Posted on 07/22/2004 11:15:22 PM PDT by kattracks
Former Clinton White House counsel Lanny Davis fueled speculation on Thursday that he personally leaked the news that former National Security Advisor Sandy Berger was under criminal investigation by the Justice Department, by repeatedly dodging the question.
Asked point-blank if he was the leaker, Davis refused to respond directly, but instead told Liberty Broadcasting's Linda Chavez that if he had asked a reporter the same question, the answer would be "None of your business." When Chavez pressed for a straight answer, Davis suggested he would have leaked the news last year to Associated Press reporter John Solomon, who actually did break the story on Monday."Had I been asked last October by my old friend Sandy Berger," Davis told Chavez, "I would have suggested to Sandy that we call John Solomon and that he sit down with John Solomon and tell him the whole story and get the story out last October."
In the next breath Davis said he wasn't surprised that "somebody" had leaked news of the Berger investigation on "this particular week out of 52 weeks in 2004."
Suspicions that Davis was the source of the Berger leak surfaced on Tuesday, when the National Review Online's Mark Levin noted in his column:
"Lanny Davis's tactics of leaking bad information in order to control the media spin is clearly in play, if not by him, by others. But he is now a prominent voice pointing a finger at purported Bush motives.
"The Berger story first appeared in the Associated Press, and was written by John Solomon, whom Davis reveals in his book as his favorite reporter. In addition to Davis, the usual Clinton propagandists are involved as well – Lanny Breuer and Joe Lockhart."
The full exchange between Chavez and Davis went like this:
CHAVEZ: Did you leak this?
DAVIS: [Laughing] Well, first of all, thank you for asking me that. I've heard about that.
The caller [who cited Levin's National Review piece] is absolutely correct. I wrote a chapter in my book about one of the great reporters who covered the White House, John Solomon for the Associated Press. I always get him into trouble by saying he's a great reporter, 'cause people will think he treated us with a soft touch. In fact, he killed us almost all the time.
But I'm afraid if I asked John Solomon "Who leaked this to you?" he would give you the same answer that he's always given me when I asked that question, which is "None of your business."
CHAVEZ: OK, Lanny. But [the caller] was asking you. He wasn't asking John Solomon. Did you leak this information to John Solomon in order to get the bad news out of the way?
DAVIS: Oh, did I? [laughing nervously] Well, let me put it this way. Had I been asked last October by my old friend Sandy Berger - who is a great man, an honest man and has done something that he sincerely regrets - I would have suggested to Sandy that we call John Solomon and that he sit down with John Solomon and tell him the whole story and get the story out last October.
Because as sure as the sun rises in the East, Linda, there were enough people who knew about this that this particular week out of 52 weeks in 2004, is not surprising as the week that somebody chose to leak the story. [END OF EXCERPT]
Is there an audio of this exchange that can be replayed on the radio talk shows?
Are there any laws against leaking such information?
Ok, well the only thing about Davis wanting this to be old news by the election is why even wait this long to leak it?
The investigation is 9 months old.
Why not leak it two months ago when the story would have been forgotten by the time the Demoncratic convention rolled around, let alone the election.
But I'm afraid if I asked John Solomon "Who leaked this to you?" he would give you the same answer that he's always given me when I asked that question, which is "None of your business."I suspect this is a dread warning to Solomon. It's what Davis demands Solomon repond. What's not clear is WHO is up for the implementation of the implied "... or else.".
Some clues might be in the audio.
Mark Levin nailed this one!
Yeh, I even saw that little dweeb, Peter Fenn, out there the other night lying his a** off. I'm waiting for Robert Wechsler of Floriduh to come out from under his rock.
bump
To quote Lanny Davis: "Where is the poof?"
We don't need to let this go....it's already starting to wane on the newsfront. Got to keep this out there.
BUMP!
Re: Post 15. I agree with your analysis 100%.
I think Bergler would have stalled this disclosure longer if he could have -- maybe until AFTER the convention. But I think it's a good shot that Bergler is going to be indicted. If Bergler hadn't gotten himself out of the way now, Kerry's judgement would have been called into question.
I'm sure Kerry's miffed now, but if this story had come after the convention, I think Kerry would have been even more irate.
What about Leahy? Jeffords?
Davis has been bed with Solomon for at least two decades.
This has been an old trick of Davis's to leak the bad news via Solomon and others so it can be old bad news.
Solomon would never be honest enough to do what you suggested.
If you look at how many Clintonians surround this affair...
My take is that the Clintonistas were ready to sacrifice one of their own (who was already in deep doo doo)and accept collateral damage to the Clinton legacy at this particular time for one reason:
Hurt Kerry and Damage him during his convention week.
All part of the ongoing Hillary-Kerry feud and her chance to run in 2008.
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.