Eric Umansky

The Coming Deaths in Pakistan

One of the things we do in life to keep ourselves sane is assign higher value to those closer to, and more like, us: My brother is worth more to me  than my cousin whom I value more than my fellow citizen whom I value more than, well, a  random human-being on the planet. I don't think it is  always   this way, and I don't think it should be.

Think about the response to Katrina--where hundreds of thousands left their houses--and the response to Pakistan--where millions lost their homes, and at least tens of thousands are now at risk of freezing to death.

It is understandable that we respond more to those who are (both physically and pyschologically) closer to us. But expanding the circle of caring (which, I know, sounds hippy) is what underpins much of the fight for  human-rights and frankly, a moral society. 

Anyway,  just saying.

Also, Anne-Marie Slaughter is right: The disaster in Pakistan isn't just an opportunity for the U.S. government to do the right thing in a moral sense, but in a pratical one too. It is an opportunity to build goodwill in one of the area's of the world where it could the  U.S. enormous good. Remember what Marine General Gregson said about one of the most crucial things to do  for the war on terror: "Put us on the side of the angels ."*

*I don't think being on the "side of angels" is enough. Killing AQ is still neccesary.
But any solid strategy needs to encompass both.

Was 'Ms. Run Amok' Novak's Source?

Swopa makes a strong argument that Miller was the first one to chirp to Novak. 

(Andy) Card Shuffling Problems

From Time:

"The problem is that the President doesn't want to make changes," says a White House adviser who is not looking for a West Wing job, "but he's lost some of his confidence in the three people he listens to the most." Those three are his Vice President, Dick Cheney, whose top aide, I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby, has been charged with brazenly obstructing the investigation into who leaked the name of CIA officer Valerie Plame; Bush senior adviser Karl Rove, who while not indicted has still emerged as a player in the scandal; and chief of staff Andrew Card, who gets some of the blame for bungling the response to Hurricane Katrina and even more for the botched Supreme Court nomination of Harriet Miers.

Farther down in the Time piece:

As for a shift in the lineup, Card could be named Treasury Secretary by the beginning of the year.

Right, because once you lose some confidence in someone, the natural thing to do is appoint that guy to one of--at least historically--the most powerful and sensitive positions in Washington. Oh, and bonus points for when the guy isn't qualified for the job.      

P.S. The "White House adviser" cited above by Time also had this to say, "All relationships with the President, except for his relationship with Laura, have been damaged recently. The funny thing is everybody's failing now, in which case perhaps it's time to look at George Bush's relationship with George Bush."   Wonder how close that "adviser" is to the White House... I hope they don't start a leak investigation to find out.

Great Moments in Newspapering

From Wednesday:

"LEAK COUNSEL IS SAID TO PRESS ON ROVE'S ROLE" - NYT

or better:

"FOCUS OF PROSECUTOR IN CIA LEAK INQUIRY APPEARS TO SHIFT TO ROVE" - LAT

But Why Did Libby Lie?

Sully thinks he was trying to protect Cheney.  The only other thing I can think of--and the two explanations are not mutually exclusive: Figuring he might be at legal risk for outing Plame--even though it now appears he didn't overstep in that regard--Libby panicked; he lied, then lied some more to cover up his lies. You don't have to stupid to do that, just human. 

P.S. Note to Fitzgerald: That New Republic story was not an "online" story. It appeared  in the magazine.   

Tijuana

A few months ago, I spent some QT in lovely Tijuana. Here's one piece I did, and now another.

One Place The WH Would Have Liked More Diversity

Mentioned at the bottom of the WP's Fitz Watch:

The grand jury, a group of onetime strangers from across the District, has spent two days a week for nearly 24 months in the cloistered, guarded room on the third floor of the U.S. District Courthouse.  ...Like the jury's forewoman, the majority are African American women who appear to be middle-age or older.

What's the president's approval rating among African-Americans again?

Fitzgerald Expands Office Space

So says Steve Clemons--and he's got an address.

More Brilliant Public Diplomacy

The White House, thankfully,  recognizes the power of simply getting ones ideas out there (which is what I take "public diplomacy" to be, at its base). But recognizing one has a problem and doing something useful about it are two very different things. So sending Karen Hughes hunting for good will? Perhaps not the greatest idea.  Adding to this fine record of achievement in public diplomacy is the president's nomination of one  J. Dorrance Smith to be Pentagon spokesman. Because Smith clearly knows how to win friends at crucial outlets (and potential allies)
such as al-Jazeera. From the NYT:

Mr. Smith, a former ABC News producer who has worked as an adviser in both Bush administrations, said in an article in The Wall Street Journal on April 25 that the Arab satellite news channel Al Jazeera operated on behalf of terrorists and that American networks aided them by televising Al Jazeera's videotape.

"Osama Bin Laden and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and Al Qaeda have a partner in Al Jazeera and, by extension, most networks in the U.S.," Mr. Smith wrote. "This partnership is a powerful tool for the terrorists in the war in Iraq."

"Al Jazeera," he added, "has very strong partners in the U.S. - ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox, CNN and MSNBC. Video aired by Al Jazeera ends up on these networks, sometimes within minutes."

Now that sounds like a guy poised to win hearts and minds.

   

 

The Fitzmas Grinch

While the Web is atwitter with talk of Cheney,  the notes, and Fitzmas in October might I suggest  a chill pill. Why? Well, we still don't squat, of course. But more centrally the fact that the "notes" came from lawyers involved in the case should raise red flags.  Maybe, as many have speculated, Libby has turned state's evidence. But that doesn't make much sense, since the notes seem to put him in the hottest water.

The most convincing  theory I've seen on the notes and this whole Cheney deal  comes from Mr. Memory himself,  Tom Maguire. The one sentence version: Libby long ago testified that Cheney told him about Plame all the talk  that Libby  testified he  learned of Plame from reporters was just lawyerly disinformation to keep his boss out of the headlines.   They would mean that at least with respect to this episode,  Libby did  not have commit perjury.

As for Cheney, well this theory would suggest that he too never lied about his chat with Libby, and presuming that he never did the leaking himself, why would he be in any legal jeopardy? A smidgen of support for this theory: Cheney spoke to the prosecutor back in 2004--and has never been asked to testify again. That doesn't sound a guy who's about to be sent up the river.

OK, continue drinking your egg-nog now.