« The Ace of Spades HQ Guide for Quickly Determining If a Scandal Hurts Liberals or Conservatives |
Main
|
Fly the Terrorist-Friendly Skies: Aircrews Confirm Muslims "Probing" Security »
July 22, 2004
TNR's Editor-in-Chief Savages Wilson & Berger
Thanks to NRO for this must-read piece. Bear in mind: Marty Peretz is a Democratic loyalist, and perhaps wanted Al Gore to be President more than Al Gore himself did.
He's brutal on The Fabulist and The Thief. Just a taste:
The tale spun by former Ambassador Joseph Wilson that Iraq did not ever try to buy uranium yellowcake from Niger is now in the process of unraveling. And, of course, the phalanx of anti-war journalists is desperately trying to stop the bust-up. But it can't be done.
...
He has long denied that [his wife] had anything to do with his going to Niger and that, alas, was a lie. It appears, in fact, that this is the sole reason he was sent. Still, in a lot of dining rooms where I am a guest here, there is outrage that someone in the vice president's office "outed" Ms. Plame, as though everybody in Georgetown hadn't already known she was under cover, so to speak. Under cover, but not really. One guest even asserted that someone in the vice president's office is surely guilty of treason, no less--an offense this person certainly wouldn't have attributed to the Rosenbergs or Alger Hiss, Daniel Ellsberg or Philip Agee. But for the person who confirmed for Robert Novak what he already knew, nothing but high crimes would do.
I confess: I do not like Sandy Berger; and I have not liked him since the first time we met, long ago during the McGovern campaign, not because of his politics since I more or less shared them then, but for his hauteur. He clearly still has McGovernite politics, which means, in my mind, at least, that he believes there is no international dispute that can't be solved by the U.S. walking away from it. No matter.
...
A more important question, of course, is: What was contained in the papers that Berger snatched? The answer to that question might answer another. Maybe Clinton's top national security aide didn't want others to see what they documented.
If The New Republic's top editor doesn't shy from mentioning the obvious possible motive for the theft (that is, to, like, steal them), then I think it's fair to say this isn't an outrageous suggestion.
Speculative at this point? Yes. Outrageous? No.
Might even be true.