Scott McClelland admits Bush administration lied on Iraq

Below is from the whitehouse.gov news release.

It is Mr. McClellan being asked about Mr. Clarke’s book. It is really cute, we could just cut and paste this and say it back to him.

The predicament he claims Clarke is in, is exactly the same predicament he himself is in.
Below is a cut and paste of the part that pertains to Mr. Clarke's book by McClellan
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/03/20040323-4.html



Q Where do you disagree with Mr. Clarke on the facts of what he observed and didn't observe, what you did and didn't do immediately after coming into office?


MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I think we went through that yesterday. We went through a lot of the assertions that were being made. And I think maybe one thing to look back to is the Dick Clarke of January 30th, 2003, who submitted a letter of resignation on that day to the President of the United States. And I think this letter runs counter to what he is now asserting. Let me just read parts of this letter, and we'll be glad to make this letter available to you shortly here. This is in his own words.

Mr. Clarke says, "It has been an enormous privilege to serve you these last 24 months. I will always remember the courage, determination, calm and leadership you demonstrated on September 11th." Then he went on to say, "I will also have fond memories of our briefings for you on cyber-security and the intuitive understanding of its importance that you showed. I thank you again for the opportunity to serve you have provided me, and wish you good fortune as you lead our country through the continuing threats."
So at this time period, when he was leaving, there was no mention of the grave concerns he claims to have had about the direction of the war on terrorism, or what we were doing to confront the threat posed by Iraq, by the former regime.


Q You and others at the White House made a point of saying yesterday that the timing was suspect because it's an election year. You asked why he had waited this long to make his concerns known. He says that the book could have been published in December, but for the White House security review process.


MR. McCLELLAN: Well, let's be clear here. His book went through the normal review process. It went through the normal national security review process to look at classification issues. This is standard practice to make sure that classified information is not inadvertently released. Dick Clarke could have released his book at any time, but the fact is he chose to release it at a time and in a way where he could maximize coverage to sell books, and at a time when he could have the impact to influence the political discourse. That's very clear.

Q He could have released it at any time --


MR. McCLELLAN: Well, his publisher put out that he was going to release it at the end of April, I might point out to you. That's been in the public domain.


Q And could he have released it before the security review?


MR. McCLELLAN: Well, certainly if he had such grave concerns, he could have raised those a year ago when he was leaving the administration, or over a year -- more than a year ago.


Q You just shifted the question, though. When did the security review conclude? In other words, when was he free as far as the United States government was concerned to publish this book?


MR. McCLELLAN: Well, first of all, keep in mind that his publisher put out that it would come out at the end of April. There is a normal review process you go through in a situation like this that involves discussing information that's potentially classified for national security reasons. It went through the normal review process.


Q But he says that normal review process ended up delaying the publication of the book.


MR. McCLELLAN: No, look, Terry, he could release this book at any time. It's very clear that he chose to release it at a time --


Q No, he couldn't release it at any time --


MR. McCLELLAN: No, Bill, he chose to release it at a time when he could maximize coverage for promoting and selling his book, and he chose to release it at a time --

Q When was he free to release it?


MR. McCLELLAN: Can I finish? He chose to release it at a time when he could influence the political discourse. I can get you the exact time period of when that --


Q You've made that point, but Terry and I are trying to find out when it could have been released without -- having been reviewed for the security --


MR. McCLELLAN: I can get you the time period when it was given to us, things like that.
 
Werbung:
His mother, Carole Keeton Strayhorn, ran for Governor of Texas against our present governor Rick Perry. She was a Republican state comptroller and Texas Railroad Commissioner. I always liked her because she would shoot from the hip. I did not know he was her son until today. His mother says he tried to resign in late 2005, but the president talked him out of it. “I could see him becoming more tortured as it went on,” said Mrs. Strayhorn.

I believe he has true grit for letting the public know what we already suspected.
 
I said he lied, you said he didn't, I showed you where he admitted to lying.

You're confused about your own posts?? :D
in the form of an untruthful statement with the intention to deceive, often with the further intention to maintain a secret or reputation, to protect someone's feelings from getting hurt, or to avoid punishment. To lie is to state something one believes is false with the intention that it be taken for the truth by someone else. A liar is a person who is lying, who has previously lied, or who tends by nature to lie repeatedly.
- wikipedia
 

Are you up on the news??

Eg

At a press briefing on October 10, 2003, McClellan asserted that the allegations of Karl Rove's and Scooter Libby's involvement in the leak of CIA Valerie Plame's identity were false.[2] However, in excerpts from his book What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington's Culture of Deception, published in the spring of 2008 by Public Affairs Books, McClellan revealed that the statements he made were untrue.[3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_McClellan

Ie, he lied.
 
WOW! New book out by former Bush press secretary Scott McClelland blows the lid off the Bush cover ups.

The sad thing is Scott is a fool. He is also a creep. Scott, is not adding much to the knowledge base. The fact that the white house politicized everything in site is old news.


Scott McClelland, made a living off carrying water. Now he writes a kiss and tells book. ---yawn---

Scott McClelland, lacks either principle or intelligence, maybe both. Hes another John Dean and George Stephanopolus. hes no man I admire. Unlike Clark these men owe their identity to those they betrayed.
 
The sad thing is Scott is a fool. He is also a creep. Scott, is not adding much to the knowledge base. The fact that the white house politicized everything in site is old news.


Scott McClelland, made a living off carrying water. Now he writes a kiss and tells book. ---yawn---

Scott McClelland, lacks either principle or intelligence, maybe both. Hes another John Dean and George Stephanopolus. hes no man I admire. Unlike Clark these men owe their identity to those they betrayed.

Absolutely dead on target.
 
there was no intention to deceive.

please remember you are judged by your actions and words. do not attempt deception as it makes you less of a man worthy of respect.

No - he intended to deceive. He has admitted knowingly offering up false stuff to the whitehouse press corps, day in and day out. I saw an archive video of him criticizing Wesley Clark for leaving the military and THEN criticizing the administration. Chutzpah. :D
 
So were supposed to believe that a self-confessed liar is telling the truth NOW? :D

As they say in Texas, that dog won't hunt. :)

The "bush lied" mantra of the foaming-at-the-mouth appeaser leftwing remains as unproven as the first time it was said.
I had unknowingly passed along false information.
r u this irrational in real life
 
Werbung:
Back
Top