RSS feed for comments on this post.
The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://poliblogger.com/wp-trackback.html?p=9403
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
0.089 Powered by Wordpress
You put way more stake in Washington memoirs than I do. Each and every book coming out of Washington by formerly anonymous staffers could be entitled “If they would have only listened to me”.
Staffers in Washington, but especially in the federal government, tend to find ways to couch the advice given in the past as being interesting in light of today’s issues. But was the advice really on point? Anybody who writes hundreds of memos can find a couple that give advice that looks good now. The question is how forceful was the advice? How consistent?
Good political actors learn how to play this game well. Give widely varying advice, and then later pull out the pieces that were right and highlite it for the world to see.
Maybe this guy was consistent on the subject, and maybe he laid out a framework for interrogation that was ignored. My money is he’s a good political operative who wants to settle scores and sell books.
If they would have only listened to him…
Comment by Buckland — Monday, February 20, 2024 @ 6:13 pm
I concur about the memoirs syndrome.
However, the story cites a memo, not memoirs, and if I read the piece correctly we are talking about contemporaneous and official memoranda, not ex post facto memories.
Regardless of Mora’s memo, the rest of my post has nothing to do with any memos, memoirs or memories, but rather analysis of official documents.
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Monday, February 20, 2024 @ 7:58 pm