Mr. Rove and the
Access of Evil
Tell Us Your "Source", Judy
by
Greg Palast, July 12, 2005
(Posted here by Wes Penre, July 13, 2005)
Not published in The New York Times
Tuesday, July 12, 2005
The
only thing more evil, small-minded and treacherous than the Bush
Administration's jailing Judith Miller for a crime the Bush
Administration committed, is Judith Miller covering up her Bush
Administration "source."
Judy, Karl Rove ain't no "source." A confidential source -- and I've
worked with many -- is an insider ready to put himself on the line to
blow the whistle on an official lie or hidden danger. I would protect a
source's name with my life and fortune as would any journalist who's not
a craven jerk (the Managing Editor of Time Magazine comes to mind).
But the weasel who whispered "Valerie Plame" in Miller's ear was no
source. Whether it was Karl Rove or some other Rove-tron inside the Bush
regime (and no one outside Bush's band would have had this information),
this was an official using his official info to commit a crime for the
sole purpose of punishing a REAL whistleblower, Joseph Wilson, Plame's
husband, for questioning our President's mythological premise for war in
Iraq.
New York Times reporter Miller and her paper would rather she go to
prison for four months than identify their "source." Why?
Part of her oddball defense is that The Times never ran the story about
Wilson's wife. They get no points
for
that. The Times SHOULD have run the story with the headline: BUSH
OPERATIVE COMMITS FELONY TO PUNISH WHISTLEBLOWER. The lead paragraph
should have been, "Today, Mr. K--- R--- [or other slime ball as
appropriate] attempted to plant sensitive intelligence information on
The New York Times, a felony offense, in an attempt to harm former
Ambassador Joseph Wilson who challenged the President's claim regarding
Iraq's nuclear program."
A Karl Rove or Rove-like creature peddling a back-door smear doesn't
make him a source. Miller's real crime is not concealing a source, but
burying the story. A reporter should never, ever give notes to a grand
jury, but this information is something The Times owes the PUBLIC, not
the prosecutors.
Why didn't The Times run this story? Why not now? Who are they covering
for and why?
Maybe the problem for The Times is that this is the same "source" that
used Miller to promote, as fact, her ersatz report before the invasion
of Iraq that Saddam truly had nukes and bugs and chemicals he could
launch at Los Angeles. That "source" too needs publication, Judy.
Every rule has an exception. My mama always told me to "compliment the
chef" at dinner. But that doesn't apply when the chef pees in your soup.
Likewise, there's an exception to the rule of source protection. When
officialdom uses "you-can't-use-my- name" to cover a lie, the official
is not a source, but a disinformation propagandist -- and Miller and The
Times have been all too willing to play Izvestia to the Bush's
Kremlinesque prevarications.
And that is what Miller is protecting: the evil called "access."
The great poison in the corpus of American journalism is the lust for
tidbits of supposedly "inside" information which is more often than not
inside misinformation parading as hot news.
And thus we have Miller sucking on the steaming sewage pipe of White
House lies about Iraq and spitting
it
out in the pages of The Times as "investigative reporting," for which
The Times has apologized. Likewise, we had the embarrassment of Bob
Woodward's special access to the Oval Office after the September 11
attacks when Woodward reported the exclusive news that the President was
a flawless commander in chief in the war on terror -- for which Woodward
has yet to apologize.
While reporting from the Potemkin village of decision-making set up for
him at the White House, Woodward missed the real story that, in the
words of the Downing Street memo, our leaders were losing track of Osama
while they spent their time "fixing the intelligence" on Iraq. Even if
Woodward learned of it, would he have reported it at the risk of losing
his access to evil?
As Karl Rove chuckles and Judy does time, we are left to ask, What are
Miller and The New York Times doing: protecting the name of a source or
covering up their conduit to the Bush gang's machinery of deception?
One can only be sympathetic to Miller for choosing jail over bending to
the power of the State. But as T.S. Eliot said,
"The last temptation is the greatest treason,
To do the right deed for the wrong reason."
Greg Palast is the author of the New York Times
bestseller, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy. Subscribe to his
commentaries or view his investigative reports for BBC Television at
www.GregPalast.com