A White House aide’s purported threat to journalist Bob Woodward over his sequester reporting doesn’t appear to have been that threatening, according to the full text of the email exchange published Thursday, marking the latest twist in a Beltway feud.
The tiff started last weekend, when Mr. Woodward, the veteran Washington Post reporter, wrote an opinion article headlined “Obama’s Sequester Deal-Changer.” In the piece, he accused the administration of moving the goal posts on budget talks by now insisting that new revenues be part of any agreement to replace the sequester’s budget cuts.�He has described as �madness� President Obama�s decision to not deploy an aircraft carrier group because of the cuts, which are�set to take effect Friday.
(Separately, in an interview on WSJ.com, Rep. Howard �Buck� McKeon, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said he believed the aircraft carrier decision was made by military leaders who didn�t have political motives.)
More In Sequester- IRS Furloughs to Begin After Tax Season
- Seib & Wessel: What We're Reading Thursday
- AFL-CIO's Trumka: Sequester a 'Fancy Word' for 'Dumb Idea'
- Pro-Obama Group Launches Sequester Push
- Reid Calls Boehner Budget Gibe 'Weak Sauce'
Moreover, Mr. Woodward argued that a senior official in the White House went too far by suggesting that the journalist would �regret� reporting that the president had changed his position in this budget disagreement.
Mr. Woodward, who detailed the deal that led to these budget cuts in his book, �The Price of Politics,� took to the airwaves in recent days. He said that the White House pushed back aggressively when he questioned the administration�s statements about the cuts.
�It makes me very uncomfortable to have the White House telling reporters, you�re going to regret doing something that you believe in,� Mr. Woodward said in an interview on CNN. �It�s Mickey Mouse.�
While Mr. Woodward�s comments implied that his exchanges with the official had been tense, perhaps even verging on threatening, the e-mails themselves revealed a friendlier conversation. Politico obtained the emails that Mr. Woodward traded with Gene Sperling, the president�s National Economic Council director.
Mr. Woodward confirmed to The Wall Street Journal that the published version of the e-mails were accurate. In them, Mr. Sperling repeatedly apologizes for an earlier phone conversation.
�My apologies again for raising my voice on the call with you,� Mr. Sperling wrote. �Feel bad about that and truly apologize.�
Mr. Sperling also questions � in a not-so-threatening tone — Mr. Woodward�s suggestion that the president�s current request for new revenues was a change in position.
�I know you may not believe this, but as a friend, I think you will regret staking out that claim,� Mr. Sperling wrote.
Mr. Woodward�s op-ed and interviews have forced the White House to defend its version of events and have given Republicans additional ammunition as they try to hang the budget cuts around the president�s neck.
On Thursday, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said administration officials are respectful of the work that reporters do but also believe it�s important to make clear when they think a journalist is getting the facts wrong. He said the full context of the exchange shows that Mr. Sperling treated Mr. Woodward with respect.
�You cannot read those e-mails and come away with the impression that Gene was threatening anybody,� Mr. Carney said.
No comments:
Post a Comment