to summarize what i find so entertaining: during the congressional investigation of the katrina response, the administration refused to give congress the transcript of the august 29, 2005 conference call in which the president and his advisors discussed how to respond to hurricane katrina. at that time, the administration claimed that no transcript for the call existed because someone forgot to hit the record button when the conference began. because the call was never recorded, it was never transcribed.
the white house also refused to release a transcript of another conference call to the congressional investigation, this one on august 31, 2005. that one, at least, they acknowledged existed, but they still refused to let anyone see it citing their policy of assuring that discussions among presidential advisors be held in secrecy to assure the free exchange of ideas.
but then earlier this week a video surfaced of an august 28th meeting between bush and advisors to discuss the possibility of the levee's failing in new orleans. this, of course, seemed to contradict bush's statements four days later that "I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees." in fact, it seems that bush himself had anticipated exactly that. or at least his advisors did and said so right in front of him.
but that wasn't the only problem with the video. bush's behavior on the video itself was also seen as a problem. as david gergen, a republican and former advisor to presidents nixon, ford, reagan and clinton, noted:
It's devastating that the president would ask no questions. If he sat there mum in a full briefing ... that will only confirm the suspicions of a lot of opponents.so, to minimize the damage, the white house leaked a transcript of the august 28, 2005 conference call to newsweek to show that the president really was in charge. the problem was that this was the transcript that the white house told congress did not exist. lying to congress, of course, is a felony.
and the white house's sudden decision release of this transcript also raises the question of why they won't release the august 31st transcript. their highfalutin claims that the confidential deliberations of advisors must be protected at all costs is somewhat undermined when they have no trouble leaking other deliberations to the press just for damage control.
honestly, i doubt if mr. and mrs. average american is following the ins and outs of this thing. but the blatent contradictions in the white house's actions just raises more questions and that will insure that this entire embarrassment for the white house will be talked about in the news for a little longer. and it couldn't come at a worse time for the president, just as his approval ratings have hit their lowest ebb ever and with members of his own party rebelling over the dubai port deal.
in the past when something like this happens, when the administration is caught in a some contradictory stance or is embarrassed such that it can't be easily explained away, their usual cool focus starts to fray a little bit and they start to screw up in their response. personally, i can't wait to see what might be coming next.
