Recent Washington Scandals Test 'Honesty Is the Best Policy'

Washington Post ^ | 4/11/05 | John F. Harris

[Crackingham]

In the decades after Watergate, Washington figures in legal or political hot water heard some familiar words of wisdom: The coverup is almost always worse than the crime. Never hunker down. Above all, never lie. Lately, though, the evidence is mounting that this tried-and-true advice may no longer be true.

Recent evidence suggests that hunkering down can sometimes work just fine, in a political and news media environment that has changed significantly in recent years. Examples include legal controversies involving prominent Democrats as well as the Bush White House. Even people who got caught in falsehoods have resolved their cases with no apparent penalty for the deception.

The case of Sandy Berger, who served as national security adviser in the Clinton White House, is the latest instance in which some old truisms of scandal management were safely abandoned. He and his spokesmen initially said that he took copies of classified documents about terrorism from the National Archives by accident and then misplaced them in what Berger described as an "honest mistake."

Earlier this month, Berger struck a plea bargain with Justice Department prosecutors in which he admitted that he took the copies on purpose and then destroyed some of them at his office with scissors. He pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor, accepting a $10,000 fine and a three-year suspension of his national security clearance -- terms that his friends and defense team said were a good deal for Berger.

At the moment, it is House Majority Leader Tom DeLay who is most urgently facing the classic Washington choice about how to respond to an ethics uproar.

snip

Bill Allison of the Center for Public Integrity said DeLay's strategy may be reflecting a polarized Washington environment in which "everything has become a partisan issue, including ethics and including right and wrong."

[LibertarianInExile]

"You just don't have anyone in power in Congress who will issue a subpoena," forcing truthful testimony, he said, chiding legislators to restore a sense "that there's things that they just won't tolerate, whether it's done by Republicans or Democrats."

Said John Podesta.

Unintentional Comedy Index=9.

[Txsleuth]

Well, lets see, just tonight at FR Leahys and Shelbys divulging of classified info, Kerry's possible outing of an undercover agent, have been discussed and they are all doing just fine, thank you very much....

SO, if I were Delay, I would Deny, deny, deny...

[weegee]

Don't forget how we got here...

Texan Democrat Files Ethics Complaint Against Tom DeLay (6/15/2004)

WASHINGTON (AP) — A Texas Democrat who is losing his House seat because of redistricting engineered by House Majority Leader Tom DeLay is filing ethics complaints against the Republican leader.

Rep. Chris Bell is charging that DeLay, R-Texas, provided legislative favors to a company that made campaign contributions to DeLay and other Republicans, laundered other corporate donations to illegally help Texas GOP candidates and improperly used his office in asking the Federal Aviation Administration to track down a private plane used by Texas Democrats.

"The charges are very serious and well documented," said Bell's spokesman, Eric Burns.

DeLay's press secretary, Jonathan Grella, characterized the complaint being filed Tuesday with the House ethics committee as "warmed-over and factually deficient allegations from a bitter partisan on his way out of office. This election year scorched-earth strategy is doomed to fail."

Bell's charges would be the first filed against a House leader since the ethics committee took up a case against former Speaker Newt Gingrich in 1997 that contributed to his decision to leave office. Since then there has been an unspoken truce between the two parties on filing ethics complaints.

[Milhous]

At the moment, it is House Majority Leader Tom DeLay who is most urgently facing the classic Washington choice about how to respond to an ethics uproar yet another George Soros attack.

[Logical me]

Looks like the Democrats might have to bite the bullet. They do know it yet but they might just be opening Pandora box and the hot seat could probably extent to them. They own the MSM but they forgot, their garbage will still get out if the Republicans have the gonads to fight.

[Hardastarboard]

he admitted that he took the copies on purpose and then destroyed some of them at his office with scissors.

But Mr. Harris, I just read in the Wall Street Journal last week that Mr. Berger really was innocent, that he didn't actually remove the documents or destroy any of them. Surely you're mistaken. The WSJ even ran a second editorial defending itself from the howls of protest over their defense of Sandy Berger.

One of these reports is wrong. Can anybody confirm for me which one?