Author Archives: Michael Froomkin

Politicized Memo Incites Row: Gather ’round children. For today’s vocabularly lesson is brought to you by the letter “P”. We have three “P” words today, Patriotic, Plot and Partisan.

If the administration lies to the nation about an imminent threat and drags us into a pre-emptive war that has nothing to pre-empt, then engages in denial and a cover-up, and tries to stonewall a Senatorial committee, all that is Patriotic. It is most certainly not Partisan and never, never, never even think that it might be a Plot. Oh my, no.

But suppose that Senators become concerned that the administration might be hiding something important to our national security like, maybe “misleading, if not flagrantly dishonest, methods and motives of senior administration officials who made the case for unilateral preemptive war”. And suppose those Senators decide that the administration has no intention of ever releasing key documents, and certainly not before the next election, so they start discussing contingency plans to force the documents' release.

Well, that is not Patriotic because George Bush might not like it. No, that is a Plot by those awful Partisan, nay maybe treasonous people.

PS. Don't tell Osama, but according to the Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee — who ought to know — the Global War on Terror™ is going so badly that it can be compromised by publication of a single memo. And who was it who went through the garbage to steal this document with this terrible possible effect on national security, and than ran to the media with it? It was Republicans? Oh. (Think that maybe heading off an independent inquiry is becoming an an important priority for the Republicans, who of course Have Nothing To Hide?)

Well, don't worry, children, it's still the Democrats' fault if you don't think about it too hard.

Accountability is Treason!
Stonewalling is Patriotic!
Fighting Terror Requires Unquestioning Obedience!

Brad DeLong has made a small industry of noting how the Bush administration lies by reflex (which is not at all the same thing as making it an art form). Sample titles:

• Is There Anything the Bush Administration Doesn't Lie About?
• Why Does the Bush Administration Lie All the Time?
• Why Are We Ruled by These Liars?

Nicholas D. Kristof has just woken up to this reality. But only partly — he blames the evil courtiers and partly exonerates the evil bosses duped by their henchmen. In Death by Optimism he recounts the following story:

Mr. Cheney has cited a Zogby International poll to back his claim that there is “very positive news” in Iraq. But the pollster, John Zogby, told me, “I was floored to see the spin that was put on it; some of the numbers were not my numbers at all.”

Mr. Cheney claimed that Iraqis chose the U.S. as their model for democracy “hands down,” and he and other officials say that a majority want American troops to stay at least another year. In fact, Mr. Zogby said, only 23 percent favor the U.S. democratic model, and 65 percent want the U.S. to leave in a year or less.

“I am not willing to say they lied,” Mr. Zogby said. “But they used a very tight process of selective screening, and when they didn't get what they wanted they were willing to manufacture some results… . There was almost nothing in that poll to give them comfort.”

Mr. Kristof is concerned by this. Not because a fish rots from the head, or because he thinks that this sort of behavior has been the G.W. Bush M.O. since at least his governorship, if not his career as a military deserter. No, Mr. Kristof thinks the Evil Courtiers are misleading that nice Mr. Bush and that clever Mr. Cheney, feeding them bad data and thus leading them down the path of self-delusion:

I wish administration officials were lying, because I would prefer hypocrisy to delusion — at least hypocritical officials make decisions with accurate information.

What evidence we have, however, suggests that the decision to invade Iraq did not depend on any data, true or false, but was a goal of the administration hawks when they took office. Bad data may have influenced the tactics, and the force levels, but there's nothing to suggest reality had much to do with the over-all strategy.

In any case, even if it were the case that the Evil Courtiers were lying to the Emperor, what creates the conditions in which this behavior is a successful strategy for the careerist courtier? Only a climate that punishes the truth.

So the scary thing is, Mr. Bush and his aides may not be lying when they look at Iraq and boast of a cheering population that a Western press sourly refuses to acknowledge. There's a precedent: Saddam Hussein.

Could anyone have imagined a year ago that Kristof or other establishment columnists would be comparing Bush to Saddam Hussein? Or that it wouldn't seem odd?