The Right Opinion

How Things Work

By Rich Galen · Jan. 25, 2013

Editor's Note: In the original version I said that Dee Dee Meyers was representing Jill Kelly. I was wrong – or, as we like to say, mistakes were made. Judy Smith, head of Smith & Company, is handling Mrs. Kelly. Ms. Meyers is representing Paula Broadwell. Thanks to another pro, Amy Weiss, for pointing out the error. Herewith the corrected version:

A couple of things happened in Our Nation's Capital this week that caught my eye, and might be of use to you as you prepare for your Public Relations 312 midterm exams.

The first was the case of Jill Kelly who popped into our national consciousness as an outgrowth of the David Petraeus/Paula Broadwell affair becoming public. You remember all of that and I won't recount the entire thing which, as Jeff Bridges' character said in The Big Lebowski “has a lot of ins, a lot of outs, a lot of what-have-yous.”

Here, if you are at the top of your game as a crisis management expert, you handle this.

First, you get hired by the client. In this case the Kellys hired Judy Smith. An excellent choice as it turns out.

Then you come up with a grand strategy – in this case get the book closed on the Kelly/Broadwell/Petraeus/Gen. John Allen business – at least at it involved the Kellys.

Here's what happened.

On January 22, 2013 the an Op-Ed was published by the Washington Post signed by both Jill and her husband Scott Kelly. I have no doubt that it was not written by the Kellys, but I have made a pretty penny ghostwriting op-eds and letters to the editor ever since I was a young press secretary on Capitol Hill, so no harm there.

In the 717 word essay, the Kellys laid out what happened, what didn't happen, and why they believe their lives were turned into a Kardashian episode through no fault of their own.

Ok. Fair enough. They get to make their case and they made it.

But, that's not what makes excellent crisis management people excellent crisis management people.

On the very same day as the Kelly's piece ran in the Post, former Post media reporter – and now Washington Bureau Chief for the Newsweek/DailyBeast site – Howard Kurtz published an exclusive interview with Jill Kelly in which she more-or-laid out what happened, what didn't happen, and so on.

SIDEBAR

I occasionally write for the DailyBeast.com and am paid for having done so.

END SIDEBAR

Ok. Op-Ed in the Post and an exclusive interview by a well-respected Washington insider. Pretty good.

But, here's the capper: Also on January 22, 2013 the Pentagon announced it was closing the case of Gen. Allen and the correspondence he carried out with Mrs. Kelly via email.

Three. For. Three.

And, for extra credit, the next day the White House announced that Gen. Allen's nomination to be the top military officer at NATO was back on track.

That's not just good. That's magical good.

The second example takes far less time to explain.

On Thursday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton testified on Capitol Hill about what she knew and when she knew it about the Benghazi attacks.

I am a huge fan of Secretary Clinton. I thought she was a great Senator for New York (note, please, she was not the Senator from Georgia or Texas); and I thought she presented the U.S. in an excellent light when she traveled the world as Secretary of State.

But. It was no secret that Members of the House and Senate committees have been rubbing their hands in anticipation of her testimony. That testimony was delayed when she fainted, fell down, bunked her head, and ended up in the hospital.

The Obama Administration owes Mrs. Clinton a lot for carrying its water at State. Moreover President Obama personally owes former President Bill Clinton an enormous debt for jumping into the recent campaign and (at least publically) wholeheartedly supporting Obama's re-election bid.

So, what did the White House do to partially pay off it's bills? They had Defense Secretary Leon Panetta announce – maybe as Secretary Clinton was testifying – that he was rescinding the rule against women serving in combat roles.

As the comms people at the White House knew it would, the Panetta announcement diluted – if not completely rinsed out of the public discussion – Hillary Clinton's testimony.

The Clintons may not have burned the mortgage they hold on the Obamas, but they know there has been a serious pay-down.

As someone who has spent most of his adult life in this arena, I can only stand and shout Bravo!.

On the Secret Decoder Ring page today: Links to all of the stories referenced above. Also a Mullfoto that brought be back to my geek days as a software writer before the word “geek” was even invented.

Copyright ©2012 Barrington Worldwide, LLC | Mullings.com

7 Comments

rab in jo,mo said:

That testimony was delayed when she got drunk, passed out, fell down, bunked her head, and ended up in rehab to dry out.

Fixed it for you...

Rand Paul had it right - Benghazi was gross negligence on the part of the State Department. An embassy or consulate is American soil and should be defended as such. We now know that communications were sent warning of possible attacks and nothing was done to improve security beforehand. The attack lasted 7 hours. There was plenty of time to send air support from Italy. The people on the ground in Benghazi had the terrorist mortar positions on a target lock (there is some speculation that this wouldn't be possible if air support wasn't in the area), eliminating the mortars would likely have broken the attack. But instead, nothing was done except to claim the bodies after they had been desecrated by the terrorists.

Culpability extends all the way to the top here - including the BS cover story about some stupid video that no one had heard of before all this. It's a shame that nothing will happen.

Friday, January 25, 2013 at 9:21 AM

wjm in Colorado said:

A huge fan of Hillary? What, as the purest excuse for a communist hag pretending to be working for American Interests? A Champion for Islam? A Prevaricating Genius? Hillary deserves a spot at Gitmo with the Traitor Obamao.

Friday, January 25, 2013 at 9:31 AM

jblack@nctv.com in sc said:

Mac, rab, and wjm----you guys are all so right---this whole affair is so despicable and I think that Galen's columns are usually full of crap---he is another arrogant, narcissist goofball. !!!!

Friday, January 25, 2013 at 10:29 AM

Wayne in Hinesville, GA said:

This article didn't work for me. Hillary is still a lying Demorat and always will be. Her lying about how upset she was in the hangar with the bodies was a bunch of BS. I watched that and she showed absolutely no emotion and neither did Odumbo. Both of them could have cared less about the four people who died as long as it didn't interfere with their agenda.

Friday, January 25, 2013 at 11:06 AM

Robert in NEW Mexico said:

I don't like the tone or content of this essay either. Galen is giving us an insiders view- and an education- of how career political insiders see and interpret the art of politics and propoganda.

Galen's kudows are no different than when a judge on American Idol or the Voice , etc, etc) gives a standing ovation to a colleague or a talented and aspiring amateur.

Otherwise,it goes without saying that this administration and its representatives are successfully perverting the language and legal processes of our country, and getting away with it.

Friday, January 25, 2013 at 11:54 AM

Tapdaddy in Indiana said:

I read it but what a waste of time.

Friday, January 25, 2013 at 3:06 PM

richard ryan in Lamar,Missouri replied:

Fortunately Tapdaddy, I stopped reading after the 2nd line. My stomach hasn`t been too good lately and I didn`t think it would stand another load of crap.,

Friday, January 25, 2013 at 7:26 PM