..out of the dark

Instead, the beltway media has been put on trial, shoving Libby's inconsequential perjury and obstruction of justice into virtual obscurity. Because, as the truth is becoming more and more apparent, what we have is not reporters who are peddling in dirty gossip among the higher stratas of political power in Washington. No, we have in fact reporters who are willing participants in planting stories that they know they cannot corroborate.

As the director of the VP's public face explains, there are three categories of sources for these reporters:
1. Official statement.
2. Unofficial, can quote SAO (Senior administration official), etc.
3. Background. Can use information, reveal part of government individual works at, agency, and so on.
4. Deep background. Can use information, but not reveal the origin.

Also, as widely used by the White House when it comes to making statements that should be official, about official business, and officially available information, on current events - "Off the record". This means the reporters are briefed on how to understand a specific issue. Much time and work is put into this process, as controlling the message is so important.

Now, this does not merely extend to the press- corps immediately following the White House, as one would imagine. For instance, Cathy Martin openly admits that they gathered all the friendly conservative columnists and invited them to the White House for these kinds of briefings. Not as part of a political campaign, but as part of a specific story dealing with discrediting the message of a troublesome prie... individial. It's widely known that baseline stories are written by said columnists to be distributed and recycled as talking points. Furthermore, the same is offered to the regular beat- reporters, as they are offered "secret information" - on the condition that they report it as they are told it is, and will testify that they have seen it. Break this agreement, and you will not be invited again.

Just imagine that - that there are in fact "journalists" who would sell their souls like this. That noone. Not one. Could be bothered to write extensively on that process. The sheer horror of it is fantastic. Just imagine - they do not see the problem with the practice.

On the other hand, we are getting all our conspiracy- theories confirmed (well.. when I say all..). There are yet to be anything "new" coming out, of course. But it is quite nice to have this confirmed from the inside, as it were. Because we know this is going on - the extent to which the White House would deliberately buy into this was difficult to see, however.

The same goes for Libby's trial. A tale unfolds now where the role of the media, whose discipline and dedication to any kind of moral obligation is equal to that of an incontinent puppy, is playing central stage. Where political hatchet- jobs are undertaken to cover up serious crimes - but only for the reason that it will give bad press. And where legal councel is perfectly capable of cutting a few corners if whatever it was can be circumvented. And where wars and their justification hangs on this relationship between the media and the White House. And how huge policy- questions hinges on petty trickery and political infighting.

Furthermore, the prevailing view among advisers, spokespeople, ministers and presidents, is that one does not do something illegal - unless one thinks one does something illegal. This is what is maintained, again and again, until certain realities catches up to people.

It brings you to mind of Oliver North, who would testify in relation to the Iran- Contra scandal, and solemnly swear that he did not think he had done anyhting illegal, or that it was illegal to "take the Shah's money, and use them to buy weapons for the freedom fighters in Nicaragua". An extrajudicial undertaking, a separate funding process outside the purview of Congress, with no limitation except for that which would lead to "victory", and furthering "the country's interest". Whatever that might be for the moment.

And that mindset, where abusing the trappings of office and democracy for undertaking tasks deemed improper for the masses to take part of - because their simple little minds would rebel at such egregious excesses and punish these benevolent kings in the voting booth - that is the problem. Where one operates on the premise that: "if we are doing it, it cannot be illegal. And if we think we do good, we are doing good".

But in this case, there is no fall guy. Neither were there any shadow- lord forcing their underlings to go along with anything. And the responsibility is rightly shared: between crooked politicians, to lackluster media, to willing and informed voters, and ignorant fools. And that's good, because it's a lot of it to go around.

---

..Anyway. Visit www.firedoglake.com to read "blogscript" of the Libby- trial (and diverse attempts, of varying degree of success, to explain the sheer magnitude of what we're finally getting our hands on with this trial).


(next, "On the irresponsible discussion predictably sprouting up in the wake of Democratic victory and Republican defeat in the US".)