Monday's Washington Post runs one of those Leak Stories at the top of the front page, and the obvious question of Leak Stories is: Who benefits? Today's report by Spencer Hsu is clearly intended to absolve the Obama White House staff for the state-dinner fiasco with the Salahis:
A summary of a secret 2003 report obtained by The Washington Post, along with descriptions of more recent incidents by federal homeland security officials, places Tareq and Michaele Salahi squarely in a rogues' gallery of autograph hounds, publicity seekers, unstable personalities and others identified by the Secret Service as defeating its checkpoints at least 91 times since 1980.
Hsu reports that this document is "the most complete accounting of recent Secret Service security breakdowns," including "a woman previously known to agents after she had falsely claimed a ‘special relationship’ with Bill Clinton." So who leaked?
A Secret Service official confirmed the authenticity of the unclassified document, which was a 39-slide presentation, and said it had been used to train agents and officers in an effort to improve agency operations. "This document reflects a proactive attempt to evaluate our security and obviously raises the awareness of uniformed division officers and agents about their jobs," spokesman Edwin Donovan said.
The media and Congress have provided more scrutiny to the Secret Service than they have to the Social Secretary staff or to Michelle Obama, who's at the top of that flow chart. Did Michelle make the decision that the social office would not lower itself to testify last week?
