Posted on 03/03/2006 6:05:19 AM PST by poisonivy27
Former FEMA chief Michael Brown told HUMAN EVENTS that the newly released video warning of major devastation from Hurricane Katrina is fresh evidence that Bush Administration officials used him as a scapegoat in a time of crisis.
In some of his toughest criticism of the administration to date, Brown and his lawyer, Andy Lester, spoke to HUMAN EVENTS about Brown’s handling of the Katrina disaster and how two high-profile administration officials—Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and Homeland Security adviser Fran Townsend—deliberately portrayed Brown as incompetent.
“They’ve got to keep me out there as a scapegoat,” Brown told HUMAN EVENTS. “If they get rid of Chertoff, they have no new scapegoat. Then it goes to the White House.”
Brown said the video from August 29, which was leaked to the Associated Press, is just one example of how information previously kept secret by the White House is vindicating him. He cited another yet-to-be-seen video from the following day, August 30, as even more revealing.
Although the White House has not released that video, Lester said he has asked for all Katrina-related information, including meeting transcripts and, before it was leaked, the August 29 video. However, he was told they couldn’t be located.
Brown criticized Chertoff’s leadership before and after Katrina made landfall. He and Lester said Chertoff and Townsend’s accusations that Brown disobeyed the chain of command and failed to keep superiors informed were lies. Brown said the August 29 video proves it.
“I really think they had the attitude: ‘It’s just a hurricane. Brown’s handled all the others. Who cares? Let’s not worry about it.’ Despite my pleas that this is a screwed up mess,” Brown said.
“The truth is that I had numerous conversations with [Chief of Staff] Andy Card and [Deputy Chief of Staff] Joe Hagin and the President prior to landfall and all the way through landfall, including a secure videoconference on August 30, which is the Tuesday after landfall.
“I told the President 90% of New Orleans has been displaced—this is a catastrophic event. And then on Friday, after this Tuesday conference call, I’m screaming, ‘Where’s the Army?’ So I think this whole notion of the White House’s being disengaged—there’s truth to it. It’s the end of summer; it’s Labor Day weekend; Nicole Devenish, the communications person, is getting married in Europe, so half the staff has gone to that wedding; Andy Card’s in Maine fishing and relaxing; Hagin’s at the ranch in Crawford; the President’s on the ranch; and Chertoff goes to Atlanta to an avian flu conference.”
Brown said he knew he was being set up as a scapegoat when Chertoff ordered him to stay put in Baton Rouge, La., in the aftermath of Katrina. Brown said he needed to be moving around—visiting areas of Louisiana and traveling to Mississippi to survey the damage.
“I couldn’t run a disaster sitting in one place,” Brown said. “And now here I am, stuck in Baton Rouge, incommunicado. I knew at that point, not so much that I was going to be a scapegoat, but I knew I had been set up. I couldn’t succeed.”
In the time since resigning in September, Brown has testified before House and Senate committees about the Katrina disaster. But it was during his recent testimony in February that he said he was stung by the White House’s treatment of him.
During an exchange between Lester and White House Counsel Harriet Miers (view letter) that touched on the subject of executive privilege, Miers sent a letter to Lester (view letter) that offered no clear answer to his question: Will the President assert any privilege that would prevent Brown from testifying to any of his communications to executive branch officials?
Miers responded: “The Administration appreciates your client’s assistance thus far with the processes that have been undertaken by the Administration and Congressional committees designed to discover the lessons to be learned from the response to Hurricane Katrina and to ensure that responses to future catastrophes meet the high standards that the American people demand and deserve. We know that your client’s continued cooperation with assisting those processes will be of value.”
When Brown went before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, he said he was left with the choice of a) telling the truth and appearing disloyal to the President or b) shielding his conservations with the White House and risking being held in contempt.
“So I’m just frustrated, because here I am, this loyal servant to the President, and they stick me between these two branches of government, and then I hear from people who say I sold out the President,” Brown said. “What are you supposed to do? Not tell the truth and go to jail. That’s not going to happen.”
Looking ahead to the future, Brown said he’s not sure what will happen to FEMA, but he believes the only true way to make it an effective government agency is to remove it from under the Department of Homeland Security and give it Cabinet-level status.
What Dubya can be criticized for is appoint this whiner in the first place.
This headline is misleading, if Brown's words on Tony Snow's radio show are to be believed...he said the PRESIDENT was giving him what he needed, but the DHS officials were the ones giving him difficulties.
Brown: You were in charge Idiot! Why did you not do your job? Scum!!!!
Anybody who has ever worked for an elected official knows, or should know, that being a scapegoat is part of the job description.
I think Brown's right. The WH and DHS hung him out to dry. I think he was willing to take one for the team, but they wouldn't even give him protection from prosecution.
We can't be intellectually honest if be heap blame on Nagin and Blanco (deservedly so) on one hand, then call Mike Brown incompetent on the other.
History won't judge Mike Brown a hero, but it should certainly show him not to be the incomptetent boob he's been made out to be.
The WH blew it badly on this one by not going on the offensive and holding the NO and LA authorities accountable. Staying "above the fray" is the President's favorite tactic, but it only works about half the time.
Guess he forgot about the "You're doing a heck of a job, Brownie" comment
Blah, Blah, Blah...........if this incompetent moron had done his job in the first place, instead of just sitting on his high horse, basking in the sunlight of his newfound "power", he would still have his job. GWB is fiercely loyal, and his firing ( ok, he resigned ) was due to nothing short of incompetence.
What I remember is the governor and the mayor--if they needed a scapegoat, why not use the real goats?
"The WH blew it badly on this one by not going on the offensive and holding the NO and LA authorities accountable. Staying "above the fray" is the President's favorite tactic, but it only works about half the time."
Correction. It only works about 1% of the time and the White House seems resigned to try it over and over again. That's why they sit at 30-40% approval.
I was trying to be kind...but you're right.
Brown, Blanco & Nagin frowned, people drowned.
Even here, for instance, he says he was ordered to stay in Baton Rouge. What if he said, "Hey, Mike. This is a crisis. You can reach me at the Super Dome." Would he have been fired? What happened to him anyway? At least he'd look like a hero instead of a crybaby.
Frankly, I suspect Brown wouldn't have been fired. Especially if he confronted some N.O cops on TV and said open this f'n bridge or move those f'n supplies. I think the WH would have said "Yeah, that's what we want."
I still think that the problem was more in the coverage than in the response. The assumption tht one can carefuly plan and execute a perfect response to an unpredictable event is false, to begin with. Then, if the reporters had actually covered what people were doing to get to people and rescue them instead of planting themselves in one spot and demanding to know why help was slow in coming we would have a better understanding of just how heroic the responders really were. Scapegoating shortchanges the tens of thousands of people it took to help out.
No one is going to disagree that the coveraged was extremely slanted...
...but...
The WH has had five years to figure out that the press is not going to give them an inch. If they have in fact figured it out, why waste so many cycles in a doomed attempt to get positive coverage from the MSM?
Brown: his name say it all, he is full of it!
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.