Exclusive: Former WH Press Secretary Scott McClellan whacks Bush, White House

[suedanim]

The truth will come out, all in good time. The Bush WH was built upon corrupt, foul policies by corrupt, incompetant people and the Republicans in Congress who cosigned and those who voted them into the WH all bear responsibility. The blood of many thousands of innocent Iraqis AND American soldiers is on their hands.

You can blame Karl Rove all you like, but the buck stops in the Oval Office and in this case.... also in the VP's office.

Posted in two parts....

Part one..

Exclusive: McClellan whacks Bush, White House (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10649.html)

By MIKE ALLEN (http://www.politico.com/reporters/MikeAllen.html) | 5/27/08 6:18 PM EST


Former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan writes in a surprisingly scathing memoir to be published next week that President Bush "veered terribly off course," was not "open and forthright on Iraq," and took a "permanent campaign approach" to governing at the expense of candor and competence.

Among the most explosive revelations in the 341-page book, titled "What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington’s Culture of Deception" (Public Affairs, $27.95):

• McClellan charges that Bush relied on "propaganda" to sell the war.

• He says the White House press corps was too easy on the administration during the run-up to the war.

• He admits that some of his own assertions from the briefing room podium turned out to be "badly misguided."

• The longtime Bush loyalist also suggests that two top aides held a secret West Wing meeting to get their story straight about the CIA leak case at a time when federal prosecutors were after them — and McClellan was continuing to defend them despite mounting evidence they had not given him all the facts.

• McClellan asserts that the aides — Karl Rove, the president’s senior adviser, and I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, the vice president’s chief of staff — "had at best misled" him about their role in the disclosure of former CIA operative Valerie Plame’s identity.

A few reporters were offered advance copies of the book, with the restriction that their stories not appear until Sunday, the day before the official publication date. Politico declined and purchased "What Happened" at a Washington bookstore.

The eagerly awaited book, while recounting many fond memories of Bush and describing him as "authentic" and "sincere," is harsher than reporters and White House officials had expected.

McClellan was one of the president’s earliest and most loyal political aides, and most of his friends had expected him to take a few swipes at his former colleague in order to sell books but also to paint a largely affectionate portrait.

Instead, McClellan’s tone is often harsh. He writes, for example, that after Hurricane Katrina, the White House "spent most of the first week in a state of denial," and he blames Rove for suggesting the photo of the president comfortably observing the disaster during an Air Force One flyover. McClellan says he and counselor to the president Dan Bartlett had opposed the idea and thought it had been scrapped.

But he writes that he later was told that "Karl was convinced we needed to do it — and the president agreed."

"One of the worst disasters in our nation’s history became one of the biggest disasters in Bush’s presidency. Katrina and the botched federal response to it would largely come to define Bush’s second term," he writes. "And the perception of this catastrophe was made worse by previous decisions President Bush had made, including, first and foremost, the failure to be open and forthright on Iraq and rushing to war with inadequate planning and preparation for its aftermath."

McClellan, who turned 40 in February, was press secretary from July 2003 to April 2006. An Austin native from a political family, he began working as a gubernatorial spokesman for then-Gov. Bush in early 1999, was traveling press secretary for the Bush-Cheney 2000 campaign and was chief deputy to Press Secretary Ari Fleischer at the beginning of Bush’s first term.

"I still like and admire President Bush," McClellan writes. "But he and his advisers confused the propaganda campaign with the high level of candor and honesty so fundamentally needed to build and then sustain public support during a time of war. … In this regard, he was terribly ill-served by his top advisers, especially those involved directly in national security."


In a small sign of how thoroughly McClellan has adopted the outsider’s role, he refers at times to his former boss as "Bush," when he is universally referred to by insiders as "the president."

McClellan lost some of his former friends in the administration last November when his publisher released an excerpt from the book that appeared to accuse Bush of participating in the cover-up of the Plame leak. The book, however, makes clear that McClellan believes Bush was also a victim of misinformation.

The book begins with McClellan’s statement to the press that he had talked with Rove and Libby and that they had assured him they "were not involved in … the leaking of classified information."

At Libby’s trial, testimony showed the two had talked with reporters about the officer, however elliptically.

[suedanim]

Part two... of McClellan article

"I had allowed myself to be deceived into unknowingly passing along a falsehood," McClellan writes. "It would ultimately prove fatal to my ability to serve the president effectively. I didn’t learn that what I’d said was untrue until the media began to figure it out almost two years later.

"Neither, I believe, did President Bush. He, too, had been deceived and therefore became unwittingly involved in deceiving me. But the top White House officials who knew the truth — including Rove, Libby and possibly Vice President Cheney — allowed me, even encouraged me, to repeat a lie."

McClellan also suggests that Libby and Rove secretly colluded to get their stories straight at a time when federal investigators were hot on the Plame case.

"There is only one moment during the leak episode that I am reluctant to discuss," he writes. "It was in 2005, during a time when attention was focusing on Rove and Libby, and it sticks vividly in my mind. … Following [a meeting in Chief of Staff Andy Card’s office], … Scooter Libby was walking to the entryway as he prepared to depart when Karl turned to get his attention. ‘You have time to visit?’ Karl asked. ‘Yeah,’ replied Libby.

"I have no idea what they discussed, but it seemed suspicious for these two, whom I had never noticed spending any one-on-one time together, to go behind closed doors and visit privately. … At least one of them, Rove, it was publicly known at the time, had at best misled me by not sharing relevant information, and credible rumors were spreading that the other, Libby, had done at least as much. …

"The confidential meeting also occurred at a moment when I was being battered by the press for publicly vouching for the two by claiming they were not involved in leaking Plame’s identity, when recently revealed information was now indicating otherwise. … I don’t know what they discussed, but what would any knowledgeable person reasonably and logically conclude was the topic? Like the whole truth of people’s involvement, we will likely never know with any degree of confidence."

McClellan repeatedly embraces the rhetoric of Bush's liberal critics and even charges: "If anything, the national press corps was probably too deferential to the White House and to the administration in regard to the most important decision facing the nation during my years in Washington, the choice over whether to go to war in Iraq.

"The collapse of the administration’s rationales for war, which became apparent months after our invasion, should never have come as such a surprise. … In this case, the ‘liberal media’ didn’t live up to its reputation. If it had, the country would have been better served."

Decrying the Bush administration’s "excessive embrace of the permanent campaign approach to governance," McClellan recommends that future presidents appoint a "deputy chief of staff for governing" who "would be responsible for making sure the president is continually and consistently committed to a high level of openness and forthrightness and transcending partisanship to achieve unity.

"I frequently stumbled along the way," McClellan acknowledges in the book’s preface. "My own story, however, is of small importance in the broad historical picture. More significant is the larger story in which I played a minor role: the story of how the presidency of George W. Bush veered terribly off course."

Even some of the chapter titles are brutal: "The Permanent Campaign," "Deniability," "Triumph and Illusion," "Revelation and Humiliation" and "Out of Touch."

"I think the concern about liberal bias helps to explain the tendency of the Bush team to build walls against the media," McClellan writes in a chapter in which he says he dealt "happily enough" with liberal reporters. "Unfortunately, the press secretary at times found himself outside those walls as well."

The book’s center has eight slick pages with 19 photos, eight of them depicting McClellan with the president. Those making cameos include Cheney, Rove, Bartlett, Mark Knoller of CBS News, former Assistant Press Secretary Reed Dickens and, aboard Air Force One, former press office official Peter Watkins and former White House stenographer Greg North.

In the acknowledgments, McClellan thanks each member of his former staff by name.

Among other notable passages:

• Steve Hadley, then the deputy national security adviser, said about the erroneous assertion about Saddam Hussein seeking uranium, included in the State of the Union address of 2003: "Signing off on these facts is my responsibility. … And in this case, I blew it. I think the only solution is for me to resign." The offer "was rejected almost out of hand by others present," McClellan writes.

• Bush was "clearly irritated, … steamed," when McClellan informed him that chief economic adviser Larry Lindsey had told The Wall Street Journal that a possible war in Iraq could cost from $100 billion to $200 billion: "‘It’s unacceptable,’ Bush continued, his voice rising. ‘He shouldn’t be talking about that.’"

• "As press secretary, I spent countless hours defending the administration from the podium in the White House briefing room. Although the things I said then were sincere, I have since come to realize that some of them were badly misguided."

• "History appears poised to confirm what most Americans today have decided: that the decision to invade Iraq was a serious strategic blunder. No one, including me, can know with absolute certainty how the war will be viewed decades from now when we can more fully understand its impact. What I do know is that war should only be waged when necessary, and the Iraq war was not necessary."

• McClellan describes his preparation for briefing reporters during the Plame frenzy: "I could feel the adrenaline flowing as I gave the go-ahead for Josh Deckard, one of my hard-working, underpaid press office staff, … to give the two-minute warning so the networks could prepare to switch to live coverage the moment I stepped into the briefing room."

• "‘Matrix’ was the code name the Secret Service used for the White House press secretary."
McClellan is on the lecture circuit and remains in the Washington area with his wife, Jill.

[Buck Laser]

I think there will be an incredible flood of show and tell books from members of Bush's administration when he leaves office. The one I'll be most interested in seeing is Colin Powell's response to being shat on by Bush and his neocon cadre. I can hardly wait.

[lily]

I've always loved Scotty. I also liked Tony Snow. Dana Perino is a light weight compared to those two.

[Phyxius]

I've always loved Scotty. I also liked Tony Snow. Dana Perino is a light weight compared to those two.

I've met his (McClellan's) mother several times. (Carole Keetan Strayhorn). She's a pretty classy lady (even if she is a Republican)... :peace:

[Deadshot]

What does everyone think about McClellan's book? He really trashes Bush. This isn't from some hanger on or somebody on the periphery, this was a person whom at the end of his tenure Bush held a press conference with and said how they were friends.

Pretty damning I think...

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/27/mcclellan.book/index.html

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,358881,00.html

[suedanim]

Its time to force Karl Rove's testimoney and haul others back for interview. This WH has been engaged in criminality and we had a Congress who shamefully co-signed the six years Republicans held power. Republicans, all too often, consistently show themselves incapable of responsible leadership and are too easily corrupted by power to trust them again.

I sincerely hope Democrats not only take both houses of Congress in significant enough numbers, but hold ALL of these people accountable from 9/11 to Iraq, torture, Plame and more. No matter where it leads, the people who have been killed as a result their criminal and/or incompetant leadership demand Bush et al be held accountable. The dead and their families and the destruction, stolen billions and looted antiquities cry out for justice.

[Deadshot]

:clapper: :clapper: Much better then the post I put up about McClellan's book :clapper: :clapper:

[Deadshot]

BUMP because I just love watching Bush Burn!

[NortheastCynic]

The GOP'll just use the old 'he's just a bitter ex-employee' line.

That maybe true, but it doesn't make his criticisms any less valid.

-NC

[Wndrtch]

What does everyone think about McClellan's book? He really trashes Bush. This isn't from some hanger on or somebody on the periphery, this was a person whom at the end of his tenure Bush held a press conference with and said how they were friends.

Pretty damning I think...

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/27/mcclellan.book/index.html

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,358881,00.html

Yah! This would be great ammo, if BUSH were running.

Hey Dems, Bush ain't running.

[Wndrtch]

Its time to force Karl Rove's testimoney and haul others back for interview. This WH has been engaged in criminality and we had a Congress who shamefully co-signed the six years Republicans held power. Republicans, all too often, consistently show themselves incapable of responsible leadership and are too easily corrupted by power to trust them again.

I sincerely hope Democrats not only take both houses of Congress in significant enough numbers, but hold ALL of these people accountable from 9/11 to Iraq, torture, Plame and more. No matter where it leads, the people who have been killed as a result their criminal and/or incompetant leadership demand Bush et al be held accountable. The dead and their families and the destruction, stolen billions and looted antiquities cry out for justice.

Sue, has there ever been a currupt democrat, in your world?

Oh, I forgot, because they "care" and "hope" so much, nothing a Lib does is ever currupt, on any planet.

[Deadshot]

Yah! This would be great ammo, if BUSH were running.

Hey Dems, Bush ain't running.


No he's not, but the GOP that supported him is supporting McCain. So people like Rove, Scooter and Cheney are shown to be liars and cheats.

Cut off the head of the snake and it dies. Start to dismantle the GOP as dishonest and/or corrupt and the GOP voter turn out suffers, of course, so do GOP candidates.

Wnd, you realize that Bush won in 2000 by just a few thousand votes and in 2004 by just a few million. Keep some GOP voters home because they don't trust their party and McCain loses by a landslide!

[suedanim]

Sue, has there ever been a currupt democrat, in your world?

Oh, I forgot, because they "care" and "hope" so much, nothing a Lib does is ever currupt, on any planet.

Hey... don't answer your own question, cause I have a better one!

Yes... there have been and are corrupt Democrats, a whole group of them. :evil:

But look.. you have to admit, the GOP and numerous Republicans have been letting the right down. Conservative and Republican or GOP are not necessarily synonomous anymore. The last true conservative Republican was Calvin Coolidge. Its been badly downhill since then, except the Eisenhower Presidency was probably the best of conservative rule.

Nixon gave ya'll a very bad name, Reagan revived you, but George and Dick have about destroyed the GOP. They are hardly conservatives. Though they use propaganda buzzwords to appeal to you, they hardly walk like they talk, do they?

I think its a riot watching the Bush faithful squirm on TV today, MYSTIFIED, perplexed, confused, annoyed with McClellon, most of all, so far, Ari Fleischer, the perfect sycophant an activist.

Fleischer... one of the original lying liars, the Iraq War propagandist, double-speaking neocon. Of course he, Rove and the rest must condemn McClellan and pretend they know nothing of which he speaks!

Its being reported today that some in the WH are calling McClellan "traitor" and other things. We need more traitors.. just like him.

Just goes to show ya don't know the people you're working with as well as you think.... AND given the right time they WILL tell all. Perhaps Scott McClellen wasn't the "soldier" for the cause George Dick, Karl and the rest thought. Perhaps he actually possesses moral values. You know like...basic right from wrong kinda stuff.

Whatever will you do when another insider... tells all. Will you capitulate then?

McClellan IS credible.. Why not capitulate right now and save the US and the world more grief and horror?

[Easy90]

Well, sometimes when someone gets fired, they develop a bad attitude. This guy just figured he'd cash in on some easy lib money.... Interesting how nobody who knew him while he was PS....said he had, or mentioned anything about those opinions and misgivings.

[suedanim]

Yah! This would be great ammo, if BUSH were running.

Hey Dems, Bush ain't running.

Yes.................... he is.

:dizzy:

A vote for John McCain is a vote for George Bush, Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, Stephen Hadley, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowicz, Foxnews and more...

The way McCain sounds when he visited the ME, I'm wondering if he stopped off somewhere and a microchip was drilled into his brain. geez... he's warmed over George.

[bobbylien]

Bush must be pretty pissed off.. haha!

[lily]

What does everyone think about McClellan's book? He really trashes Bush. This isn't from some hanger on or somebody on the periphery, this was a person whom at the end of his tenure Bush held a press conference with and said how they were friends.

Pretty damning I think...

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/27/mcclellan.book/index.html

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,358881,00.html

I doubt the entire book trashes Bush......but this is what the headlines are going to be.

[lily]

Yah! This would be great ammo, if BUSH were running.

Hey Dems, Bush ain't running.

It's going to bring up again that this war was unnecessary, it was a war of choice, Obama was against it, McCain is for it and also for not changing strategies and that 100 year quote is going to be brought up again and again. McCain not knowing the difference between a Shite and a Sunni, more than once is going to be brought up. Nope, Bush isn't running........but this is going to hurt McCain.

[lily]

Its being reported today that some in the WH are calling McClellan "traitor" and other things. We need more traitors.. just like him.

Rove is on Fox calling him nothing more than a Liberal blogger.:lmao:

[PatrickHenry]

Well, sometimes when someone gets fired, they develop a bad attitude.What can you cite to indicate he was dismissed? :evil:

[lily]

Well, sometimes when someone gets fired, they develop a
bad attitude. This guy just figured he'd cash in on some easy lib money....
Interesting how nobody who knew him while he was PS....said he had, or
mentioned anything about those opinions and misgivings.

If Scotty got fired, then Rove got fired, as they "resigned" at the same
time.


Damn.......where is a copy of the tearful goodbye between Scott and George when you need it?

[piratemonkey]

Damn.......where is a copy of the tearful goodbye between Scott and George when you need it?

Is this good enough?

Mr. Bush, during his remarks, at one point put a hand on Mr. McClellan's shoulder. "One of these day he and I are going to be rocking on chairs in Texas, talking about the good old days and his time as press secretary," the president said. "And I can assure you I will feel the same way then that I feel now, that I can say to Scott, job well done."
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/19/washington/19cnd-resign.html?ex=1303099200&en=18b4ed46c945a9f6&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

Hell-uv-a-job Scottie! ;)

[lily]

That'll work.......thanks pirate.

[PatrickHenry]

Is this good enough?


http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/19/washington/19cnd-resign.html?ex=1303099200&en=18b4ed46c945a9f6&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

Hell-uv-a-job Scottie! ;)
That would be heckuva-job...

[apdst]

Since the Liberals on here seem tp be wetting themselves over their percieved burning of Bush, how do you all feel about McClellans seething judgement of what he called, "The Liberal media"?

Lemme' guess: that's the only inaccuracy in the entire book.

[Elrathin]

I look at the whole thing as an effort to sell his book IMO. Talk bad about the "liberal media" and you get the conservatives and Republicans to buy your book. Talk bad about Bush and this administration and you nab the liberals and Democrats to buy your book.

All in all, it doesn't really matter what is true and what isn't in the mind of Scott because either way his book will sell.

Given the amount of "Biographies" being written now by just about anyone, I don't see anything factual in it at all. The biography book is the capitalists blog.

[piratemonkey]

Since the Liberals on here seem tp be wetting themselves over their percieved burning of Bush, how do you all feel about McClellans seething judgement of what he called, "The Liberal media"?

Lemme' guess: that's the only inaccuracy in the entire book.

I thought the problem he had with the "liberal media" was that they weren't hard enough on Bush...

That seems like an entirely valid criticism.

[apdst]

I thought the problem he had with the "liberal media" was that they weren't hard enough on Bush...

My point is, that if McClellans book is the defenitive work on how Bush screwed the pooch, then Liberals are forced to admit that the media is controlled by the Liberals. Yes?

[Elrathin]

My point is, that if McClellans book is the defenitive work on how Bush screwed the pooch, then Liberals are forced to admit that the media is controlled by the Liberals. Yes?

If he thinks the liberal media didn't scrutinize him enough, than that absolutely proves the liberal media isn't as liberal as some think.

[piratemonkey]

If he thinks the liberal media didn't scrutinize him enough, than that absolutely proves the liberal media isn't as liberal as some think.

Exactly.

The "liberal media" obviously weren't liberal enough to hold Bush's feet to the fire. They were utterly sycophantic... like good little Bushies.

[apdst]

If he thinks the liberal media didn't scrutinize him enough, than that absolutely proves the liberal media isn't as liberal as some think.

The "liberal media" obviously weren't liberal enough to hold Bush's feet to the fire. They were utterly sycophantic... like good little Bushies.

Wait! If McClellan isn't dead on, on the Liberal media, then whatelse in his book isn't dead on?


LOL...you Libs are HILLARIOUS!!!

[piratemonkey]

Wait! If McClellan isn't dead on, on the Liberal media, then whatelse in his book isn't dead on?


LOL...you Libs are HILLARIOUS!!!

HE said the "liberal media" wasn't acting anti-conservative enough. He was correct. What about that is difficult to understand?

(BTW - the quotes around "liberal media" actually mean something...)

[suedanim]

Here's McClellans quote. Notice he puts... liberal media ... in quote. He is mocking the label, since it has been obvious .. the media... has been ANYTHING but liberal.

In other words... had the media lived up to the reputation GOPers have laid on it... perhaps the TRUTH would have become known. Instead, mainstream media has played cover for Bush et al and in fact worked with the fuckn Pentagon putting up military propagandists to further the Bush admin LIES.

Get it now apdst?

There is no such thing as mainstream liberal press. For some of you though, true facts, ARE liberal. You'd rather believe lies out a Republican mouth than the truth from a liberal source.

Wake up!


"The collapse of the administration’s rationales for war, which became apparent months after our invasion, should never have come as such a surprise. … In this case, the ‘liberal media’ didn’t live up to its reputation. If it had, the country would have been better served."


You been had, bamboozled, swindled, tricked and played. And it couldn't have been a more transparent conspiracy.

[suedanim]

McClellan COULD have spoken up years ago.... Where were you when we really needed you Scott?


Food for thought...........

Scotty Come Lately (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/scotty-come-lately_b_103983.html)



Posted May 28, 2008 | 06:15 PM (EST)



Seven takes on Scott McClellan's new book:

Take One: What Took You So Long?

In What Happened, Scott McClellan offers withering portraits of George Bush, Karl Rove, Condi Rice, and Scooter Libby, confirms that we went to war in Iraq under false pretenses, and that we were serially lied to about the outing of Valerie Plame.

Interesting stuff, Scott. But about five years too late.

It's George Tenet déjà vu all over again. How many times are we going to have a key Bush administration official try to wash the blood off his hands -- and add a chunk of change to his bank account -- by writing a come-clean book years after the fact, pointing the finger at everyone else while painting himself as an innocent bystander (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/why-didnt-george-tenet-j_b_47226.html) to history who saw all the horrible things that were happening but, somehow, had no choice but to go along?

McClellan told the Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/27/AR2008052703679_pf.html) that he wrote the book to "provide an open and honest look at how things went off course and what can be learned from it." And he told (http://weblogs.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/blog/2008/05/bushs_culture_of_deception_spo.html) Cox News Service, "My job was to advocate and defend policies and speak on his behalf. This is an opportunity for me now to share my own views and perspective on things."

Great. We need all the openness and honesty we can get. But it would have been a lot more helpful if he had taken the "opportunity" when it really mattered -- say before the 2004 election, when it could have potentially saved thousands of lives.

What Happened is page-turning reading. What Didn't Happen -- namely McClellan telling the truth in service to his country rather than in service to his book sales -- is a stomach-turning disappointment.

Take Two: The Rationale for Iraq is Even Worse Than We Thought

McClellan really lets it rip on Iraq. He says that Bush led (http://www.democrats.org/a/2008/05/ouch_1.php) a sophisticated "political propaganda campaign" to sell the war, was not (http://thinkprogress.org/attackerman/2008/05/28/scottmcclellanmclevelswithus/) "open and forthright on Iraq," managed the runup to war (http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/05/mcclellans-grav.html) "in a way that almost guaranteed that the use of force would become the only feasible option," "largely ignored or simply disregarded" contradictory intelligence on the war, and as the war went poorly responded by (http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/nymag/intel/~3/299968438/the_highlights_of_scott_mcclellans_bush_broadside. html) "never reflecting, never reconsidering, never compromising."

McClellan's scathing conclusion (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10649_Page3.html): "History appears poised to confirm what most Americans today have decided: that the decision to invade Iraq was a serious strategic blunder. No one, including me, can know with absolute certainty how the war will be viewed decades from now when we can more fully understand its impact. What I do know is that war should only be waged when necessary, and the Iraq war was not necessary."

Perhaps the most damning revelation regarding Iraq is McClellan's assertion that the real reason Bush wanted to invade Iraq was the "opportunity to create a legacy of greatness" by transforming the Middle East into a land of peace and brotherhood. Over 4,000 dead U.S. soldiers sacrificed for a neo-con wet dream of democratic dominoes across the region. How chilling is that?

McClellan also tosses in a pinch of Oedipal subtext: "The president had promised himself that he would accomplish what his father had failed to do by winning a second term in office. And that meant operating continually in campaign mode: never explaining, never apologizing, never retreating."
Such is the stuff foreign policy nightmares are made of.

Take Three: The Press Secretary Presses the Press

McClellan points an accusatory finger at the mainstream media -- he calls them "enablers" (http://feeds.salon.com/~r/salon/greenwald/~3/299840592/index.html) and says they were too easy on the administration during the selling of the war (http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/TheCarpetbaggerReport/~3/299808932/15678.html):
"The national press corps was probably too deferential to the White House and to the administration in regard to the most important decision facing the nation during my years in Washington, the choice over whether to go to war in Iraq. The collapse of the administration's rationales for war, which became apparent months after our invasion, should never have come as such a surprise. ... In this case, the 'liberal media' didn't live up to its reputation. If it had, the country would have been better served."
Great point, Scotty. We and many others made it back in 2003. :sadly:

It's such a great point, it caused Karl Rove to act like something nefarious has happened to McClellan, transforming him from the lie-spouting sock puppet he has "known for a long time" into somebody who "[B]sounds like a left-wing blogger (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/28/rove-hits-back-at-mcclell_n_103872.html)." :lmao: Have anyone specific in mind, Karl?

I know... liberal bloggers from DailyKos kidnapped McClellan and brainwashed him. Since independant thought is strictly forbidden in Bizarro World, Stepford aka Bush/Cheney Land of course Rove and others are shocked, SHOCKED I tell you.

Take Four: Rove More Turd Blossom Than Boy Genius

Speaking of Rove, McClellan's tome continues the obliteration of the Rove mystique, reminding us what an out-and-out liar Rove was and is (http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/05/27/now-this-is-scottie-mcclellan-news/) -- more than willing to assure McClellan that he wasn't involved in the leaking of Valerie Plame's identity when, in fact, he was up to his Turd Blossom in the sordid affair, having discussed Plame with Matt Cooper and Bob Novak in an effort to discredit Joe Wilson.

McClellan also makes it clear that the indelible, says-all-you-need-to-know-about-this-administration photo of Bush looking out the window of Air Force One during his too-busy-to-stop flyover of New Orleans in the wake of Katrina was a Rove special (http://rising-hegemon.blogspot.com/2008/05/sweaty.html): "Karl was convinced we needed to do it -- and the president agreed."

Take Five: Truthiness in Government

Stephen Colbert satirized the Bush approach when he coined the concept of "truthiness": the truth we want, in our gut, to exist, without regard to evidence, logic, intellectual examination, or facts.

McClellan reveals how much the joke matched the reality, saying that Bush's "leadership style is based more on instinct than deep intellectual debate." Citing Bush's assertion that he honestly couldn't remember if he'd ever done cocaine, McClellan says he felt he (http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Americablog/~3/299954699/mcclellans-book-bush-cant-remember-if.html) "was witnessing Bush convincing himself to believe something that probably was not true, and that, deep down, he knew was not true."

But who needs reality when you have faith? Who needs truth when you have truthiness? As George Costanza put it on Seinfeld: "Jerry, just remember, it's not a lie if you believe it."

A fantastic philosophy for a sit-com character. A disastrous philosophy for a sitting president.

Take Six: Truth in Government

According to McClellan, the Secret Service code name for the White House press secretary was "Matrix."

As any Keanu Reaves fan will tell you, the Matrix is a simulated reality used to pacify and subdue the human population in a dystopian future.

Who knew Secret Service agents have such an arch sense of humor?

Take Seven: Heckuva Job, Scotty!

On the day McClellan resigned as press secretary, Bush pictured a time down the road when he and his former aide would (http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Bagnewsnotes/~3/299591624/the-latest-thor.html) "be rocking on chairs in Texas, talking about the good old days and his time as the press secretary. And I can assure you, I will feel the same way then that I feel now, that I can say to Scott, 'Job well done.'"

Maybe not. Although, since, according to McClellan (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/05/mcclellan-on-bu.html), Bush "has a way of falling back on the hazy memory to protect himself from potential political embarrassment," who knows?

[lily]

In defense of Scotty.......he was told what to say and nothing more. It takes some more time to know when they are being lied to than others. In defense of the "Liberal media"......they are there to make money. At the time, the war was selling newspapers, the more they drummed it up, the more they sold. Then there was a phase where all we heard about was how bad it was, now it's elections. Are they whores? Probably, but we paid them.

[Elrathin]

In defense of Scotty.......he was told what to say and nothing more.

And how long does it take to tell the truth?????? Looks to be about as long as it takes to get a book deal right?

[apdst]

Where were you when we really needed you Scott?

He wasn't peddling a book, back then.

[Elrathin]

He wasn't peddling a book, back then.

But that didn't stop the right from saying EVERYTHING he said was the truth now was it?

[lily]

And how long does it take to tell the truth?????? Looks to be about as long as it takes to get a book deal right?

Sorry, I'm not going to villify Scotty, just because he didn't do it when you wanted him to. I honestly believe he thought what he was saying at the time was true, until the Plame affair........then you knew he was in over his head.

[PatrickHenry]

A good kid who fell in with thieves.

The Bible says: "Bad company corrupts good morals."

There was actually lots of 'feasible options' prior to the invasion of Iraq.

I can't believe that there are still Iraq war-supporters...

[Trish]

I look at the whole thing as an effort to sell his book IMO. Talk bad about the "liberal media" and you get the conservatives and Republicans to buy your book. Talk bad about Bush and this administration and you nab the liberals and Democrats to buy your book.

All in all, it doesn't really matter what is true and what isn't in the mind of Scott because either way his book will sell.

Given the amount of "Biographies" being written now by just about anyone, I don't see anything factual in it at all. The biography book is the capitalists blog.

El, I have to agree with you completely here. Whether the book is "true" or not, it was written to make money. I haven't read it, of course, but from the excerpts I've seen, there doesn't appear to be any real substance to the book just the same stuff that's been said before by others. Those that were anti-Bush are going to hail this as the definitive "proof" that they were right all along, and those that support Bush are going to be contemptuous and we're right back where we started.

[Deadshot]

Maybe it is just a money making ploy but, believe it or not, when a former high ranking member of a White House Administration, who was the spokesperson not only for the White House, but has been associated with George W. Bush since 1992, trashes the White House, that means something.

FauxNews and others can attempt to dismiss this as a disgruntled employee; and others will simply re-post "buddy-fest", rocking chair moment between Bush and Scotty.

This is damning. Those GOP voters who consider themselves as good Christians will stay away from a party that lies and attempts to fool the country. People who are for the war, after reading this book and McClellan's view of the inside will stay away from the party that lied, and continues to lie, to them.

I believe that this book hurts Bush's legacy, adding on more proof that he's one of the worst POTUS's in history, but it also hurts McCain and the party. The book shows that Bush was fooled by his own spin doctors and was a patsy to the lies of his advisors. It shows him to be foolish. McCain has followed Bush, in lock step, on the general principles of the war.

So now the GOP, and more importantly the country, must ask "Who's more the fool? The fool or the fool who follows him?" McCain's in trouble with this book.

[suedanim]

Sorry, I'm not going to villify Scotty, just because he didn't do it when you wanted him to. I honestly believe he thought what he was saying at the time was true, until the Plame affair........then you knew he was in over his head.

I believe he believed it too when he said most of it. But, I remember his great difficulty in answering obvious contradictions, skin glistening with sweat, turning red, obviously struggling toward the end. At some point he knew... I just think it took him some time to come out of it, out of the overwhelming dogma these people believe like a frenzied, obsessive faith in God... We see the same thing in rightwingers who post to these message boards and blogs.

If you listened to his interview this AM, his reasoning about how he trusted early on, the defining moments, his reasons for writing this book and why he decided to release this book now, the whole thing makes more sense. He will be on Olberman tonight and Meet The Press on Sunday morning.

Of course some are accusing him of just trying to cash in, that the book is rubbish, written for one purpose, to make money and therefore the information in it should be ignored. Move along, nothing to see here.

But, imo, regardless of his reasons, he should take responsibility for his words, as should George Tenet and both should be testifying before Congress about what they know. Either McClellan is lying for money or there are some real smoking guns in his book.

Beyond this, I wonder how the right who condemns him, trivialize his revelations and in fact, villify him as a traitor or complicit in Bush admins crimes, will react... as one by one... other actors within that admin tell what they know and confirm, if not reveal more solid testimony against this admin, what McClellan has stated. It WILL happen. Eventually, Colin Powell will speak, besides through his close associate and surrogate and so will others, military and civilian. So will others.

I personally would love to hear Powells pov on this book since he submitted that propaganda to the world as justification for war, so did Rice and Cheney.

[lily]

Here is a pretty good op-ed, Sue. (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/roughsketch/2008/05/the_puzzle_presidency.html?hpid=topnews)

The Puzzled Presidency
Dan Bartlett has had 36 hours to think it over, and he's still puzzled.

"There's not a lot of specific evidence [for] some of the more explosive
charges that he's putting in this book; that's the part that is leaving us
most puzzled," the former Bush White House official said of his turncoat
former colleague, Scott McClellan, on NBC's "Today" show this morning.

Bartlett's understanding does not appear to have advanced much from
Wednesday, when he announced his befuddlement on television. "Those of us
who were close to Scott during this process and the last eight years are
really just puzzled by and bewildered by the views," he said then.

The puzzlement was pervasive. "We are puzzled," said White House press
secretary Dana Perino. And President Bush? "He is puzzled," Perino reported.

Of course, nobody's really puzzled about anything. They're peeved and
perturbed. But they can't admit that, so they have retreated to the
practice -- time-honored in the Bush White House -- of discrediting your
opponents by labeling their actions confusing and irrational.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's claim that Bush can't launch military
action in Iran without congressional consent?

"I'm puzzled," Perino said at the time.

The media's interest in John McCain's criticism of the Bush administration's
Iraq war?

"It's puzzling to me," Perino said.

Opposition by Democrats to Iraq war spending?

"I'm puzzled," said Vice President Cheney.

Problems with deficit spending during a war?

"I'm always puzzled," said then-press secretary Ari Fleischer.

Disagreements over Bush's Medicare proposals?

"Very puzzling," Fleischer said.

But perhaps nobody spent as much time being publicly -- and implausibly --
puzzled as McClellan himself did, from the White House podium.

An article on the treatment of prisoners? "Puzzling." Democratic complaints
about Karl Rove's fear tactics? "Puzzling." Changes to restrict information
on the White House Web site? "I'm somewhat puzzled."

In his book, McClellan describes the time when Bush was asked whether the
Iraq war was a war of choice or a war of necessity. Bush "seem puzzled,"
McClellan wrote. "This, in turn, puzzled me."

Can nobody solve the puzzle? "Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald and his
team," McClellan writes, "had all the pieces of the puzzle that could be
uncovered." But don't get excited. "Other pieces will likely never be made
public by individuals like Cheney, Libby, and Rove who have no reason to
reveal them."

Puzzling.




Eventually, Colin Powell will speak, besides through his close associate and surrogate and so will others, military and civilian. So will others.

I personally would love to hear Powells pov on this book since he submitted that propaganda to the world as justification for war, so did Rice and Cheney.[/QUOTE]

I honestly doubt if Powell will speak out. He's pretty much "old soldier" and sticks to the rule that you don't say anything bad about America or the President, either in uniform or not.

He had his say, apologized to the country......to me that's enough.

[Mia]

The corruption started in the election, is anyone really surprised?

[Trish]

Just a quick question - has anyone actually READ McClellan's book or are we all relying on what others are saying about the book?

[piratemonkey]

Just a quick question - has anyone actually READ McClellan's book or are we all relying on what others are saying about the book?


It's not out yet. June 7th, I think.

[Trish]

I think I'm going to have to buy this book. I've already noticed some discrepancies in what is being said McClellan said and what I've heard and read for myself on some of the points covered in this thread. The only way to be sure what was actually written and what is being said to have been written is to read it myself.

[ECW]

With the WH and their corps of trained chimps all saying they are puzzled over a guy who writes a book that reveals how much we were lied to as a nation by George Bush & Company, is there any doubt as to why we are in the quagmire that we are in now?

I'm not puzzled in the least.

[dgun]

Whatayaknow, a whole bunch of stuff we already knew from at least two other Bush insiders who wrote books, including Richard Clarke who Scott McClellan himself blasted as being disgruntled.

To summarize the whole book: Bush sucks. Well, stop the presses.