Talking Points Memo: by Joshua Micah Marshall: January 11, 2004 – January 17, 2004 Archives
DIANE SAWYER
(Off Camera) But stated as a hard fact, that there were weapons of mass destruction as opposed to the possibility that he could move to acquire those weapons still.
PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH
So what’s the difference?
I see a campaign theme . . . . some obviously different facts treated identically and some similar facts treated differently: one obvious example is the diligence employed in ferreting out who leaked the name of a covert CIA operatice to the press vs how a widely respected former cabinet officer got some papers that discredit the administration.
Didn’t take long to find someone else who saw this . . . .
Now, here is why this ugly matter finds its way into my roundup: The Bush administration wasted no time – one day – in launching a fierce, legal attack against O’Neill, while it still has not shown any genuine interest in discovering who disclosed the identity of Valerie Plame, the CIA employee whose husband argued, in a New York Times column, that Bush had misled the public about Iraq’s supposed purchase of “yellow cake” from an African nation.
What is the difference between these two alleged breaches of loyalty? I will not insult the intelligence of my gentle readers by trying to explain.