Sunday, August 19 , 2018, 9:21 am | Overcast 70º

 
 
 
 

Joe Conason: Republicans Swoon Over Holder’s ‘Partisan’ Leak Probers

The charges are especially galling coming from people never troubled by the appointment of Ken Starr to investigate the Whitewater affair

This week, Republicans on Capitol Hill opened yet another front in their continuous sniping against the Obama administration, the Justice Department and Attorney General Eric Holder. Having demanded a federal investigation of intelligence leaks, they now claim to be outraged because Holder has asked two United States attorneys to conduct that probe — and one of the two happens to be a Democrat.

Angry Republicans (and their media enablers at Fox News, et al) insist that the White House must have leaked information about President Barack Obama’s terrorist “kill list,” the success of drone strikes and the killing of Osama bin Laden to improve the president’s martial image and re-election prospects. Never mind that they fawned over the Bush White House, regardless of its leaks and even its unlawful disclosure of CIA officer Valerie Plame’s identity. That was then, of course — and now the alleged leaks of national security material from a Democratic administration enrage them.

Whether those stories emanated from the Obama White House or not, someone must have tipped off The New York Times, which first reported the “kill list,” among other things. So consistent with President Obama’s evident obsession about stanching leaks, Holder appointed Ronald Machen, the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, and Rod Rosenstein, the U.S. attorney for the District of Maryland, to oversee an investigation and potential prosecution of the leakers.

Immediately, a loud claque stretching from Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, to the Fox Nation website began whining about Holder’s appointments. First, they said that the job ought to be handled by a special counsel, not a pair of prosecutors subject to presidential appointment. And second, they complained that Machen had supported the president in 2008 and donated about $4,500 to his campaign.

(They never mention that Rosenstein was a Bush appointee, held over by Obama with bipartisan support in Maryland. But then appointment by a Republican president isn’t much protection against smears from the right — just ask Patrick Fitzgerald, who prosecuted the Plame case.)

At this point, it is impossible to take Republicans seriously when they accuse anybody else of partisanship, although the Washington press corps feels obliged to pretend. To anyone with a functioning memory, these charges against Holder are especially galling, coming from people who were never troubled by the appointment of Kenneth Starr to investigate the Whitewater affair back in the 1990s.

Unlike Machen, whose resume includes years of service as a federal prosecutor, Starr had no prosecutorial experience. He was merely an ambitious Republican judge whose sole necessary qualification — in the eyes of the right-wing Republican senators and judges who conspired to appoint him — was partisan and ideological animus against President Bill Clinton.

Not only had Starr donated thousands of dollars to GOP candidates, he had almost run for a Virginia Senate seat himself as a Republican. He had represented the Republican National Committee and even volunteered to write an amicus brief to the Supreme Court on behalf of Paula Jones, the Arkansas woman who sued President Clinton for sexual harassment.

Yet somehow, nothing about Starr’s record suggested unacceptable partisanship to the Republicans who appointed him or the media that fawned over him. The $50 million-plus investigation of the Clintons, which actually encompassed at least six separate strands of inquiry, turned up nothing except the president’s trysts with Monica Lewinsky and his dissembling about that personal indiscretion. Ultimately, Starr’s embarrassing performance led to a consensus that the nation should no longer encourage undefined probes by unsupervised prosecutors. The law that enabled him was allowed to lapse.

Today, there is nothing startling in Holder naming a Democrat and a Republican to conduct a national security investigation — and in this case, their independence can be amply assured by congressional oversight and media coverage. And perhaps the Republican noise machine can pipe down, in full recollection of its silence when Starr ran amok with his party’s blessing.

Joe Conason writes for Creators Syndicate. Click here for more information, or click here to contact him.

Support Noozhawk Today

You are an important ally in our mission to deliver clear, objective, high-quality professional news reporting for Santa Barbara, Goleta and the rest of Santa Barbara County. Join the Hawks Club today to help keep Noozhawk soaring.

We offer four membership levels: $5 a month, $10 a month, $25 a month or $1 a week. Payments can be made through Stripe below, or click here for information on recurring credit-card payments and a mailing address for checks.

Thank you for your vital support.

Become a Noozhawk Supporter

First name
Last name
Enter your email
Select your membership level
×

Payment Information

You are purchasing:

Payment Method

Pay by Credit Card:

Mastercard, Visa, American Express, Discover
One click only, please!

Pay with Apple Pay or Google Pay:

Noozhawk partners with Stripe to provide secure invoicing and payments processing.

  • Ask
  • Vote
  • Investigate
  • Answer

Noozhawk Asks: What’s Your Question?

Welcome to Noozhawk Asks, a new feature in which you ask the questions, you help decide what Noozhawk investigates, and you work with us to find the answers.

Here’s how it works: You share your questions with us in the nearby box. In some cases, we may work with you to find the answers. In others, we may ask you to vote on your top choices to help us narrow the scope. And we’ll be regularly asking you for your feedback on a specific issue or topic.

We also expect to work together with the reader who asked the winning questions to find the answer together. Noozhawk’s objective is to come at questions from a place of curiosity and openness, and we believe a transparent collaboration is the key to achieve it.

The results of our investigation will be published here in this Noozhawk Asks section. Once or twice a month, we plan to do a review of what was asked and answered.

Thanks for asking!

Click Here to Get Started >

Reader Comments

Noozhawk is no longer accepting reader comments on our articles. Click here for the announcement. Readers are instead invited to submit letters to the editor by emailing them to [email protected]. Please provide your full name and community, as well as contact information for verification purposes only.

Daily Noozhawk

Subscribe to Noozhawk's A.M. Report, our free e-Bulletin sent out every day at 4:15 a.m. with Noozhawk's top stories, hand-picked by the editors.

Sign Up Now >