Mmmm. Reputation Mincemeat
Thud is questioning whether leaking a CIA agent’s information should be the thing that brings down George W. Bush.
Take a breath before you jump on me with claws bare. Think a moment: what two things threatened the Clinton presidency more than anything else? Whitewater and Zippergate. And what’s put the Bush presidency in a bind right now? One blown cover of one agent.I don’t want to minimize the seriousness of blowing a covert operative’s cover for partisan purposes. But—and this is my point—even if he doesn’t survive this debacle, Bush’s credibility should have been mincemeat a long time before now.
As always, John’s bringing up an excellent point. Bush’s credibility should be shot, already. The man’s record is worse than just the Iraqi war – there’s the issue of tax cuts that weren’t really tax cuts, pork for corporate interests, and stories of petty squabbles with other politicians. And that’s just a taste of what he’s done since he’s been in office.
Yes, the man’s reputation should be shot all to Hell. And there are a lot of indicators that it is. Polls recently showed Bush would lose an election to two of the current Democratic frontrunners. People are not satisfied with the job he’s been doing. And there are more and more allegations coming out about how Bush has lied, cajoled, and threatened his way through his first term. And recently some magazines and papers have become a lot less shy of running unflattering pictures of the potus (the horror, the horror).
But, in all fairness, John does wind up “minimizing the seriousness of blowing a covert operation’s cover” – although not necessarily for partisan purposes. The CIA recently produced a sizeable report on the obvious results such a leak has in store, to say nothing of the covert actions taken on the intelligence that we may never know of.
And there’s the fact that leaking this kind of information is criminal, and for good reason. This leak not only threatens the life and security of a former agent and her family, but it also threatens national security. You don’t go around outing undercover agents over political vendettas. It will come back and bite you in the ass if you do – one way or another.
We need to know what happened. And we need to know if our President or his advisors – who have talked so big about making our nation safe – were willing to risk our national security in order to settle a personal score.
What does this all mean?
There’s plenty of reason to bring Bush down. This is only a part of the puzzle. However, this is a serious breach and deserves a lot more attention than it’s gotten.
October 1st, 2003 at 7:25 am
Yes, I realize it has national consequences. But the failure of one operation is unlikely to bring about the kind of negative lifestyle changes in the American public as ten years of massive deficits caused by Bush’s intentionally anti-employment economic policies.
If suggesting Bush’s plan for the top 1% of America is much more dangerous to the US than the blowing of Plame’s cover seems to be minimizing the seriousness of national defense, it’s because the impact of Bush’s plan has been significantly minimized itself.
October 1st, 2003 at 9:27 am
You’re right, John. Bush has done a lot more to do in the country than just this leak. And his economic policy will probably have a much more direct effect on the American citizenry as a whole.
My point was not that we should be concentrating specifically on this because it will bring Bush down, but rather that we should still push for an investigation because it is the right thing to do. Bush’s economic plan may be harmful to the American people, and his ecological plans may destroy our environment, and his educational plans may endanger the public school system – but they’re all legally pushed through. This, on the other hand, is a criminal act and deserves a fair investigation. And we won’t get a fair investigation unless we press for one.