Gov. Spitzer, in a deep hole over his plan to give drivers’ licenses to ille gal immigrants, won’t stop digging.
He spoke at NYU’s Center for Law and Security yesterday to underscore the plan’s security bells-and-whistles in a bid to reassure an astonishingly skeptical public. (A scant 22 percent of New Yorkers approve of the scheme, according to a recent poll.)
He trumpeted an endorsement of the plan from Richard Clarke, a counter-terrorism czar in both the Clinton and Bush White Houses.
Bringing in Clarke as a supporter of the plan was an odd choice, to say the least.
For one thing, despite heading up the nation’s anti-terrorism effort from 1998, Clarke failed to foresee 9/11. Maybe nobody could have, but the attack effectively revoked Clarke’s security-expert credentials.
Yesterday, though, Spitzer distributed this statement from Clarke: “[States] should act to register immigrants, legal and illegal, who use our roadways as New York is doing. From a law-enforcement and security perspective, it is far preferable for the state to know who is living in it and driving on its roads.”
A clear endorsement of the Spitzer plan, right?
Small problem.
Back on June 1, The New York Times published an opinion piece written by Clarke that argued precisely the opposite: “Potential terrorists here illegally can easily use phony licenses or, in many states, get real ones issued to them, along with credit cards and all of the other papers needed to blend into our society . . . Indeed, those arrested for allegedly planning to attack Fort Dix in New Jersey included illegal immigrants who apparently had little difficulty getting along in this country.”
Asked about the inconsistency, the governor’s office deflected the question to Clarke, who “explained” by e-mail:
“Terrorists can attempt to create counterfeit or phony licenses, but the New York license is hard to forge. Terrorists could apply for a N.Y. license and if they had verifiable proof of identity, they could get a license. The N.Y. rules require verifiable proof of identity. But having them register in a real name is precisely what we want. U.S. counter-terrorism authorities would have access to the names, addresses and photos of people who registered.”
Say what? Doesn’t that contradict your op-ed, Mr. Clarke?
“I just told you why it doesn’t contradict what I wrote,” he told The Post’s Ken Lovett last night.
Hmmm. You could have fooled us.
We wonder.
Will Spitzer ever quit digging?