The major sins of the present administration come not from being "wrong" per se so much as not knowing where the limits are. Witness the bloated budget, "faith-based initiatives," Social Security reform, the over-reaching USA PATRIOT act, and the feverish defense of same wherein any question is characterized as amounting to high treason. The point is that the Bushies have taken positions and extrapolated so far that no one but the most partisan and blindly loyal can stomach them.
Now, an odd burp of a story is floating around the Internet about a question from Andrea Mitchell to James Risen on the possibility that CNN reporter Christiane Amanpour was the subject of a government wiretap. The place to start here in The Moderate Voice, where Joe Gandelman has some good analysis and lots of links to get you around. Be prepared for the typical responses in the comments from the usual suspects. Bush backers will say something on the order of, "Well, there must have been a good reason," while anti-Bush people will be throwing I-told-you-sos amidst the predictions or hope of an early impeachment. And let's not forgo the obvious Nixon parallels.
In a nut shell, Mitchell, in interviewing Risen, gave the impression that she was aware that the administration was bugging Amanpour's communications. NBC killed the transcript and issued an oddly phrased statement that implied that NBC thought that the charge was credible but wasn't ready to break the story, which, whether this ends up being true or hooey, is the right thing to do.
Some further thought on this is necessary beyond the expected bickering.
First, if the story is true, then George has some 'splainin' to do. This could become a very messy and huge scandal. It could also lead to the downfall of the administration, and we will be now counting down the hours and minutes until someone utters, "What did the president know and when did he know it?"
It is unconscionable that the administration would spy on journalists.
This could do some major damage, but not necessarily for the reasons already cited, no matter how important. The number one issue here, unfortunately, is not freedom of the press or the violation of civil liberties. If true, what the Bush administration is said to have done will surely do irreparable harm to our national defense. Just as their mismanagement of Iraq now makes it virtually impossible to take on any other terror-sponsoring regime (read: Iran), the crass and illegal surveillance of a prominent reporter--and frequent critic of the administration--will hobble real efforts to track real terror suspects. Thus we see the classic shooting ones self in the foot. Only this time, we aren't just talking about the disgraceful removal of a president, but perhaps the prospect of opening the country up to greater risk of attack. For this alone, the president must be held accountable.
The violation of the law and of Amanpour's civil rights will be the main issues, as they should be, but the real crime will be larger than that. It will be a disaster.
Now, this is assuming that the story is true and that the intent of the administration was malicious. What if the story is true, but the tap came from the other end? Meaning, if the tap was initiated on someone with whom Amanpour had contact, which isn't beyond the realm of possibility. She has done stories on al Qaeda and the Taliban, so it's quite possible that she was contacted by someone on a watch list.
There are other things to consider, also.
- Remember that Andrea Mitchell is the person who said that "everybody knew" about Valerie Plame and then recanted. Mitchell could know something is up, or if she was just throwing out a name, is on her way to subbing on "The View."
- No one so far has heard from Amanpour. Did she know she was being watched, and if so, why isn't CNN all over this?
- If Amanpour was under the scope, was a warrant issued?
- Get ready for a "National security" defense if this gets fleshed out. Which will be it's own fetid pile unless there is something so heinous (i.e. Amanpour's really a spy for al Qaeda!)
- Not all reporters' motives are pure.
- That said, Amanpour's bio is not exactly that of a turncoat, but a gadfly. Yes, yes, she was born in Iran, raised in Britain. Her family fled Iran, I believe, during the Ayatollah's revolution. She can be a pain in the ass sometimes, but that doesn't justify spying.
- Remember Franklin's adage about security and liberty.
- So far everything is speculation by a handful of bloggers.
I'm inclined to wait and see what this is all about. But this is certain: if true, the game is over. If it turns out to be nothing, it's another nail in the media's collective coffin.
Comments