« Won't Someone Please Think of the Children? | Main | Moral Relativism »

May 5, 2004
More on Powell GQ Flap

This is getting really weird.

At the State Department's daily press conference today (transcript | audio | video), spokesman Richard Boucher spent the first 10 minutes or so answering questions about Wil Hylton's GQ article.

When pressed, he said that he does believe that the Wilkerson interview was supposed to be on background, and he accuses Hylton of "breaking the ground rules" of the interview. The story I'm getting from Wil is that it was absolutely, explicitly on the record, and that Wilkerson knew it. He reports that Wilkerson said things like "I should be careful about what I say," which clearly indicates he knew he was on the record.

Beyond the issue of on the record/off the record, Boucher does not deny that any of the quotes and sentiments attributed to Powell's senior staff are untrue. Over and over again, he says that we should judge the Secretary by his words and his actions, and not by descriptions of his state of mind by other people.

Many variations on this theme:


There's a lot being written and said and talked around this town about the Secretary, and books and articles and everything else. You all, especially those of you who cover the State Department, you watch him, you see him, you know him.

Rather than read about him, people should look at what he says, look at what he does and look at what he's doing; look at what he said to Larry King last night, look at the daily appearances he does; look at man who gets to work earlier than all of us and accomplishes more than any of us.

He's said very clearly in his own words that he's got a positive agenda, he's very proud of the successes of this Administration, he's very comfortable with the choices that were made about going to war, and he's very satisfied that he's served the President well.

So rather than read about him or talk about him, I'd just say people ought to read his own words and watch what he does.

Uhhh, what? I completely disagree. While we should naturally take someone's description of another's state of mind with a grain of salt, when it comes to people in positions of extreme power, it's ridiculous to assume that they are "telling it like it is." They are extremely careful with their words. It is very useful to get descriptions of their state of mind from those very close to them.

If Powell were to say publicly that he is tired, unhappy and ready to quit, the administration could very well collapse. At the very least, he'd start a major story that couldn't be other than damaging to the president, particularly as he seeks reelection. To my mind, Hylton's story that Powell's aides were pushed forward as unofficial surrogates to say things that Powell himself could not say makes good sense.

It certainly makes more sense than a reporter risking his career by attributing off the record remarks to high-level government officials. It's a question of motivation. The motivation on the part of the Secretary and his staff is easy to see, the motivation to make this up on the part of Hylton is not. And I'm not just saying that because he's my friend. It just doesn't follow.

Basically, in the end, it seems that they're trying to have it both ways. They are admitting that staff were told, by the Secretary, to "tell it like it is," but now that it's been told, they don't want to admit that it's true and they're confusing the issue with this on the record/off the record argument.

So were they telling it like it is or not? Boucher never denies that they were.

There is sure to be more to this story. Apparently Glen Kessler is going to have something about it in the Washington Post tomorow. Stay tuned.

Comments

Previous Comments