The White House pushes back–hard–on the NYT story on the involvement of White House attorneys in discussions about what to do with the CIA torture tapes.
Here’s the statement out this morning from White House press secretary Dana Perino, demanding a correction:
The New York Times today implies that the White House has been misleading in publicly acknowledging or discussing details related to the CIA’s decision to destroy interrogation tapes.
The sub-headline of the story inaccurately says that the “White House Role Was Wider Than It Said”, and the story states that “…the involvement of White House officials in the discussions before the destruction of the tapes…was more extensive than Bush administration officials have acknowledged.”
Under direction from the White House General Counsel while the Department of Justice and the CIA Inspector General conduct a preliminary inquiry, we have not publicly commented on facts relating to this issue, except to note President Bush’s immediate reaction upon being briefed on the matter. Furthermore, we have not described – neither to highlight, nor to minimize — the role or deliberations of White House officials in this matter.
The New York Times’ inference that there is an effort to mislead in this matter is pernicious and troubling, and we are formally requesting that NYT correct the sub-headline of this story.
It will not be surprising that this matter will be reported with a reliance on un-named sources and individuals lacking a full availability of the facts — and, as the New York Times story itself acknowledges, some of these sources will have wildly conflicting accounts of the facts. We will instead focus our efforts on supporting the preliminary inquiry underway, where facts can be gathered without bias or influence and later disseminated in an appropriate fashion.
We will continue to decline to comment on this issue, and in response to misleading press reports
The statement then lists all of the no comments from the White House in recent days.
The essence of the pushback isn’t about whether the White House knew of the tapes and their destruction or about whether White House attorneys were deeply involved. The White House is focusing narrowly on the issue of whether it has been misleading by minimizing its role or mis-characterizing it. The pushback, in short, is: Hey, we’ve been stonewalling and haven’t said jack about this.
Now that’s a defense.
Late Update: The White House highlights its on the record “no comments.” What about the anonymous accounts that have been coming from White House officials? We’ll have more on that soon.
Later Update: The White House’s outrage would appear to be misplaced.
