“How about this for a new communications plan: No one investigates themselves. No one take the Fifth. No executive privilege is asserted to protect anyone in the White House from testifying. Everyone tells the truth. And Holder goes. Otherwise it just looks like more spin and more prevarication from a White House determined to do everything but tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.”
—-Washington Post conservative blogger Jennifer Rubin, discussing the Obama Administration’s defensive and evasive posture in response to the various scandals within.
I was torn about how best to raise the issue of why Eric Holder’s removal as Attorney General is an ethical imperative. Labeling President Obama an Ethics Dunce in his ridiculous decision to leave the investigation of Holder’s conduct in the various news media investigations to the Justice Department itself was fair, but obvious. Noting the apparent dishonesty of Holder’s denial to Congress that he was involved in the surveillance of James Rosen—
“In regard to potential prosecution of the press for the disclosure of material — this is not something I’ve ever been involved in, heard of, or would think would be wise policy.”
—-seemed too easy, and I also do get tired of the word-parsing employed by the seemingly impenetrable Obama defenders here, for which this would be blood in the water. “But Jack, Rosen has not been prosecuted…Holder only said he wasn’t involved in any journalist’s prosecution. Naming him as a conspirator to get a warrant* isn’t a prosecution!” Yes, yes, I know. It’s deceit again. How clever. How dead wrong to be coming from an Attorney General testifying to Congress and the American people. And how typical of Eric Holder.
Rubin’s quote, however, captures the point, and more. She also quoted CBS’s Bob Shieffer, notable for breaking ranks among the President’s “Praetorian Guard” ( thank-you, James Taranto!) among media heavyweights and being openly critical of Obama’s minions in all three (or four) scandals, who said this week,
“It’s reached the point that if I want to interview anyone in the administration on camera—from the lowest-level worker to a White House official—I have to go through the White House Press Office. If their chosen spokesman turns out to have no direct connection to the story of the moment—as was the case when U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice was sent out to explain the Benghazi episode—then that’s what we, and you the taxpayer, get, and it usually isn’t much. So I am glad the President has asked the attorney general to review whether his investigations into leaks is having a chilling effect on journalists,” said Schieffer in closing. “But it shouldn’t stop there. The president needs to rethink his entire communications policy top to bottom. It is hurting his credibility and shortchanging the public. And to head the review, how about someone other than the attorney general whose department is so deeply involved? That makes no sense to me.”
Nor me. I really don’t comprehend how anyone who is being honest and objective can disagree with Shieffer or Rubin, or how the President’s refusal to ask for Holder’s resignation can be seen as anything less offensive than cronyism, weak leadership, or stubbornness, and probably all three.
* Earlier, this read “subpoena,” which was both wrong and careless.
Source: Washington Post (Jennifer Rubin)
Graphic: Pat Dollard