by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright February 4, 2007
All Rights Reserved.

pening up a can of worms, the perjury trial of I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby has done more to expose and discredit the inside workings of Washington journalism than one man's inept attempt to lie to the FBI and federal grand jury. Libby's problems stemmed from Vice President Dick Cheney's order to retaliate against former Iraq ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV for his July 6, 2003 New York Times op-ed discrediting President George W. Bush's claim in the '03 State of the Union that Saddam tried to purchase “yellowcake” uranium from Niger. During the yearlong run-up to war, Libby's good buddy former New York Times reporter Judith Miller—who served 85 days in prison for contempt, refusing to name Libby—published numerous articles about Saddam's weapons of mass destruction. Miller was fed a steady diet of lies that she loomed into front-page stories.

      During her testimony, Miller confessed that Libby tipped her off about Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, on June 3, 2004, five weeks before Libby said he learned her CIA identity from NBC's chief Washington correspondent Tim Russert. Libby's attorney Ted Wells called his client a “scapegoat,” to protect President George W. Bush's chief strategist Karl Rove, also under investigation by special counsel U.S. Atty. Patrick J. Fitzgeral. In reality, Rove was clever enough to avoid concocting a pathetic story about when he first learned of Plame's identity. Libby told the FBI and grand jury he learned of Plame's identity from Russert July 10, who's scheduled to testify Monday, Feb. 5, 2007. Russert is expected to say he did not reveal Plame's name or identity to Libby. Libby's attorney argues dates don't matter because his client suffered “faulty memory” from information overload.

      When former Cheney top media aide Catherine Martin testified Jan. 26, 2007, she exposed intricate details about how the vice president, through media aides, dictated specific talking points to rebut Wilson's critical op-ed, undercutting the administration's rationale for war. Ironically, Martin's former boss, Mary Matlin, played an key role in the White House Iraq Group [WHIG], commissioned in Aug. 2002 to leak reports to the media about Saddam's weapons of mass destruction, violations of U.N. sanctions and refusal to cooperate with U.N. weapons inspectors. Cheney's talking points intended to discredit Wilson by exposing Plame, Wilson's wife, as the one ordering the trip. Wilson errantly reported that Cheney approved his trip to Niger to investigate claims that Saddam sought enriched uranium for his nuclear weapons program—a compelling threat to U.S. national security.

      Martin's testimony raises disturbing questions about journalistic ethics, especially manipulating the media to advance political agendas. When Wilson raised doubts about Bush's justification for war, Rove was dumbfounded that Wilson was a powerful source of credibility undermining the White House. Allowing WHIG's media aides to contact key reporters with bogus information about Saddam's alleged arsenal of WMB goes to the heart of journalistic ethics. When Judith Miller testified Jan. 30 that Libby revealed Plame's identity June 3, 2003, his once reliable media contact bit him in the rear end. Miller was Libby's most credible source to advance the White House's case for war. Journalism trade groups complained about Fitzgerald dragging reporters into court. Unlike today's journalism that seems content to curry favors with Washington's elite, Fitzgerald seeks the truth.

      America's free press derives its authority and power from the First Amendment, commissioned with the awesome duty of keeping the government legitimate. When reporters collude with devious politicians, it compromises the free press by injecting insidious political manipulation into mainstream journalism. Exploiting the credibility of the New York Times, Miller revealed the symbiotic relationship between Washington's elite and mainstream journalism. Mainstream publications rely heavily on high-placed sources to sell headlines. Conversely, Washington's insiders depend just as much on advancing agendas through stories in print and broadcast journalism. Journalists, like Miller, will never admit whether they colluded with the White House to advance a predigested war agenda. Journalism groups should be more concerned about manipulation than whether reporters are forced testify.

      Today's symbiotic relationship between the press and Washington's elites threatens to compromise the free press. Blaming Fitzgerald for calling journalists to testify misses the key ingredient in preserving the First Amendment: Journalists should seek the truth, not advance the agendas of devious politicians. As Martin revealed, you can't blame political operatives for exploiting the press. But you can and should hold journalists accountable for colluding with politicians to advance political agendas. Assembling the best team of former journalists to advance Cheney's talking points to discredit Wilson reveals shameful manipulation. Journalists found guilty of compromising ethics—and their oath to protect the First Amendment—should be sanctioned and stripped of credentials. Libby's trial says more about today's journalism than one man's mistakes.

About the Author

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He's editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2005 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.