Wednesday :: Dec 19, 2007

Great Symbolism

by Steve

AP photo of the fire this morning in Dick Cheney's ceremonial office

I guess Shooter and Addington got a little overzealous in burning the evidence this morning.

On a more serious note, the White House is pissed at the NYT for reporting today that despite previous claims that only Harriet Miers was involved in deliberations on what to do with the CIA interrogation tapes, it turns out that Alberto Gonzales and Cheney's hatchetman Addington also participated in discussions from 2003 to 2005 about the tapes.

That should tell you everything you need to know. I'm sure the 2004 election and any possible disclosure of these tapes during that time played no part whatsoever in these discussions.

At the very least, while these discussions were going on and at a time when the 9/11 Commission and several courts asked about these tapes, there was no edict issued from the White House to the CIA to preserve them. The NYT went farther today, claiming that a senior former intelligence official with direct knowledge of the 2003-2005 discussions (Tenet, McLaughlin, Negroponte?) said that some in the White House wanted the tapes burned, a claim the White House disputes, knowing that not one of the attorneys involved will be allowed to testify in public on the matter as long as current faux-AG Mike Mukasey stonewalls Congress and the courts.

Update: As commenter Nash notes correctly and as the updated AP wire story now notes, the White House isn't disputing the core of the NYT story, but rather the original subheadline in the Times story which claimed White House had been misleading the media about its true role. The Times has now corrected its subheadline, but the end result is that the White House is not disputing what the former senior intelligence official said: that four senior staff actively talked about destroying the tapes at a time when they were sought by the 9/11 Commission and the courts.

Steve :: 10:34 AM :: Comments (9) :: Digg It!