Posted on 03/26/2004 7:53:56 AM PST by Hillary's Lovely Legs
Fox News Channel created a stir by broadcasting past remarks by a leading critic of the Bush administration that seemed to support the president's anti-terror efforts - although the comments were originally made on condition that their speaker not be identified.
In August 2002, the critic - former chief counter-terrorist official Richard A. Clarke - defended the White House's record on fighting terrorism in a "background" telephone conversation with a small group of reporters, including Fox News' Jim Angle, who taped the exchange.
But the comments were considered "on background," an arrangement frequently used by the press. In "background" conversations, a source provides information to reporters on the condition that it not be directly attributed to him. At the time, Clarke's bosses at the National Security Council insisted that his quotes be attributed only to an unnamed counter-terrorism official, Angle said.
Clarke's remarks and identity were released, the same day he testified before a federal commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks. Clarke also this week published a book, Against All Enemies: Inside America's War on Terror, in which he argues that in the months preceding the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the president and his aides didn't take warnings about the threat posed by al-Qaida seriously enough.
Angle got permission from the Bush administration to broadcast the remarks and to use Clarke's name. "We asked them to lift the rules, and for obvious reasons, they did," Angle said.
Angle said he had been struck by the disparity between the August 2002 background conversation and the tone of Clarke's new book. He said he was unable to reach Clarke.
"I can't think of any reason why we wouldn't have used this when his criticism in his book received so much other attention," Angle said.
Fox News' story was instantly denounced by former Nebraska Sen. Bob Kerrey, a Democrat. "All of us who have provided background briefings for the press before should beware," said Kerrey, a member of the anti-terrorism panel. "I mean, Fox should say 'occasionally fair and balanced' after putting something like this out, because they violated a serious trust."
White House spokesman Scott McClellan read reporters excerpts of the Clarke background briefing. Meanwhile, former Illinois Gov. James Thompson, a Republican commission member who is considered sympathetic to Bush, attempted to challenge Clarke's current critique.
"As we sit here this afternoon, we have your book and we have your press briefing of August 2002," Thompson said to Clarke. "Which is true?"
Clarke initially deflected the question, and then spoke of the role of White House aides in defending the administration's policies.
"I was asked to highlight the positive aspects of what the administration had done and to minimize the negative aspects ... And, as a special assistant to the president, one is frequently asked to do that kind of thing. I've done it for several presidents."
Talk about violating a trust. . .Clark is telling bald-faced lies, and the Dems are whining because he got caught doing so.
So, Senator Kerry. . .sounds like you really don't want to find out the truth after all.
...especially when we are interested in getting to the truth with this committee, not just a lot of posturing.
If *you* provide a background briefing and *you* decide to later have yourself identified, what's the problem? In this case, the "trust" was with the Administration---and since they decided the "trust" was no longer operative, what's the problem? Oh, it hurt John Kerry for the truth to come out, so that's the real issue, isn't it?
Perhaps Clarke thought that the administration would protect him......surely he KNEW that Richard Plante, Andrea Mitchell and the person from TIME would protect him. He just didn't count on Jim Angel!!!
Look for more of this as the campaign heats up. Remember, Bush stole the 2000 election to hear the Libs tell it. They despise the man and will do anything to get him out of office. Don't be surprised to see more liar - child molester - alcoholic - serial rapist - Nazi camp guard accusations as part of your everyday, garden-variety, liberal character assassination campaign.
The fact that it's starting this early doesn't surprise me. The fact that Fox News is jumping into it, does.
Exactly. Seems Senator Kerry has a strange idea of what 'violating a trust' means.
What do you think Fox News has jumped into exactly? They reported factual information, as a news source is supposed to do. I'm confused because you seem to be equating that with liberal slander.
If all the other networks will say, "we will tell any lie for the leftists who are willing to watch you die in their pursuit of wealth and power", then I'm OK with it.
However, no trust was violated in Clarke's case since he was a government employee when he made the comments and it wasn't his decision to hide his identity in the first place.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.