1 Boring Old Man

Not long ago, when the National Intelligence Estimate was leaked, President Bush made an angry speech saying it was leaked as a political maneuver in the lead up to the elections. That was, of course, a little weird since one of his White House staffers, indicted Cheney aide, Scooter Libby, leaked the N.I.E. back in 2003 by Bush’s authority. When the Foley story broke, any number of people accused the Democrats of leaking the story in the run up to the midterm elections. Yesterday, when Curt Weldon’s associate’s and daughter’s houses were raided, Weldon immediately suggested a political motive, "three weeks before the election."

It’s true. We move from "leak" to "leak" these days. In fact, "leaks" are the news. What’s our choice? Without the leaks, all we would know would be the heavily filtered, sanitized, distorted information that comes from the Bush Administration. It’s as if the Iron Curtain went up in the U.S.S.R., and it came down in the United States. That’s how the Communists did it, controlled the flow of information so tightly that their people knew nothing worth knowing.

My favorite was Cheney’s call to Bob Woodward after State of Denial was released. Cheney had discussed with Woodward the fact that Henry Kissinger was a frequent White House visitor and confidente. Woodward used it in his book, in a not particularly flattering way. Cheney was furious. How dare Woodward use the truth to criticize the Bush Administration? Cheney felt tricked.

Unfortunately, since we cannot believe what we’re being told any more, we rely on whistle-blowing for our real news. But who started it? They did. In the lead-in to the Iraq War, there was a media blitz, spearheaded by Judith Miller of the New York Times, of leaks about Saddam Hussein’s Weapons of Mass Destruction. That was a "dirty trick." By leaking these stories from [con man] Ahmad Chalabi and government sources, the information was not subjected to any rigorous scrutinty – and most of it was false. The Bush Administration supported its road to war with leaks. When Joe Wilson wrote his oped piece, the Administration countered it with leaks – leaking his wife’s identity in an attempt to discredit him.

It’s as if there’s a Civil War in the United States being fought with leaked information. That being the case, we have to develop a new standard for evaluating such information. We can’t use the motives of the "leaker" to evaluate what we’re being told anymore. All whistle-blowers have motives. I know! Let’s uses these:

• "… the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth."
• the leaked information is countering a public lie [commission]
• the leaked information has been withheld to tell a public lie [ommission]

Sounds a little bit like Catholic Confession or an A.A. Step or a Witness on the stand. I like it. It’s the way our Founders wanted us to do things.

The only reason for governmental secrecy is National Defense, not Political Gain. Another set:

• Is the leak exposing a lie?
• Is the leak protecting a lie?
• Is the leak telling a lie?

I’m on a roll…