The Leaders Leakers

For the THIRD day in a row, the White House expanded the list of those within the Bush Administration who knew BEFORE the leak of an investigation into Berger to the Press. Strengthening the evidence of a preemptive, vindictive leak to take up a newscycle or two.

From today's Washington Post:

For the second day in a row, administration officials said yesterday that more of President Bush's aides knew about an investigation of former Clinton national security adviser Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger than the White House originally acknowledged.

The question is sensitive because Democrats have charged that Republicans leaked word of the investigation to try to taint next week's Democratic National Convention and to distract attention from criticisms of Bush in the report of the commission investigating the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

A senior administration official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said that some National Security Council officials knew Berger -- who has resigned from his position as informal adviser to Democratic presidential candidate John F. Kerry -- was suspected of mishandling National Archives documents that were being sought by the commission.

National security adviser Condoleezza Rice, meeting reporters to discuss the commission's report, would not say when she was told of the probe.

"Sandy is somebody I've known a long time," Rice said. "And I think he's a good person, and I respect him. This is a criminal investigation. It's a serious matter. I'm just not going to comment about it."

The senior official said that a few NSC staff members who also report to the counsel's office had known about the inquiry.

That's three straight changes -- Story 1: Nobody Knew; Story 2: OK, a few in the White House Counsel's office knew; Story 3: Alright some on the NSC and the White House Counsel's office knew.

And now it gets really curious.

Meanwhile, an unrelated Washington Post Staff Editorial sums up how hackneyed and partisan the Republicans really are:

Still, it's hard not to be repulsed by the reaction to the affair by President Bush's campaign spokesmen and Republicans in Congress. They have suggested, without foundation, that Mr. Berger took the papers to benefit Mr. Kerry, who says that he knew nothing of the matter; House Majority Leader Tom DeLay has spoken, with gross hyperbole, of a "national security crisis." Having squelched congressional examination of a genuine national security scandal -- the involvement of U.S. military commanders in grave violations of the Geneva Conventions in Iraq -- House leaders, including Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (R-Va.), have rushed to announce hearings on the Berger affair. As happened so often during the Clinton administration, they are treating a real but apparently limited case of misconduct as an opportunity to misuse congressional oversight powers to wage partisan warfare.

It's worth noting that news of the months-old investigation of Mr. Berger just happened to leak on the week before the Democratic convention, and two days before the release of the Sept. 11 commission's report -- which covers serious lapses by President Bush as well as President Bill Clinton. Officials at the Bush White House had been briefed on the Berger probe. Could that be a coincidence?

I brought this up YESTERDAY that the 9/11 Commission in regard to Congress said this specifically:

In recent years, traditional review of the administration of programs and the implementation of laws has been replaced by “a focus on personal investigations, possible scandals, and issues designed to generate media attention.”

This White House, like Congressional Republicans, loves pointed/directed leaks to HARM political opponents, amongst the individuals under investigation in the Plame leak are staffers from the NSC.