OPINION & EDITORIAL
When dirty tricks catch up with you
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Josh Moskowitz:
- Taser experiments will help save lives (April 7, 2005)
- Planted articles hurt Iraqi democracy (December 14, 2005)
- DeLay's tactics catch up with him, finally (April 15, 2005)
- Iran key concern for Israel (January 26, 2006)
- Journalism out in jeopardy (April 25, 2005)
Related Stories:
- Harriet Miers: a true conservative (October 13, 2005)
- GOP unlikely to repeat in 06' (September 13, 2006)
- Judges need diverse résumés (February 13, 2007)
- Fulfilling their constitutional duty (September 27, 2005)
- From the desk of the opinion editors (January 15, 2006)
by Josh Moskowitz
Monday, August 8, 2005
As the heat and humidity begin to descend upon Washington D.C. in these initial dog days of summer, the political climate in the Beltway has also begun to swelter. Whether it’s the nomination of a new Supreme Court justice, the president’s Social Security plan, or the situation in Iraq, the political arena is chock full of intrigue, mystery, and divisiveness. Though these issues promise to invigorate and mobilize activists from across the spectrum, the issue with the most potential to galvanize the nation is Karl Rove’s involvement in the CIA leak case.
This issue has the capability of delivering a crucial and critical blow to President Bush’s administration and may have finally shredded the veil of secrecy that this administration highly values and prides itself on.
Karl Rove and George W. Bush have formed an inextricable relationship since Bush began his political career in Texas. The architect of Bush’s gubernatorial and presidential campaigns, Rove has become a political mastermind and master manipulator. While his handling of various political candidates has resulted in monumental success, his methods and tactics for victory have come under question and scrutiny prior to the CIA leak.
In 1970, Rove was found to have snuck into the office of Illinois Democratic Senator Alan Dixon and stole some of his letterhead. Rove then created a number of fliers promising “free beer, free food, girls and a good time for nothing,” and distributed them at rock concerts and homeless shelters. In 1980, Rove was fired from George H. W. Bush’s vice-presidential campaign after leaking information to journalist Robert Novak, a prime player in the CIA-leak scandal. In 2000, Rove was suspected of authorizing a South Carolina poll that asked, “Would you be more likely or less likely to vote for John McCain for president if you knew he had fathered an illegitimate black child?” McCain, who appeared with his adopted Bangladeshi daughter in numerous photo-ops, had to fend off questions regarding his daughter’s relationship to him. The momentum McCain’s Straight Talk Express had aroused during the Republican primary was all bust lost in South Carolina.
And in 2005, Rove elicited anger and condemnation from Democrats when he remarked, “Liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers.” Conservatives, he said, “saw the savagery of 9/11 and the attacks and prepared for war.” Appalled, many congressional Democrats called on Rove to resign for his apparent use of September 11 as a political device. Though able to fend off these past cries of outrage and criticism, Rove’s tactics may have finally caught up with him in the CIA leak case.
On July 6, 2003, career ambassador Joe Wilson published a column in the New York Times accusing the Bush administration of relying on and proving false information to the American public in its decision to go to war in Iraq. President Bush, in his 2003 State of the Union address, told Americans, “the British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.” Wilson refuted this in his column, saying that he had traveled to Niger in 2002 at the urging of the CIA to investigate claims that Saddam Hussein sought materials used in making weapons of mass destruction and had found nothing to corroborate this assumption.
Eight days after Wilson’s piece was published, conservative columnist Bob Novak published a piece questioning Wilson’s legitimacy as a weapons expert. In the piece, he wrote, “Wilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction. Two senior administration officials told me Wilson’s wife suggested sending him to Niger to investigate the Italian report.” This outing of Ms. Plame, an obvious act of retaliation for Mr. Wilson’s dissent, may have violated the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982, which punishes government employees who disclose covert agent’s identities to the public. A federal investigation was started, seeking to uncover the identity of Mr. Novak’s source.
Two years later, the investigation continues without any charges being filed against government employees. However, two journalists, Judith Miller of The New York Times and Mathew Cooper of Time Magainze, faced jail time after refusing to divulge the identities of their sources they used in covering the Wilson affair. While Miller sits in jail, Cooper avoided prison after his “source” relieved him of his commitment to keep his source’s identity secret. This “source,” in later days, would appear to be Karl Rove.
Cooper allegedly first learned from Karl Rove that Wilson’s wife was a C.I.A. officer. Mr. Rove also may have told Cooper that Mr. Wilson’s wife had played a role in sending Mr. Wilson to Africa to investigate uranium sales to Iraq. While Rove never mentioned Ms. Plame’s name or say she was a covert officer, his candidness is a far cry from repeated White House statements over the past two years saying that administration officials had nothing to do with identifying Ms. Wilson.
It would behoove Mr. Rove to finally come clean and publicly discuss his involvement in the CIA leak. While President Bush continues to call for the head of anyone involved in this criminal conspiracy, Democrats should call upon Rove to speak openly about his involvement. Though some Democrats, like former presidential nominee John Kerry, have foolishly called on Rove to resign his post before he has been charged with a crime, they should continue to pressure Rove to speak and emerge from the stealth confines of the Bush administration. A blunder like this could propel Democrats to regain crucial seats in the 2006 midterm election and become a political force once again.
Josh Moskowitz (jmoskowitz@badgerherald.com) is a senior majoring in political science and journalism.
Anonymous (August 8, 2005 @ 10:43pm):
"the president's Social Security plan"
As opposed to the Democrat "plan" of "do nothing and see what happens" to this massive ponzi scam?
Anonymous (August 11, 2005 @ 7:16pm):
As always, Josh. a well documented and well researched piece...yours is a voice that causes one to think..
Anonymous (August 15, 2005 @ 3:18pm):
If you just removed the cap, the problem of "imminent bankruptcy" claimed by supporters of Bush's plan would be delayed by at least 20 years. And since the "imminent bankruptcy" isn't due for another 15-20 years, removing the cap would save social security for at least a generation. Sounds like a good start to me.
Anonymous (August 19, 2005 @ 12:55am):
If you remove the cap will you also increase the benefits for those who pay more? It's already "progressive" in that the "return" for low paid is much higher than for high paid taxpayers.
Or will you cave and admit that it's just a welfare program financed by a payroll tax?
Anonymous (August 23, 2005 @ 1:09pm):
Social Security (not the main point of the actual article) aside, good work, Josh. Just when one thought politics couldn't get much uglier, Rove came along and made the whole thing total crap. And not just from the Republican's side either. (The Democrats haven't taken actual worthwhile INITIATIVE since the early to mid-90's)
You wrote some great pieces from both viewpoints last year, and I'm looking forward to it again. All of us moderates thank you.
Anonymous (August 25, 2005 @ 9:10pm):
interesting article
Anonymous (August 31, 2005 @ 3:48pm):
Aw, the Badger Herald is removing the comment box from Mohammed Abed's article so we can't tell him what a terrorist asshole he is. I guess the Badger Herald likes terrorists! Oh no, they don't want anyone to retort because only terrorists get to say anything. You bunch of liberal babies!
