Does Mike McCurry's Resignation Suggest Rats Deserting a Sinking Ship?

Washinton Post Hints McCurry Departure Signals a Beginning Exodus

By Mary Mostert, Analyst,

Friday June 24, 1998-

Mike McCurry Survived three and a half years as Clinton's spokesman by deliberately squelching his journalistic curiosity about Lewinsky and the President, according to a story in today's Washington Post by veteran reporters Peter Baker and Howard Kurtz. They wrote:

"Still, he survived the crisis by abandoning the one political commodity he prized the most: access. With subpoenas flying and lawyers setting strategy, McCurry deliberately stayed uninformed on the Lewinsky situation, aggravating an already combustible situation in the briefing room where questions went unanswered.

"It was a good approach for me personally, a good approach for the institution of the presidency and a good approach for Bill Clinton personally," he said. The "downside," he acknowledged, was that the White House was accused of stonewalling.

"That was a striking turnaround for a veteran media spinner who arrived at the White House in January 1995 insisting on the access that his often-frustrated predecessor, Dee Dee Myers, never had. Having worked for Sen. Bob Kerrey (D-Neb.) during the 1992 presidential primaries, McCurry had no personal relationship with Clinton and never became a FOB (Friend of Bill), despite the professional partnership that developed. In some ways, this enhanced his credibility because he did not take the daily slings so personally, according to colleagues and reporters."

For two veteran reporters of the Washington scene, this is an incredible statement, especially after noting that "While timed to minimize disruption, it comes at a difficult moment for the Clinton presidency as the Monica S. Lewinsky investigation moves closer to conclusion. McCurry, 43, valued his reputation for honesty, which remained largely intact."

Only in Washington could McCurry's studied determination to deliberately evade the issues involved in the Clinton White House be called "honesty." By his own admission, Mike McCurry deliberately avoided trying to find out what was really happening under his nose. That is deceit. Deceit is dishonesty. So, in effect what he has said is that he avoided finding out what was going on in the White House so, if subpoenaed he could say he "didn't know" what was going on. Only by deliberately leading the reporters astray, and therefore the public, did McCurry feel he could cope with the situation.

A person can lead others astray if they are being dishonest in thought or action. And, of course, that is what the army of "spin doctors" in the White House have been doing - deliberately trying to lead the American people astray where people like Kenneth Starr are concerned.

As a writer, I simply don't believe that McCurry "didn't know" what was really going on between Clinton and Lewinsky. He just kept himself aloof so he could tell the press corps that he "didn't know" what happened. It's sad to think that two top reporters have written reports, including today's report, that millions of people believe to be true - yet by their own words they indicate they are part of the deception.

Kurtz and Baker noted in their report that "McCurry's departure likely will be followed by others spaced out over the coming months, possibly including White House Chief of Staff Erskine B. Bowles, senior advisers Rahm Emanuel and Douglas B. Sosnik and others."

McCurry's resignation comes on the heels of a report in the Washington Times that Sen. Arlen Specter was threatening to take Attorney General Janet Reno to court if she ignores the recommendation of her own top investigator to seek an independent counsel to probe fund raising in the 1996 Clinton re-election campaign. "The Pennsylvania Republican, a former federal prosecutor and a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said he was preparing a writ of mandamus to the U.S. District Court in Washington, which would compel Miss Reno to request the appointment," Jerry Seper reports in today's paper. (June 24, 1998)

"The Senator described as "devastating" the report to the attorney general this week by Charles LaBella, the career prosecutor handpicked by Miss Reno to head a Justice Department fund-raising task force. Mr. LaBella, after a lengthy investigation, recommended the naming of an independent counsel to investigate accusations of illegal fund-raising activity by the Clinton campaign. "Miss Reno steadfastly has rejected calls by congressional leaders to seek outside counsel. But Thursday she promised to review the matter in light of Mr. LaBella's report. "She said she was listening to a 'wide range of lawyers' within the department 'who have had long experience with the Independent Counsel Act,'... not just one lawyer, but everybody."

Obviously, McCurry has not been alone in the studied determination to avoid "knowing" anything. It has been a common, if cowardly, response to what has been going on in the White House these past few years.

However it is behavior that has my news antenna up and scanning. I suspect that both Reno and McCurry, in spite of their studied efforts to portray ignorance, know only too well what has been going on in the Clinton White House. And, they are sure acting like people who don't want to be caught in the way when the people finally discover that the Emperor really DOESN'T have any clothes because it will probably destroy their own careers.. I suspect. in fact, that the sudden exodus and the admitted effort to cover up the planned exodus of so many top Clinton aides suggests that things are worse than we thought.

Those who lack integrity and principle also invariably lack courage. And, when there is no courage, no integrity, no principle and a studied attempt to deceive the public - the ending to the story could get pretty ugly.

Washinton Post article on McCurry: Washington Post

Washington Times article on Janet Reno: Washington Times

To comment go to: mmostert@waveshift.com