. The New York Times has started to savage Patrick Fizgerald.
Some things don’t change. Joe Wilson remains a pathological liar. Valerie Plame remains blonde. And Richard Armitage remains a cretin.
Read on.
Yesterday, Armitage finally apologized for his role in this affair. An affair which it must be noted cost the US government tens of millions of dollars, an affair which knocked several key Administration officials down Maslow’s hierarchy from self-actualization to mere survival, an affair which made the 2004 election much closer than it should have been.
“It was a terrible error on my part,” Mr. Armitage said in an interview, discussing his conversations with reporters. He added: “There wasn’t a day when I didn’t feel like I had let down the president, the secretary of state, my colleagues, my family and the Wilsons. I value my ability to keep state secrets. This was bad, and I really felt badly about this.”
Indeed it was a terrible error. And we are all sorry. But the self-absorption evident in this statement would have qualified Armitage for a role on Seinfeld. This isn’t about Armitage and his feelings. It is about the damage done to the nation and the calculated duplicity on the part of Armitage, and sadly on the part of his boss Colin Powell, that allowed this minor contretemps to mutate into a scandal that financially ruined a handful of White House staffers, sent Judith Miller to jail, deprived the nation of the services of a dedicated public servant, Scooter Libby, and may very well see Mr. Libby jailed.
It all could have been avoided if either Armitage or Powell had come forward as the story broke and done the honorable thing.
Why didn’t Armitage come forward?
Mr. Armitage, who has been criticized for keeping his silence for nearly three years, said he had wanted to disclose his role as soon as he realized that he was the main source for Robert D. Novak’s column on July 14, 2003, which identified Ms. Wilson. But he held back at the request of Patrick J. Fitzgerald, the prosecutor. “He requested that I remain silent,” Mr. Armitage said.
Fine. He requested it but Armitage was under no moral, legal, or ethical obligation to remain silent and watch others careers ruined. Your own testimony before a grand jury is not covered by grand jury secrecy. In fact, Armitage, “patient zero” in this particular scandal was oddly in no danger whatsoever from Fitzgerald.
Mr. Armitage testified three times before the grand jury, the last time in December 2005. “I was never subpoenaed,” he said. “I was a cooperating witness from the beginning.”
[How an investigator could term the source of the leak he was investigating a “cooperating witness” and not a subject or suspect leads one to believe that Fitzgerald was out for a big name scalp from day one and didn’t have a lot of qualms how he went about taking it. But that is a story for a different day.]
In fact, this part of the story stinks.
That meant Mr. Armitage’s role was known to the Justice Department almost from the outset of the inquiry, two months before Mr. Fitzgerald was named special counsel in the case.
So Armitage still has to account for his actions for the two months that elapsed between him shooting his mouth off to Bob Novak and the alleged omerta being imposed on him by Fitzgerald. Two months, in fact, where he could have single-handedly prevented Fitzgerald from ever being appointed.
The most egregious part of the story is to follow.
He expressed irritation over assertions in some editorials and blogs that, by his silence, he had been disloyal to the Bush administration, saying he had followed President Bush’s repeated instruction that administration officials cooperate with the Fitzgerald inquiry. “I felt like I was doing exactly what he wanted,” he said.
Pause for a moment and savor this. Armitage says he believed that Bush wanted this investigation to damage his administration, he wanted is top political advisor immobilized, he wanted Scooter Libby to be indicted. Surely it would never occur to any of us to step forward, admit what was a minor mistake, and stop this nonsense in its tracks.
The facts here are really clear. Armitage lost a battle with Cheney’s staff and the National Security Council over Iraq policy. The Plame investigation began and he instantly saw the blame focused on the White House. This was convenient because he disliked a lot of the staffers there, disparaged them in front of State Department staff, and probably had a few good yuks as he watched them hire attorneys, trundle down to the grand jury, and get savaged in the press.
One wonders if he’s called Scooter Libby yet to apologize. Probably not because that would imply that he’s capable of caring about someone other than himself.
« McClellan Originally Wanted to Attack Media, Defend Bush — Comments (5) | David Broder Demands an Apology — Comments (5) »
Too Little, Too Late 7 Comments (0 topical, 7 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
In the CBS interview, Mr. Armitage just seemed pitiful to me. I couldn't help but wonder how a man that is so helpless and incapable of conceiving consequences could be effective as the #2 at State. Maybe its says something about State.
The NYT article does seem to clarify a point about Fitz. It appears that he did not know at the time of his press conf. that Armitage was the first leaker (to Woodward) so his claim that it was Libby was not a lie but failing in his investigation. That still leaves unexplained why he has not returned to the public to announce the error in his predicate and his rejustified conclusion.
John E.
Joe Wilson remains a pathological liar. Valerie Plame remains blonde. And Richard Armitage remains a cretin.
And streiff remains on an incredible roll. You are on fire lately! Great stuff.
--
"It is a sordid business, this divvying us up by race." - Chief Justice John Roberts
If Red State hires a second writer, it probably ought to be him.
--
If you're seeing shades of gray, it's because you're not looking close enough to see the black and white dots.
still alive, or it should be, only renamed "Fitz-gate." Armitage worked at State. He told his boss, Colin Powell. Both, I presume, were told to clam up about it by Fitzgerald.
Why? If he knew that no crime had been committed by the White House, why did he continue investigating and blaming them?
One can argue that Powell should have told Fizgerald to stuff and and went to the President with the information. That this was his first obligation. I agree with that sentiment, and I agree that Colin Powell was, in the deepest respect, a bad Secretary of State.
One can argue that Armitage, seeing Powell's reticence and refusal to tell the WH, should have overruled both Fitzgerald and his own boss (Powell) and gone to the President himself. That argument is a little more tenuous, I think, but it could nevertheless be legitimately made.
The villain here is surely Patrick Fitzgerald. When he discovered that his investigation would be for naught, it was his duty either to prosecute Armitage or to end his charade. Instead, he chose to drag it out, obfuscate, and deliberately lie about the White House, the Administration of the President during wartime.
I'm not going to argue that he should be prosecuted for treason, as that is thrown around a bit too much these days. Did he violate his authorizing statue? He most certainly violated the public trust. Did he perjure himself by lying in any legal documents?
Based on the information I've seen, Patrick Fitzgerald should at the very least be disbarred and forbideen from ever practicing law again. He should be disqulalified from any further government service, forfeiting any pensions or other forthcoming benefits.
If this is what it seems to be, and I'll admit that things seldom are in this case, he must be punished also to warn any future special counsels/prosecturs that such behavior violates the public trust and will be punished severely.
Armitage should have tendered his resignation immediately upon learning that he should not have leaked. Powell should either have disobeyed Fitzgerald and told the President or he should have resigned. That they did not is disgraceful.
except there was a two month window from the Novak article until Fitzgerald was appointed when this "scandal" was gathering steam. At that time Armitage could have come forward without ever having spoken to Fitzgerald.
I myself made that charge regarding his accusation that Libby was the first to leak. Are you referring to more than that?
Because the time line that is now being reported indicates that Woodward brought that information forward only after hearing the misstatement in Fitz's press conference. Armitage is saying he didn't remember and tell Fitz until after Woodward reminded him. Of course, that raises additional questions... Did Fitz ask Armitage if he told anybody else? No, then why? Yes, then why is Libby's memory failure more illegal than Armitage's? And why didn't Fitz return to the lecturn to correct his sinister motive predicate for the indictment.
John E.
Let us put aside the politics.
Armitage, under no obligation to do so, kept silent while innocent people were villified in the press, hauled in front of grand juries, and the Left made false accusations against honorable public servants and respected journalists (yes, there are some left). This is an insight into a mind that was far too sociopathic to be in Armitage's position. As you pointed out, his apologia only bolsters this perception.
Colin Powell's slippery rear doesn't need to come out of this debacle unscathed, either. It is high time someone put a question or two to him.