HOME / ballot box: Politics and policy.

Pot and Kettle Department

Jacob WeisbergPosted Thursday, Sept. 28, 2000, at 3:38 PM ET

The great campaign mystery of the moment is who sent the Bush debate preparation tape to Al Gore's friend Tom Downey. Since Downey turned the purloined video over to the FBI two weeks ago, both campaigns have been trying to suggest that the other is to blame. The Bush folks say there must be a Gore mole among them. The Gore side is dropping hints that the anonymous package was a honey trap. Over the last few days, there have been various leaks about the FBI's investigation into the matter.

RSS

There has also been a bit of hypocrisy. On Tuesday, Bush's communications director Karen Hughes complained that FBI Director Louis Freeh had not returned a phone call from Bush's campaign manager Joe Allbaugh requesting information about the investigation. According to the Washington Post, Hughes said that a Freeh subordinate returned the campaign's call. "Our campaign manager conveyed to him that he did not feel that was satisfactory and that he would like to talk to the director," Hughes said. Freeh, who was busy Tuesday testifying on Capitol Hill about the Wen Ho Lee case, returned Allbaugh's call after he got back to the office, assuring him that the matter was receiving his personal attention.

My friend Michael Waldman, author of the excellent new book POTUS Speaks (which you can buy by clicking here), proposes a thought-experiment. Suppose it came to light that Gore's campaign manager William Daley had called Freeh to chat about the tape investigation. The Bush campaign would immediately cry foul, connecting such an act to a long litany of supposed attempts by the Clinton administration, and by Gore in particular, to influence impartial law enforcement decisions. As Michael Kinsley points out, Republicans now make this charge against the administration ritually, complaining for instance that Attorney General Janet Reno was responsible first for impeding the Wen Ho Lee investigation, then for railroading Lee, both for political reasons. Karen Hughes provided another example of this reflex at work when she subsequently suggested that the FBI might be focusing its investigation on the Bush campaign rather than on the Gore campaign because of pressure from inside the administration.

In fact, the Bush campaign's calls to Freeh aren't especially troubling. What's troubling is the double standard.

E-MAIL

RECOMMEND... Get Slate RSS Feeds

Jacob Weisberg is chairman and editor-in-chief of the Slate Group and author of The Bush Tragedy. Follow him at http://twitter.com/jacobwe.

COMMENTS

Reader Comment from The Fray:

[Note from the Fray Editor: There was a mysterious outbreak of political poetry in the Ballotbox Fray. This sample was at least on-topic for the article:]

Many wolves in the pack will regret it
As their own ethics have little credit.
Before casting a stone
They should look at their own.
My advice to George W? Don't sweat it!

--Mother Goose

(To reply, click here.)

What's troubling is that you think that there's a double-standard. In all the cases that you cite regarding involvement of the Clinton White House in investigations, they were the suspects involving themselves. This is clearly and absolutely wrong. (The Lee case is different, but it's just a screwed up case from beginning to end). In the case of the Bush administration trying to get the FBI to get in gear on the investigation, it's the victim trying to push the investigation. This is clearly and absolutely correct. They are afraid that the mole is still there and they want him/her found. The idea of the Bush camp creating this as a farce to make the Gore people look bad is ludicrous. Why? Because there's no guarantee that the Gore people would ever admit they got the tape. They might just try to use it instead.

--Chris

(To reply, click here.)

Expecting to actually get information about a pending criminal investigation is very troubling. Yes, leaks happen all the time, but they are not supposed to. These investigations are supposed to be kept confidential. If someone doesn't crucify the Bushies for making this calls, in my judgment, there is something seriously wrong with the way this story is reported. Who does Bush think Louis Freeh is? His personal private investigator? He is not. He is the head of a law enforcement agency charged with investigation of a potential crime. He has no obligation to reveal this information to Bush (or to the Gore people for that matter). In fact, he has an obligation not to--to protect the integrity of the investigation and to protect the reputation of the innocent

--David Frye

(To reply, click here.)

(10/2)

What did you think of this article?

Join The Fray: Our Reader Discussion Forum

POST A MESSAGE | READ MESSAGES