McClellan's book: "Bush, Cheney, etc. made me lie about CIA case"

moegolden

Perv-switch toggler
Oct 3, 2004
7,293
2
226
#1
A little late night lightning on the news wire....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071121/ap_on_go_pr_wh/cia_leak_mcclellan;_ylt=Av2MLTA0ekLc8bztiPJvGw6s0NUE

If it is true (of course it is), it would have been impeachable in years past, but this is 2007 and the guy waited for his book to get published, so it probably won't be regarded as something particularly admissible. But it may be the kind of thing that historians will use to sink Bush to worse than Warren Harding status.


Former aide blames Bush for leak deceit

By MATT APUZZO, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 2 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Former White House press secretary Scott McClellan blames President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney for efforts to mislead the public about the role of White House aides in leaking the identity of a CIA operative.

In an excerpt from his forthcoming book, McClellan recounts the 2003 news conference in which he told reporters that aides Karl Rove and I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby were "not involved" in the leak involving operative Valerie Plame.

"There was one problem. It was not true," McClellan writes, according to a brief excerpt released Tuesday. "I had unknowingly passed along false information. And five of the highest-ranking officials in the administration were involved in my doing so: Rove, Libby, the vice president, the president's chief of staff and the president himself."

Bush's chief of staff at the time was Andrew Card.

The excerpt, posted on the Web site of publisher PublicAffairs, renews questions about what went on in the West Wing and how much Bush and Cheney knew about the leak. For years, it was McClellan's job to field — and often duck — those types of questions.

Now that he's spurring them, answers are equally hard to come by.

White House press secretary Dana Perino said it wasn't clear what McClellan meant in the excerpt. "The president has not and would not ask his spokespeople to pass on false information," she said.

Plame issued a statement saying the opposite.

"I am outraged to learn that former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan confirms that he was sent out to lie to the press corps," Plame said. "Even more shocking, McClellan confirms that not only Karl Rove and Scooter Libby told him to lie but Vice President Cheney, presidential Chief of Staff Andrew Card and President Bush also ordered McClellan to issue his misleading statement."

McClellan turned down interview requests Tuesday.

Plame maintains the White House quietly outed her to reporters. Plame and her husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, said the leak was retribution for his public criticism of the Iraq war. The accusation dogged the administration and made Plame a cause celebre among many Democrats.

McClellan's book, "What Happened," isn't due out until April, and the excerpt released Monday was merely a teaser. It doesn't get into detail about how Bush and Cheney were involved or reveal what happened behind the scenes.

Yet the teaser provided enough fodder for administration critics.

"Just when you think the credibility of this White House can't get any lower, another shoe drops," said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. "If the Bush administration won't even tell the truth to its official spokesman, how can the American people expect to be told the truth either?"

In the fall of 2003, after authorities began investigating the leak, McClellan told reporters that he'd personally spoken to Rove, who was Bush's top political adviser, and Libby, who was Cheney's chief of staff.

"They're good individuals, they're important members of our White House team, and that's why I spoke with them, so that I could come back to you and say that they were not involved," McClellan said at the time.

Both men, however, were involved. Rove was one of the original sources for the newspaper column that identified Plame. Libby also spoke to reporters about the CIA officer and was convicted of lying about those discussions. He is the only person to be charged in the case.

Since that news conference, however, the official White House stance has shifted and it has been difficult to get a clear picture of what happened behind closed doors around the time of the leak.

McClellan's flat denials gave way to a steady drumbeat of "no comment." And Bush's original pledge to fire anyone involved in the leak became a promise to fire anyone who "committed a crime."

In a CNN interview earlier this year, McClellan made no suggestion that Bush knew either Libby or Rove was involved in the leak. McClellan said his statements to reporters were what he and the president "believed to be true at the time based on assurances that we were both given."

Bush most recently addressed the issue in July after commuting Libby's 30-month prison term. He acknowledged that some in the White House were involved in the leak. Then, after repeatedly declining to discuss the ongoing investigation, he said the case was closed and it was time to move on.

___

Associated Press writer Jennifer Loven contributed to this report.

 

weakside

He was stupid. I was lucky. I will visit him soon.
Dec 9, 2004
3,871
0
0
California
#2
These are some pretty bold claims. He better be telling the truth because unless he wrote it as opinion he can be sued for libel.
 

TheDrip

I'm bi-winning.
Jan 9, 2006
5,051
3
228
#3
Odds on whether he has a tragic freak accident in the upcoming months?
 

Vyce

Light-skinned, with no Negro dialect.
Feb 11, 2006
8,171
10
496
Washington D.C.
#4
Odds on whether he has a tragic freak accident in the upcoming months?
In all seriousness, the sad fact is that, whether he's lying or not, the Administration isn't going to do jack shit to defend itself against these claims. Because for some retarded reason, it pretty much NEVER defends itself for this sort of thing. Hell, people routinely wish DEATH upon the Bush administration, and write up vicious little murder-porns about it, and they don't really experience any sort of accountability for it. That's pretty weak for an administration that's supposedly taking away all of our civil liberties. You'd have thought they'd send brownshirts in jack boots to "correct" those people by now, right?

BTW, I'm going to sit back and bask in the delicious irony of seeing the left do a complete 180 on McClellan and now treat him as if he's speaking the Word of God (because after all, he was one of those Administration folks who's death was routinely wished for / called for).
 

mendozathejew

Registered User
Mar 12, 2005
6,749
0
0
jersey
#5
MSNBC News Services
updated 38 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Former White House spokesman Scott McClellan does not believe President Bush lied to him about the role of White House aides I. Lewis Scooter Libby or Karl Rove in the leak of CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity, according to McClellan's publisher.

Peter Osnos, the founder and editor-in-chief of Public Affairs Books, which is publishing McClellan's book in April, tells NBC from his Connecticut home that McCLellan, "Did not intend to suggest Bush lied to him."

Osnos says when McClellan went before the White House press corps in 2003 to publicly exonerate Libby and Rove, the problem was that his statement was not true. Osnos said the president told McClellan what "he thought to be the case." But, he says, McClellan believes, "the president didn't know it was not true."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21917188/
 

Kris_LTRMa

LoseTheRadio.net's Ma
Nov 17, 2006
9,749
1
333
right where I wanna be
#6
MSNBC News Services
updated 38 minutes ago

Peter Osnos, the founder and editor-in-chief of Public Affairs Books, which is publishing McClellan's book in April, tells NBC from his Connecticut home that McCLellan, "Did not intend to suggest Bush lied to him."

Osnos says when McClellan went before the White House press corps in 2003 to publicly exonerate Libby and Rove, the problem was that his statement was not true. Osnos said the president told McClellan what "he thought to be the case." But, he says, McClellan believes, "the president didn't know it was not true."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21917188/
And Clinton smoked pot but didn't inhale and he did not have sexual relations with that woman [Monica, not Hillary]
 

d0uche_n0zzle

**Negative_Creep**
Sep 15, 2004
46,797
6,919
763
F.U.B.A.R
#7
In all seriousness, the sad fact is that, whether he's lying or not, the Administration isn't going to do jack shit to defend itself against these claims. Because for some retarded reason, it pretty much NEVER defends itself for this sort of thing. Hell, people routinely wish DEATH upon the Bush administration, and write up vicious little murder-porns about it, and they don't really experience any sort of accountability for it. That's pretty weak for an administration that's supposedly taking away all of our civil liberties. You'd have thought they'd send brownshirts in jack boots to "correct" those people by now, right?

BTW, I'm going to sit back and bask in the delicious irony of seeing the left do a complete 180 on McClellan and now treat him as if he's speaking the Word of God (because after all, he was one of those Administration folks who's death was routinely wished for / called for).

R.I.P. Ron Brown
 

mendozathejew

Registered User
Mar 12, 2005
6,749
0
0
jersey
#8
And Clinton smoked pot but didn't inhale and he did not have sexual relations with that woman [Monica, not Hillary]
clinton had a handful of legitimate, serious scandals that the press only scratched the surface on. it wasnt until one of them had jizm stained dresses that they decided to run with them

can you imagine the shitstorm that would have happened if a republican pres had a former bouncer holding the fbi files of their political rivals? the media would have been all over it. or the various filthy campaign contributions involving the chinese?
 

mendozathejew

Registered User
Mar 12, 2005
6,749
0
0
jersey
#10
Well we had Abramoff. I don't believe his Indian clients wanted the technology to turn America into a nuclear wasteland though.
they are both scumbags dont get me wrong. its the difference in the coverage that disgusts me. clinton and bush's overall failures are very similar imo

but the media only cared about clinton's disasters when it got sexy. everything real was ignored. and the overblown nature of the lewinksy bullshit makes the legitimate criticisms taken even less seriously
 

Southpaw

Registered User
Jan 12, 2005
934
0
0
#11
but the media only cared about clinton's disasters when it got sexy. everything real was ignored. and the overblown nature of the lewinksy bullshit makes the legitimate criticisms taken even less seriously
So not true. The MSM all reported extensively on Whitewater, the travel office scandal, the FBI files scandal. The "Chinese Connection" story broke in the Washington Post and was written by Bob Woodward. The pimping of the Lincoln bedroom and the pardons were all so publicized that they became material for late night monologues. Non-Lewinsky scandals were all over the media during his terms. Of course, back then there blogs and cable news didn't exist as they do now to provide 24/7 scandal saturation.
 

mendozathejew

Registered User
Mar 12, 2005
6,749
0
0
jersey
#12
So not true. The MSM all reported extensively on Whitewater, the travel office scandal, the FBI files scandal. The "Chinese Connection" story broke in the Washington Post and was written by Bob Woodward. The pimping of the Lincoln bedroom and the pardons were all so publicized that they became material for late night monologues. Non-Lewinsky scandals were all over the media during his terms. Of course, back then there blogs and cable news didn't exist as they do now to provide 24/7 scandal saturation.
I clearly didnt say they ignored the stories. but they only scratched the surface, they didnt get knee deep in it, cover it everyday, let alone make the clear judgments that this is something actually important that you see with a bush story. not nearly.

and when you have a story like the FBI files, which was truly just let go, maybe years down the line its a relevant story in regards to the absolute deterioration of the FBI during the clinton years. louis freehs book didnt get any coverage from the media.