A Glimpse Into the Mind of Peter Hoekstra

House Intelligence bigshot Peter Hoekstra's May 18, 2006 letter to the president was leaked today, and it affords a valuable peek into the pique of one angry Republican. A most revealing passage is quoted in the Times' story:

I have learned of some alleged intelligence community activities about which our committee has not been briefed. If these allegations are true, they may represent a breach of responsibility by the administration, a violation of the law, and, just as importantly, a direct affront to me and the members of this committee who have so ardently supported efforts to collect information on our enemies.

That's right, folks; Peter Hoekstra thinks the president's "violation of the law" is "just as important" as his snubbing of a political ally. So before anyone starts applauding Hoekstra for being one of the few members of Congress willing to remind the president that the Constitution still exists, bear in mind that he clearly did not intend this letter to become public (a fact acknowledged by his office). Hoekstra's reaction is about turf and control, about a player in the intelligence business who knows that power increases with information, and angry that he's lost some. For Eric Lichtblau and Scott Shane of the Times to claim that "the assertion that other intelligence activities had been hidden from Congress is particularly surprising coming from Mr. Hoekstra" is either touchingly naive or downright scary, depending on your perspective.

The Post tepidly covers Hoekstra's letter in one all-too brief story, but at least hits the right notes with their lead; "[t]he White House possibly broke the law by keeping intelligence activities a secret from the lawmakers responsible for overseeing them." But a later Post story on the subject oddly deletes the words "just as importantly" from the paragraph excerpted above.

The same Post piece also mentions but papers over a particularly ridiculous dispute Hoekstra is having with the White House and the Defense Department. Remember Ricky Santorum and his claim that a few pre-Gulf War, severely degraded shells found in Iraq were the WMD that supposedly brought us there in the first place? Hoekstra, who had jumped onto that rickety bandwagon, blasted U. S. intelligence chief John Negroponte for publicly shooting down Santorum's delusions, accusing Negroponte of attempting "to downplay the significance of relevant facts." When a White House this desperate for good news turns down a chance to say they found WMD in Iraq, you know there's no story here.

And with that I give you Peter Hoekstra, champion of "truthiness."