In a shameful display of unaccountability from the White House podium Monday afternoon, Press Secretary Scott McClellan repeatedly stonewalled questions from reporters about how the White House was responding to newly-disclosed information that Karl Rove was a leaker of classified information.

McClellan hid behind the assertion that the special prosecutor had requested that he not speak from the podium on the matter. A careful reading of McClellan’s talking point demonstrates that he was under no specific orders not to speak by the prosecutor. McClellan’s word games were deliberately chosen to create the impression that his hands were tied and he simply couldn’t comment on an “ongoing investigation.” But a closer inspection of his language shows that McClellan was admitting that he was opting not to answer questions that he most certainly could have answered.

“The prosecutors overseeing the investigation had expressed a preference to us that one way to help the investigation is not to be commenting on it from this podium.”

“That’s something that the people overseeing the investigation have expressed a preference that we follow. And that’s why we’re continuing to follow that approach and that policy.”

“There came a point when the investigation got underway when those overseeing the investigation asked that it would be their — or said that it would be their preference that we not get into discussing it while it is ongoing.”

“Well, those overseeing the investigation expressed a preference to us that we not get into commenting on the investigation while it’s ongoing. And that was what they requested of the White House.”

“I think probably more than one individual who’s involved in overseeing the investigation had expressed a preference that we not get into commenting on the investigation while it’s ongoing.”

So McClellan could not answer any questions because the special prosecutor preferred that he not talk. But that’s never stopped the White House before. So where did the White House get the idea that Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald “preferred” that they not speak? McClellan could not say who specifically made the request of the White House or when the request was made. In any case, the suffering credibility of the Bush White House demands that any considerations of a preference not to speak be overridden in favor of coming clean about this growing scandal.

Finally! The White House press corps at long last woke up today and started asking questions about Karl Rove. They wanted to know if White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan stood by his previous statement that anyone involved in leaking undercover CIA agent Valerie Plame’s identity to the media should be fired. But when the going tough, McClellan fell back on his handy list of Phrases To Use To Dodge Questions. Here’s Scott McClellan, by the numbers:

23: Number of times McClellan could’t answer a question because the Rove investigation is “ongoing.”

10: Number of times McClellan couldn’t answer a question because it was “related” to the investigation or in the “context” of the investigation.

16: Number of times McClellan said he just wouldn’t “comment” on a question.

5: Number of times McClellan assured reporters he “appreciates the questions” about Rove’s involvement in the Plame case.

8: Number of times McClellan told reporters he and the president were “helping” the investigation with their silence.

8: Number of times McClellan said he and President Bush want to “get to the bottom of this.”

3: Number of times McClellan said he and the president planned to “cooperate fully” with the investigation by not answering questions.

10: Number of times McClellan claimed he’d already “responded” to a reporter’s question.

Today in the White House press briefing, Press Secretary Scott McClellan tried a few different tricks to cajole reporters into not asking difficult questions of him. McClellan was taking tremendous heat for refusing to comment on Rove and the leak investigation despite having done so numerous times before (the video will be available here later today; we’d urge you watch at least the first 10 minutes).

McClellan repeatedly turned to the aid of two evasive maneuvers: 1) highlight his personal relationship with reporters as someone that could be trusted, and 2) highlight that he was more than well aware of what he has said in the past and cannot wait to explain himself at some later date. Here are some examples of each:

McClellan Emphasizes Relationship With Reporters

“We know each other very well.”

“You and everybody in this room — or most people in this room, I should say — know me very well, and they know the type of person that I am. And I’m confident in our relationship that we have.”

McClellan Wants To Talk But Can’t

“I remember very well what was previously said. And, at some point, I will be glad to talk about it, but not until after the investigation is complete.”

“I’m well aware, like you, of what was previously said. And I will be glad to talk about it at the appropriate time.”

“I am well aware of what was said previously. I remember well what was said previously. And at some point I look forward to talking about it. But until the investigation is complete, I’m just not going to do that.”

“Again, I’m going to be happy to talk about this at the appropriate time.”

WHITE HOUSE REGULAR NEWS BRIEFING
JULY 11, 2005
SPEAKER: SCOTT MCCLELLAN, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY

MCCLELLAN: Good afternoon, everyone.

I want to begin with a statement by the president. Read more

Finally, the White House press corps gets its act together.

Scott McClellan’s press briefing is beginning now (you can watch it live here) — but a reporter inside today’s untelevised press gaggle just shot us an email. Apparently McClellan was asked 5 different times about the Rove revelations, and 5 different times he said he “would not comment on an ongoing investigation.”

UPDATE: This press briefing is stunning. McClellan is refusing to say anything at all, not one word, about the Plame case. The reporters are outraged – NBC’s David Gregory just told McClellan that his stonewalling was “ridiculous.”

UPDATE II: McClellan’s line is that he will not comment on the investigation until the “appropriate time, which is when the investigation has concluded.” Actually, that’s not true — at all. The investigation began on September 28, 2003.

Reuters’ write-up of Rove’s involvement in the leak scandal captures the emerging consensus within the media that Karl Rove is an astute wordsmith who carefully-parsed his statements:

Rove has carefully chosen his words when questioned about the leak. “I didn’t know her name. I didn’t leak her name,” he told CNN last year when asked if he had had anything to do with it.

There’s no doubt that Rove has tried to carefully parse his statements, but what is being overlooked is that Rove actually did not choose his words carefully enough.

Consider his two on-the-record comments about the leak (which are both on-camera):

Reporter: Did you have any knowledge or did you leak the name of the CIA agent to the press?
Rove: No. [ABC, 9/29/03]

Rove: Well, I’ll repeat what I said to ABC News when this whole thing broke some number of months ago. I didn’t know her name and didn’t leak her name. [CNN, 8/31/04]

Notice that in the second statement, Rove rephrases what ABC’s original question was to him, omitting the part where the reporter asked whether he had “any knowledge” of the leak. Rove offered a categorical denial to the entire question. The ABC reporter did not ask whether Rove knew Plame’s name — that was simply offered as part of Rove’s later recasting of the question.

If Rove wants to play these legal word games, then he should explain why he said he did not have any knowledge of the leak when he was Matt Cooper’s source.

Why did Karl Rove leak the covert identy of a CIA agent to a reporter? Here’s what his lawyer wants you to believe:

Robert Luskin, attorney for Karl Rove: “This was not an effort to encourage Time to disclose her identity. What he was doing was discouraging Time from perpetuating some statements that had been made publicly and weren’t true.”

But before getting sucked into that spin, it’s important to remember what a senior administration official told the Washington Post shortly after the leak investigation began.

“A senior administration official said that before Novak’s column ran, two top White House officials called at least six Washington journalists and disclosed the identity and occupation of Wilson’s wife ‘Clearly, it was meant purely and simply for revenge,’ the senior official said of the alleged leak.”