The Essence

by digby

Scotty is having a fit trying to make a distinction between the president leaking classified information and the NSA whistleblowers leaking classified information by saying that the first leak was in the public interest and the second harmed national security. He’s getting very hot under the collar trying to make that case. Clearly, they are very worried about this and they should be.

Here’s the problem. The president pretended that he was disturbed by the leaks in the Plame case and said he wanted the perpetrator to come forward. Now we find out that he was personally authorizing the leak for political purposes. Scotty can call it “in the public interest” but everyone knows it was in the political interest of the president.

The illegal NSA wiretapping program depends upon the nation placing their trust in this same president not to use this warrantless writetapping for political purposes. The fact that he authorized leaking of sensitive classified information for political purposes proves that we should not do this.

They are trying to muddy up the waters with all kinds of arguments about good leaks and bad leaks and what is and isn’t in the public interest. There are issues to be explored of whether or not the president was trying to set the record straight or lying further with the leaking of this NIE. And there are good arguments to be made about all of that. But it is this matter of trust that presents the biggest danger to them.

A reporter needs to ask the following question:

If the president was willing to authorize leaking of national security information to reporters for political purposes, why should we believe he won’t authorize warrantless wiretaps on Americans for political purposes?

Update: Here is the president talking about leaks in October of 2003:

I’ve always interpreted his remarks as a threat. Think how they would sound coming from the mouth of Tony Soprano:

Randy, you tell me, how many sources have you had that’s leaked information that you’ve exposed or have been exposed? Probably none. I mean this town is a — is a town full of people who like to leak information. And I don’t know if we’re going to find out the senior administration official. Now, this is a large administration, and there’s a lot of senior officials. I don’t have any idea. I’d like to. I want to know the truth. That’s why I’ve instructed this staff of mine to cooperate fully with the investigators — full disclosure, everything we know the investigators will find out. I have no idea whether we’ll find out who the leaker is — partially because, in all due respect to your profession, you do a very good job of protecting the leakers. But we’ll find out.

Update II: Haha. The reporter from CNN reports that Scotty was trying to distinguish between a harmful leak and one that serves the public interest. Apparently a harmful leak is one that harms the Bush administration and a leak that serves the public interest is one that helps the Bush administration. Good to know.

Update III: Bush’s leak comments above pertains specifically to Plame so it cannot be used to illustrate his oft repeated admonitions against leaking in general.

Perhaps this one does it better. From the same period in 2003:

Q Mr. President, beyond the actual leak of classified information, there are reports that someone in the administration was trying to—after it was already out—actively spread the story, even calling Ambassador Wilson’s wife “fair game.” Are you asking your staff is anyone did that? And would it be wrong or even a fire-able offense if that happened?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, the investigators will ask our staff about what people did or did not do. This is a town of—where a lot of people leak. And I’ve constantly expressed my displeasure with leaks, particularly leaks of classified information.
And I want to know, I want to know the truth. I want to see to it that the truth prevail. And I hope we can get this investigation done in a thorough way, as quickly as possible.

Here’s the president talking about leaks earlier in his presidency:

Q Mr. President, when you meet with the congressional leadership tomorrow, will you be specific about what they can and cannot relay back up to the Hill? Or, do you just expect them not to relay anything?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I’m going to talk to the leaders about this. I have talked to them about it. I mean, when the classified information first seeped into the public, I called him on the phone and said, this can’t stand. We can’t have leaks of classified information. It’s not in our nation’s interest.

But we’re now in extraordinary times. And I was in the — when those leaks occurred, by the way, it was right before we committed troops. And I knew full well what was about to happen. And yet, I see in the media that somebody, or somebodies, feel that they should be able to talk about classified information. And that’s just wrong. The leadership understands that.

And if there’s concerns, we’ll work it out. I mean, obviously I understand there needs to be some briefings. I want Don Rumsfeld to feel comfortable briefing members of the Armed Services Committee. But I want Congress to hear loud and clear, it is unacceptable behavior to leak classified information when we have troops at risk. I’m looking forward to reiterating that message. And we will work together. We’ve got a great relationship.

Listen, the four leaders with whom I have breakfast on a weekly basis fully understand the stakes. They fully understand the decision I made. And they will have gotten feedback from their members, and we will discuss it. But one thing is for certain, I have made clear what I expect from Capitol Hill when it comes to classified information.

.