|
So I am working on an Op/Ed about the Plame case that I would like to submit somewhere. Do you all think this is a strong enough editorial? Am I missing anything?
Time For Bush's True "Accountability Moment"
July 13, 2005
In January 2005, on the heels of his second coronation, George W. Bush was asked by the Washington Post about the declining situation in Iraq, and if anyone in his administration should be held accountable.
Specifically, a reporter from The Washington Post stated: "In Iraq, there's been a steady stream of surprises. We weren't welcomed as liberators, as Vice President Cheney had talked about. We haven't found the weapons of mass destruction as predicted. The postwar process hasn't gone as well as some had hoped. Why hasn't anyone been held accountable, either through firings or demotions, for what some people see as mistakes or misjudgments?"
Bush responded "Well, we had an accountability moment, and that's called the 2004 election." Bush's message was clear: The only time he thinks he is accountable to the American people is on election day. He doesnt' believe he's accountable any other time.
I would argue that the President of the United States, whether he knows it or not, is accountable to the American people 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days of the year.
There's been a lot of talk about White House accountability recently, in the wake of revelations that Bush's "brain" (and Deputy Chief of Staff) Karl Rove, held conversations with Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper about a covert CIA operative, who we now know is Valerie Plame. Rove has contained that he did not know Plame's name, and did not know her status as a covert CIA operative. Cooper is currently testifying before a grand jury about his conversations with Rove, and Time magazine has turned over Cooper's emails related to those conversations. Another reporter, Judith Miller of the New York Times, is currently in jail for refusing to identify her sources in the Plame case.
At issue is who in the administration leaked Valerie Plame's identity, assumedly as retaliation against her husband. Valerie Plame's husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, traveled to Africa in 2002 to investigate claims that Iraq had tried to acquire yellow cake uranium from Africa. Ambassador Wilson found no evidence that Iraq had purchased yellowcake uranium from Africa, and upon his return to the United States, briefed the C.I.A. and the State Department African Affairs Bureau on his findings. He also contributed an opinion/editorial to the New York Times, entitled "What I Did Not Find in Africa."
Yet dispite this, and the doubts that others in the intelligence community had, George W. Bush repeated the Iraq/Africa uranium claim in his 2003 State of the Union Speech. Since that time, some officials in the administration have had to admit that it should have been deleted from Bush's speech.
The Bush administration's rush to war in Iraq appears to be at the very heart of the Valerie Plame debacle. If indeed her identity was purposefully leaked, as retaliation against her husband debunking the Iraq/Africa uranium claim, then someone within the Bush administration appears to be guilty of treason. Currently, an indepedent counsel, Patrick Fitzgerald, is investigating the outing of Valerie Plame.
At the end of the day, it comes down to one word: accountability. The Bush administration's accountability to the American people is at issue here. In September 2003, Bush promised to "take appropriate action" against "anybody in my administration who leaked classified information." In 2004, he promised to fire anyone in his administration found leaking Valerie Plame's name.
So, will Bush be a man of his word? Will he fire Karl Rove or anyone else in his administration who might be found guilty of disclosing the identity of a covert CIA operative?
Everything he has done during his presidency, indicates that George W. Bush will not demand accountability. He has a history of rewarding the incompetence of those around him (I offer Condoleeza Rice and Alberto Gonzales as examples).
Bush has given a lot of lip service to responsibility and accountability. Often during the 2000 campaign, and since then, he has talked of ushering in a new era of responsiblity. In 2002, he said "And here at home I think we have an opportunity to help change a culture -- one that has said, if it feels good, go ahead and do it. And if you've got a problem, blame somebody else."
By his statement to the Washington Post earlier this year, Bush clearly thinks that his moment of accountability has passed (and by default, that of those around him).
Oh contraire, W! It is high noon for your administration, and time for your true "accountability moment."
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
