Obama aide's emails captivate D.C.
WASHINGTON — When not fighting with Republicans, the White House has been tangling with one of the capital's best-known and best-sourced reporters. But the Bob Woodward vs. White House sideshow moved to the center ring on Thursday. And much of the city paused to watch.
That's when Politico published an email exchange between Woodward, the celebrity investigative reporter and chronicler of presidents, and Gene Sperling, President Obama's top economic aide. Although Woodward had accused an Obama aide of rough treatment and veiled threats, the emails showed a much softer, genial exchange.
“I know you may not believe this, but as a friend, I think you will regret staking out that claim,” Sperling wrote.
“I also welcome your personal advice. I am listening,” Woodward responded.
The back-and-forth had some chuckling and others scoffing. The White House downplayed the matter as routine business.
“I think you cannot read those emails and come away with the impression that Gene was threatening anybody,” said White House spokesman Jay Carney.
Still, the fight with Woodward has been an irksome distraction for a White House engaged in a high-stakes showdown with Congress over the federal budget.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Buffet: Berkshire’s built to last
- Huge, ancient quasar could alter theories on black holes
- Most young Republicans back legal marijuana
- Florida fisherman’s high court win spurs call for legal reform
- Paul edges Walker in CPAC straw poll
- Perceived slights have some New Yorkers longing for Pennsylvania
- Monarch butterflies find milkweed supply dwindles
- Mo. gunman kills 7, self, in rampage
- Congress approves 1-week funding measure for Homeland Security
- Gene making human brains bigger found
- Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu rejects Jewish House Democrats’ invitation