Specifically Vague

Over at Slate John Dickerson observes that despite the immediate sensation created on news tickers across the country yesterday, Scott McClellan's big bombshell announcement really amounts to . . . nothing we didn't know already.

It's not that his frankness in copping to passing along incorrect information isn't a big deal. It's that McClellan, by apparent design, has done so rather innocuously. To wit:

. . . McClellan said the five administration officials had been "involved" in putting out the bogus information. The word was too vague. It could have meant many different things. With respect to Rove and Libby, McClellan was already on the record saying that they'd mislead him. But was he now saying the same thing about Bush, Cheney and Card? If so, why didn't McClellan just say so? I had unknowingly passed along false information. And five of the highest ranking officials in the administration knew it. That would be big news, indeed.

Indeed. Emphasis John's. There you have it. The nickel version of what didn't happen yesterday.

McClellan on Plamegate

UPDATE: It's not clear to me what all this amounts to. The guy says he passed along false information. From what little I've found online, the general reaction is "Yeah, who hasn't?" The prevailing idea is that McClellan wants to sell his book, so he says something grand to get people's attention.

What strikes me is how few words have been exchanged on this topic today. I haven't seen any political fallout type discussions going on. So here I go betraying my political naivety once more: Is there something I just don't get? Is this actually a non-issue?
__________

Holy Political Whiplash, Batman!

Former White House press secretary Scott McClellan blames President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney for efforts to mislead the public about the role of White House aides in leaking the identity of a CIA operative. In an excerpt from his forthcoming book, McClellan recounts the 2003 news conference in which he told reporters that aides Karl Rove and I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby were "not involved" in the leak involving operative Valerie Plame. "There was one problem. It was not true," McClellan writes, according to a brief excerpt released Tuesday. "I had unknowingly passed along false information. And five of the highest-ranking officials in the administration were involved in my doing so: Rove, Libby, the vice president, the president's chief of staff and the president himself." [snip] White House press secretary Dana Perino said it wasn't clear what McClellan meant in the excerpt and she had no immediate comment.

Unlike Dana Perino, I think it's exactly clear what McClellan meant. I am, however, still trying to get my head around what it might mean in the immediate future. Count on hearing a lot of people ask a lot of questions.

Scooter Madness

Everybody's blogging about Scooter. I count 21 out of 23 posts at Talking Points Memo, since 5:45 EST, dealing with the Libby sentence commutation (no, it's not a pardon--a pardon would mean Libby would not be able to invoke the 5th amendment and would therefore be a liability to the administration were he to be called to testify in future investigations; see here, here and here for more). And the other two posts did make mention of Libby, as in "Just so it doesn't get lost in the Libby avalanche," and "I hate to rain on the all Libby all the time parade . . . . "

TPMmuckracker runs close behind with 9 posts about Libby since the news broke. FireDogLake has 6 posts on the Scooter events, and a 7th just before news of the commutation broke about the judge's denial to delay prison while Libby appeals (which is quite the moot point now).

Washington Monthly shows only 3 posts on the subject, but Kevin Drum is on vacation--and posted anyway--and Steve Benen is pulling double duty covering Kevin's desk and keeping up his own at The Carpetbagger Report.

Matthew Yglesias posts a meager 2 items on the subject, while his colleague at The Atlantic Online, Andrew Sullivan, posts 3 items, the most interesting of which ushers in a breath of fresh air and a reminder that this isn't just about liberals and conservatives.

Is it now the conservative position that only left-wingers actually object to people getting away with perjury? . . . It seems to me that real conservatives - not the lawless hoodlums now parading under that banner - should be as outraged as anyone.

Daily Kos has 8 posts on Libby, if you don't count the multiple updates to each post which would jack that total to about 17. Atrios has a couple or three, and easily more comments than anyone else (how does he do that?!). Digby also has three, and I just realized I don't have her on my Voices list, a mistake to be remedied promptly. I love her chagrin:

Just in case Bush's Fourth of July "fuck you" to the American people wasn't emphatic enough, here's a double "fuck you," with a twist . . . .

She goes on to discuss Karl Rove's continued--and questionable--roll in the White House as "Bush's Brain," pointing to a Washington Post article on Rove's security clearances given his role in and around the Valerie Plame affair.

And oh yeah, Drudge has Scooter coverage too. The first 11 items on the page are Scooter related. Go figure.

Anyway, that's what I've been doing with my time since the news broke. Almost more fun than writing about Scooter myself. Just wanted to share.

Presidential Prerogative

George W. Bush, February 11 2004:

"If there's a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is," Bush told reporters at an impromptu news conference during a fund-raising stop in Chicago, Illinois. "If the person has violated law, that person will be taken care of.

"I welcome the investigation. I am absolutely confident the Justice Department will do a good job.

"I want to know the truth," the president continued. "Leaks of classified information are bad things."

George W. Bush, July 2 2007:

Mr. Libby was a first-time offender with years of exceptional public service and was handed a harsh sentence based in part on allegations never presented to the jury.

. . . I have concluded that the prison sentence given to Mr. Libby is excessive. Therefore, I am commuting the portion of Mr. Libby’s sentence that required him to spend thirty months in prison.

There you have it.


UPDATE: As Christy Hardin Smith pointed out:

The sentence as laid out carefully by Judge Walton was well within the sentencing guidelines — in fact, it was mid-range in the guidelines. The President may well feel that a 30 months sentence is excessive for someone who has been convicted of multiple federal felonies — but, it is entirely false to say that the sentence is excessive within the guidelines. It is an attempt at spin and shold not be allowed to stand unchallenged.

Scooter Gets a Pass

I'm reluctant to blog about Scooter Libby, because so many people who know much more than I do and wax angrier than I can are already doing such a good job. My favorite post so far? Jane Hamsher captures the outrage:

. . . George Bush thumbed his nose once again at the very concept of democracy and the Beltway Brahmins are cheering. The dirty unwashed masses who populate our juries are fit to judge each other, but evidently not the ruling class. David Broder can breathe a sigh of relief that People Like Him are safe from those overly zealous US Attorneys who might want to hold them accountable to the same absurd standards that the little people must live by.