Okay, I have to get this off my chest so pardon the rant. One aspect of the whole Gannuckert issue that really worries me is the possibility that it's a trap. More below...
Remember when CBS News went to the White House seeking comment before going to air with the TANG memos? One thing at the time that struck me as odd was that bizarre look on Bartlett's face. It was not so much a Crap-This-Could-Be-Bad look, but more of a We'll-Let-You-Run-With-This-Because-We-Know-Something-You-Don't-About-Those-Memos look.
Followed by a deafening silence.
I'm getting that same feeling again.
Think about it. What if the WH knows something about this that could destroy their opposition? In this case, wouldn't, the most effective approach be complete silence - letting the blogosphere find it? First let the story build with opponents jumping aboard. Then leak the devastating final piece of the puzzle. For example, imagine Gannuckert has a little black book and, by chance, he only keeps the names and addresses of Democratic clients. Shit like that.
I'm less inclined to think the press is scared, or even that this is a non-story than to think the press folks either don't understand the scope of the story yet -OR- they know something that we don't. In my dreams they are silent right now because they are currently checking and double-checking sources, photos and videotapes before breaking the Dubya/Gannuckert sex-in-the-Lincoln-bedroom scandal. But in the real world, I feel there is something else going on. Because the Washington press pool is full of ambitious, competitive IveGotMine-ers, I'm finding it hard to believe it will stay quiet for very long. And I'm not so sure we're all going to be happy when whatever it is does come out.
Am I a tad paranoid? Maybe. But there is very little that I wouldn't put past the folks in the WH these days. Never, ever forget that Rove et co. can be pretty crafty and have no restraints (ethical or otherwise) to hold them back.
I think our biggest strength is the openness of this discussion. With this accessibility, we have the power of numbers on our side. Many people bring many different points of view, ideas, resources and experiences. But I also think this openness is our biggest weakness. Being this open and public allows the other side to anticipate any moves we make and any directions we go - permitting a cover-up that may otherwise be unsuccessful.
So what should we do? Do we take the investigation underground? Restrict access to gathered information? Dismiss my concerns as more tin hat stuff? I don't know. Someone else was asking WWRD (what would Rove do). I think that's a good starting point.
Ideas or comments anyone? Again, sorry for the rant.