Letter to new editor of AA-S

Carl E. Schlaepfer
3902 Sidehill Path
Austin, TX 78731

June 2, 2008

Mr. Fred Zipp, Editor
Austin American-Statesman
P.O. Box 670
Austin, Texas 78767

Dear Mr. Zipp,

First, I wish to congratulate you to your promotion. Your new position of Editor must bring demanding new responsibilities, for which you have my best wishes.

I can imagine that one such responsibility could be to receive, contemplate and answer letters such as mine.

The purpose of my letter is to encourage you in what I consider a most challenging task, namely giving confidence to your readers to see your paper as a trustworthy source of information, without the perception of advocacy but with truthfulness, accuracy, balance and completeness.

I would imagine this to be a most challenging task, particularly with so many of us using the internet as an information source with its broad spectrum of views.

I am attaching an example of what I am talking about. It is the misperception advanced by the press regarding the “outing” of Valerie Plame. This surfaced again with the Scott McClellan’s recent book and a response by Robert Novak, which I summarize on the attached page.

Sincerely,
(signed)



Summarizing Novak’s article from Rasmussen reports:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_robert_d_novak/mcclellan_on_plame

1. Scott McClellan’s book gives the partisan Democratic version of the Valerie Plame affair.
2. That version, widely broadcast by the press, accuses Bush, Cheney and Rove of being involved in leaking Plame’s identity.
3. Actually, it was Deputy Secretary of State, Richard Armitage, who leaked Plame’s identity as a CIA employee.
4. Armitage first leaked this to Bob Woodward and then to Robert Novak.
5. Armitage turned himself in to the Justice Department before Patrick Fitzgerald became the prosecutor (of a non-crime)
6. Fitzpatrick’s investigation found no violation of the Identities Protection Act because Plame was not covered by it.

Let me add to the story:
*Because there was no violation, Armitage was not prosecuted.
*Scooter Libby was also not prosecuted for violating the Identities Protection Act but was convicted of perjury in Fitzpatrick’s perjury trap.
*The allegation that Bush, Cheney and Rove were somehow involved in a violation of this act is an effective Democratic talking point started in an open letter by Sen. Chuck Schumer and really should be exposed by the press.

LIBBY COMMUTATION

LIBBY COMMUTATION EXPOSES LIBERAL HYPOCRISY
By Bob Ward

Congressional liberals and media heavyweights – who yawned at President Clinton’s pardon of Marc Rich, indicted for evading $42 million taxes and illegally buying oil from Iran while they held our hostages – are pitching fits because President Bush commute3d the sentence of “Scooter” Libby.

And, predictably, some of them are lying about it. U.S. Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich) said, “Until now, it appeared the President merely turned a blind eye to a high-ranking administration official leaking classified information. The President’s action today makes it clear that he condones such activity.”

In fact, Libby was not even accused, much less convicted, of leaking classified information, in this case, the name of an allegedly covert CIA operative Valerie Plame. (Wife of Bush critic Joseph Wilson) to columnist Robert Novak He was convicted of lying to investigators who were supposedly trying to learn who did leak her name.

But the larger, and more serious lie, was the investigation itself. It would have been a perversion of justice for Libby to be locked up while Special Prosecutor Edward Fitzgerald who got him convicted walks free. As Washington Post reporter David Broder reported, Fitzgerald learned “soon after taking the job” of special prosecutor that Richard Armitage, a State Department official, and Bush aide Karl Rove were Novak’s sources.

Armitage, Broder noted, admitted his role “immediately,” but instead of indicting Armitage or Rove for the supposed crime of outing Plame, he continued the charade of pretending to look for the leaker. A case could be argued that he committed a fraud for collecting a fee to conduct a phoney investigation. In fact, it was doubtful that a crime had been committed since Plame’s convert status was effectively challenged by the person who wrote the law protecting covert agents.

Broder, who does not qualify as a “conservative,” accurately characterized the controversy as “a sideshow — engineered partly by the publicity‑seeking former Ambassador Joseph Wilson and his wife, and heightened by the hunger in parts of Washington to ‘get’ Rove for something or other.”

Broder also pointed out that Libby was convicted “on the testimony of reporters from NBC, The New York Times and Time magazine.” Broder recalled that this fact angered conservatives and added, ”I think they have a point.” He might well have added that Libby was hounded by liberals eager to implicate Vice Pres. Cheney, Libby’s boss, in something unsavory.

Bush’s action does not absolve Libby from all punishment. A hefty fine still must be paid and the conviction is still a matter of record. It is not a pardon such as Clinton gave to Marc Rich after Rich’s ex-wife donated and raised more than $1 million for the Democratic party. But it’s better than nothing and a break for conservatives who so often get nothing from this president.