Scott McClellan Knifes the White House

-

scott mcclellan.jpg
This is my next read. It’s overdue — and I’m sad to see that McClellan basically waited all of this time to tell his story. He should have gotten word to Patrick Fitzgerald that Libby and Rove were coordinating their Valerie Plame stories.
But the worst is even more confirmation that George W. Bush wasn’t just hoodwinked by neoconservative zealots on Iraq. I have known that for a long time — but to hear it yet again, Bush’s role in pumping out the propaganda to sell the war — is heart-ripping when one considers all who have died on all sides of this conflict and those too who have been physically and psychologically maimed.
McClellan confirms what Council on Foreign Relations President and former senior Bush administration official Richard Haass and many other national security experts have said about Iraq being a “war of choice”:

“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.”

And John McCain wants to keep it going. . .
— Steve Clemons

Comments

60 comments on “Scott McClellan Knifes the White House

  1. Snappy says:

    It’s not a surprise that Bush and his gang are a bunch of crooks, to
    a point of platitude. Rove is the most virulent poison ever injected
    into the political bloodstream in this age. And he still runs around
    spewing lies but only the lowly ill-educated masses (who are the
    asses) still believes what he says. These people are Homo
    Ignoramus. It’s hard to say if they are human but definitely they are
    less intelligent than baboons.

    Reply

  2. meme says:

    Why’s Bush so hellbent on “democratizing” the Middle East?

    Reply

  3. David says:

    Amen, Bartolo, amen.

    Reply

  4. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “President Bush has been a great President that has had to deal with nothing but left wing whacko kooks and the left wing whacko media the entire time he’s been in office”
    Ladies and Gentlemen, allow me to introduce you to the bottom 28% of the barrel.

    Reply

  5. Ginger says:

    Scott “WEASEL” McClellan. What a low life piece of horse crap.
    People like this shallow idiot make me puke.
    Follow the money. Scott is nothing but a yellow bellied turn coat.
    The only lies are the ones in this sorry good for nothing book.
    President Bush has been a great President that has had to deal with nothing but left wing whacko kooks and the left wing whacko media the entire time he’s been in office. Now he has to deal with this turn coat weasle mcclellan. Scum bag.

    Reply

  6. DonS says:

    TokyoTom, no doubt you meant “prevent an attack on Iran”, and I hope you are right. However, I have noticed my own faith in logic an gravity to be irrelevant when it comes to the outrages this administration — these politicians — keep cranking out.

    Reply

  7. TokyoTom says:

    Allow me to add a brief political note:
    As self-serving as McClellan’s book is, I think it will help ensure – by highlighting the lies relating to the Iraq war – that Obama will win the nomination over Clinton and the Presidency over McCain.
    Further and for the same reason, it may also help to prevent a US attack on Iraq – at least pre-election – will add fuel to the fire for more investigations regarding the administration, and will contribute to a very needed greater examination of (and self-examination within) the media.

    Reply

  8. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Steve, this “captcha” feature is an act of domestic terrorism.

    Reply

  9. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Has any asked Scott if Guckert’s “White House Press Pass” is as big as it was reported to be?

    Reply

  10. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Has any asked Scott if Guckert’s “press credential” is as big as it was reported to be?

    Reply

  11. scotty says:

    Pudge, You should clean up your physical act before being photographed.

    Reply

  12. Grapost says:

    Nixon and Staff = Watergate Crooks & And Convicted
    Ford = Pardoned Nixon = The Fix Was In – Crook
    Reagan & Staff = Treason – Sold Arm To The Enemy – Iran Contra – Staff Charged And Ready For Trial
    Bush Sr. = The Fix Was In Again: Pardon All charged in Iran-Contra To Avoid Convictions
    Bush Jr. – The Fix was In again: Stole 2 Elections – Started Illegal War – Added Signing Statements To Laws.- Politicized all branches of government – Encroached on Constitutional Rights – Enacted vast coverup of lies on Iraq War attacks on it’s critics. And On And On. Continued Criminal acts and policys.
    Want more of the same? Vote Republican. Vote McCAIN!

    Reply

  13. WigWag says:

    From the Howling Latina on Bushes cocaine use.
    “In the past, Bush used cocaine.
    Of course, we knew it all along. But now we have the smoking gun, courtesy of former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan and ABC News.
    Writes McClellan: “‘The media won’t let go of these ridiculous cocaine rumors,’ I heard Bush say. ‘You know, the truth is I honestly don’t remember whether I tried it or not. We had some pretty wild parties back in the day, and I just don’t remember.’
    ‘I remember thinking to myself, How can that be? How can someone simply not remember whether or not they used an illegal substance like cocaine? It didn’t make a lot of sense’.”

    Reply

  14. Bartolo says:

    “…Bush’s…war — is heart-ripping when one considers all who have died on all sides of this conflict and those too who have been physically and psychologically maimed.”
    This is why I don’t care about any “progress” in Iraq. The damage has been done and cannot be undone. No exit, however face saving, can make up for the FUBAR and evil war of choice of this village idiot from Texas.

    Reply

  15. Kathleen says:

    This is news??? WTF? Tell us something we don’t already know, Scotty.
    If anyone wants Impeachment back on the table, support Shirley Golub, challenging Pelosi for the nomination. She is working with Bruce Fein, Constitutional expert and produced an Impeachment play, running in San Francisco. If Golub does as well against Pelosi as Gene McCarthy did against LBJ in New hampshire, 1968, Pelosi could be having a quick change of heart, next week. I mailed Golub a check today.

    Reply

  16. Zathras says:

    A final note about McClellan: Laney makes a valid point just upthread, one that also applied to the electronic media’s non-coverage of the Pentagon’s media analyst program.
    The importance of the media, or more specifically the extent of the media’s impact on politics and government, is generally overstated because it is (be definition) visible all the time, while some of politics and much of government is not. It is especially overstated now, with partisans of all three Presidential campaigns complaining that media coverage of the opposing candidates is too soft and coverage of their own candidate too tough. But this doesn’t mean the way the news media covers itself isn’t a real story.
    You rarely hear journalists from one major media outlet criticize another media outlet, for the same reason you don’t often hear football players on the Chargers or Panthers rip the owners of the Texans or Bears: today’s competition may be tomorrow’s employer. Moreover, jobs with the electronic media can pay a lot more than reporting for a newspaper, an additional disincentive to critical reporting on defects in television journalism. The longstanding habits of access journalism, which prizes highly placed sources even when these dispense no information that does not directly serve their interests, and the treatment of television news as entertainment, just aren’t covered by electronic media and are barely covered in print.
    Truth is, the White House press corps that McClellan rightly says now let the bush administration get away with so much is not, as a group, especially sympathetic to Bush. He and his people haven’t treated them much differently than other major national politicians (John McCain excepted) do, which is to say they haven’t treated reporters very well. And most reporters aren’t partisan Republicans. But the rules of the game for the media represented in the White House press corps are that they can’t be seen quarreling with the administration; that whatever an administration spokesperson says must be quoted without analysis or commentary; and that any highly placed source can go “on background” upon request, even if the source is placing a quote right off the administration’s party line. The point is not that these rules have favored President Bush for the last seven-odd years more than they would have, say, a President Obama. It is instead that they represent nominal journalism only, journalism that any administration that cares to can manipulate as easily as Bush and his people have.
    Electronic media outlets, all of which have been complicit in this, have no interest in reporting on it. Neither did they have any interest in following up the New York Times story that documented how retired military analysts hired for their supposed expertise (and definite entertainment value) were being run by the Department of Defense while at the same time using their media exposure to generate contracting and government relations business for themselves. This was a thoroughly sordid story, but it was a story about the electronic media, so the electronic media doesn’t cover it. Print media besides the Times didn’t cover it very much either.
    So it shouldn’t surprise anyone that for the media the big story of Scott McClellan is his turning on his former associates in the administration, not what he has said about the easily manipulated press. We should expect it to stay that way, too.

    Reply

  17. pauline says:

    easy e wrote:
    “The PNAC appears to have succeeded in pacifying the entire system.”
    And without 9/11, who would really be pacified by sucking at the teat of DHS? And without 9/11, how many precious lives would have been saved? And without 9/11, how much of the US Treasury would have been available for credible non-war use? And without 9/11, how strong would our constitution and US citizens’ liberties still be? And without 9/11, how much of what we used to think of as our sacred republic would have been allowed to be hijacked by a foreign power?
    The politics of deceit, lies and fearmongering fit our current cabal of federal fascists more than the PNAC devils could have gleefully dreamed for.

    Reply

  18. easy e says:

    Not only were all institutions uncritical enablers of the war and other high crimes, they continue to be uncritical enablers of ensuring that citizens remain passive and that no charges will ever be pressed against these criminals. The PNAC appears to have succeeded in pacifying the entire system.

    Reply

  19. Laney says:

    The press continues to ignore McClellan’s depiction of them as uncritical enablers of Bush’s war.

    Reply

  20. WigWag says:

    THE HYPOCRITES ARE ON THE MARCH AT THE WASHINGTON NOTE
    Like him or hate him, Scott McClellan is certainly right that the press abrogated its responsibility reporting the run-up to the Iraq War. Had they acted more responsibly and done their job, thousands of Americans and Iraqis would still be alive. Why didn’t the press scrutinize the war more carefully? Because they were enamored with their hero in chief; George W. Bush. Can you remember how outraged we were? From the sound of many of the posts here, we’re still outraged.
    But now, the press has a new hero in chief; a new hero to deliver us from evil. Of course, his name is Barack Obama and his record is getting just about the same amount of scrutiny that George W. Bush got from the press in his first term. The press gladly trumpets every mistake his opponent makes; but when it comes to his mistakes, lies and gaffes, all we hear is conspicuous silence. And those same readers of the Washington Note who were so glad to post the most vitriolic comments about the inadequacy of the press during the early Bush years are now happy to sit around, smile and say nothing. There is a word for that. The word is hypocracy.
    And by the way. Those who watched the broadcast of the British Foreign Minister that Steve posted a few days ago may recall that the world renowned pundit, Andrew Sullivan was prominently featured in Steve’s program. Yes, it’s that same Andrew Sullivan that so called “progressives” now love because he’s in the tank for Senator Obama. Some of us are old enough to remember little Andrew just a few years ago when he was shilling for the war in Iraq, begging for the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, denigrating John Kerry and, yes, supporting George W. Bush. Sounds like many of the folks hanging around here just love that kind of hypocracy.

    Reply

  21. easy e says:

    To hell with the whore McClellan and his book. Let’s hope Bugliosi’s upcoming book grows legs…..
    THE PROSECUTION OF GEORGE W. BUSH FOR MURDER
    by Vincent Bugliosi
    There is direct evidence that President George W. Bush did not honorably lead this nation, but deliberately misled it into a war he wanted. Bush and his administration knowingly lied to Congress and to the American public — lies that have cost the lives of more than 4,000 young American soldiers and close to $1 trillion.
    A Monumental Lie
    In his first nationally televised address on the Iraqi crisis on October 7, 2002, six days after receiving the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), a classified CIA report, President Bush told millions of Americans the exact opposite of what the CIA was telling him -a monumental lie to the nation and the world.
    On the evening of October 7, 2002, the very latest CIA intelligence was that Hussein was not an imminent threat to the U.S. This same information was delivered to the Bush administration as early as October 1, 2002, in the NIE, including input from the CIA and 15 other U.S. intelligence agencies. In addition, CIA director George Tenet briefed Bush in the Oval Office on the morning of October 7th.
    According to the October 1, 2002 NIE, “Baghdad for now appears to be drawing a line short of conducting terrorist attacks with conventional or CBW [chemical and biological warfare] against the United States, fearing that exposure of Iraqi involvement would provide Washington a stronger case for making war.” The report concluded that Hussein was not planning to use any weapons of mass destruction; further, Hussein would only use weapons of mass destruction he was believed to have if he were first attacked, that is, he would only use them in self-defense.
    Preparing its declassified version of the NIE for Congress, which became known as the White Paper, the Bush administration edited the classified NIE document in ways that significantly changed its inference and meaning, making the threat seem imminent and ominous.
    In the original NIE report, members of the U.S. intelligence community vigorously disagreed with the CIA’s bloated and inaccurate conclusions. All such opposing commentary was eliminated from the declassified White Paper prepared for Congress and the American people.
    The Manning Memo
    On January 31, 2003, Bush met in the Oval Office with British Prime Minister Tony Blair. In a memo summarizing the meeting discussion, Blair’s chief foreign policy advisor David Manning wrote that Bush and Blair expressed their doubts that any chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons would ever be found in Iraq, and that there was tension between Bush and Blair over finding some justification for the war that would be acceptable to other nations. Bush was so worried about the failure of the UN inspectors to find hard evidence against Hussein that he talked about three possible ways, Manning wrote, to “provoke a confrontation” with Hussein. One way, Bush said, was to fly “U2 reconnaissance aircraft with fighter cover over Iraq, [falsely] painted in UN colors. If Saddam fired on them, he would be in breach” of UN resolutions and that would justify war. Bush was calculating to create a war, not prevent one.
    Denying Blix’s Findings
    Hans Blix, the United Nation’s chief weapons inspector in Iraq, in his March 7, 2003, address to the UN Security Council, said that as of that date, less than 3 weeks before Bush invaded Iraq, that Iraq had capitulated to all demands for professional, no-notice weapons inspections all over Iraq and agreed to increased aerial surveillance by the U.S. over the “no-fly” zones. Iraq had directed the UN inspectors to sites where illicit weapons had been destroyed and had begun to demolish its Al Samoud 2 missiles, as requested by the UN. Blix added that “no evidence of proscribed activities have so far been found” by his inspectors and “no underground facilities for chemical or biological production or storage were found so far.” He said that for his inspectors to absolutely confirm that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction (WMD) “will not take years, nor weeks, but months.”
    Mohamed ElBaradei, the chief UN nuclear inspector in Iraq and director of the International Atomic Energy Agency, told the UN Security Council that, “we have to date found no evidence or plausible indication of the revival of a nuclear weapon program in Iraq.”
    The UN inspectors were making substantial progress and Hussein was giving them unlimited access. Why was Bush in such an incredible rush to go to war?
    Hussein Disarms, so Bush … Goes to War
    When it became clear that the whole purpose of Bush’s prewar campaign — to get Hussein to disarm — was being (or already had been) met, Bush and his people came up with a demand they had never once made before — that Hussein resign and leave Iraq. On March 17, 2003, Bush said in a speech to the nation that, “Saddam Hussein and his sons must leave Iraq within 48 hours. Their refusal to do so will result in military conflict.” Military conflict — the lives of thousands of young Americans on the line — because Bush trumped up a new line in the sand?
    The Niger Allegation
    One of the most notorious instances of the Bush administration using thoroughly discredited information to frighten the American public was the 16 words in Bush’s January 28, 2003 State of the Union speech: “The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.” The Niger allegation was false, and the Bush administration knew it was false.
    Joseph C. Wilson IV, the former ambassador to Iraq, was sent to Niger by the CIA in February 2002 to investigate a supposed memo that documented the sale of uranium yellowcake (a form of lightly processed ore) to Iraq by Niger in the late 1990s. Wilson reported back to the CIA that it was “highly doubtful” such a transaction had ever taken place.
    On March 7, 2003, Mohamed ElBaradei told the UN Security Council that “based on thorough analysis” his agency concluded that the “documents which formed the basis for the report of recent uranium transactions between Iraq and Niger are in fact not authentic.” Indeed, author Craig Unger uncovered at least 14 instances prior to the 2003 State of the Union address in which analysts at the CIA, the State Department, or other government agencies that had examined the Niger documents “raised serious doubts about their legitimacy — only to be rebuffed by Bush administration officials who wanted to use them.”
    On October 5 and 6, 2002, the CIA sent memos to the National Security Council, National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, and to the White House Situation Room stating that the Niger information was no good.
    On January 24, 2003, four days before the president’s State of the Union address, the CIA’s National Intelligence Council, which oversees all federal agencies that deal with intelligence, sent a memo to the White House stating that “the Niger story is baseless and should be laid to rest.”
    The 9/11 Lie
    The Bush administration put undue pressure on U.S. intelligence agencies to provide it with conclusions that would help them in their quest for war. Bush’s former counterterrorism chief, Richard Clarke, said that on September 12, 2001, one day after 9/11, “The President in a very intimidating way left us — me and my staff — with the clear indication that he wanted us to come back with the word that there was an Iraqi hand behind 9/11.”
    Bush said on October 7, 2002, “We know that Iraq and the Al Qaeda terrorist network share a common enemy — the United States of America. We know that Iraq and Al Qaeda have had high level contacts that go back a decade,” and that “Iraq has trained Al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gasses.” Of Hussein, he said on November 1, 2002, “We know he’s got ties with Al Qaeda.”
    Even after Bush admitted on September 17, 2003, that he had “no evidence” that Saddam Hussein was involved with 9/11, he audaciously continued, in the months and years that followed, to clearly suggest, without stating it outright, that Hussein was involved in 9/11.
    On March 20, 2006, Bush said, “I was very careful never to say that Saddam Hussein ordered the attack on America.”
    Vincent Bugliosi received his law degree in 1964. In his career at the L.A. County District Attorney’s office, he successfully prosecuted 105 out of 106 felony jury trials, including 21 murder convictions without a single loss. His most famous trial, the Charles Manson case, became the basis of his classic, Helter Skelter, the biggest selling true-crime book in publishing history. The Prosecution of George W. Bush For Murder is available May 27.
    For more information visit http://www.prosecutionofbush.com

    Reply

  22. KYJurisDoctor says:

    Yes, Bush “veered TERRIBLY OFF course” — Scott McClellan’s own words –, and the country is NOW paying the TERRIBLE prize for it. SHAMEFUL.

    Reply

  23. Sycophant Committee Chairman & CEO says:

    And let’s just try to keep Colin Powell quiet.
    Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

    Reply

  24. Sycophant Committee Chairman & CEO says:

    And let’s just try to keep Colin Powell quiet.
    Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

    Reply

  25. Sycophant Committee Chairman & CEO says:

    And let’s just try to keep Colin Powell quiet.
    Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

    Reply

  26. Sycophant Committee Chairman & CEO says:

    Political courage in Washington, D.C.? Are you kidding me? There is a wing to be added to my mansion in Potomac, more padding to be added to my ample rump and more toe fungus to worship as I prostrate myself at the feet of the mighty – at a cocktail party. In our world, the earth is flat, and don’t ever forget it.

    Reply

  27. Sycophant Committee Chairman & CEO says:

    Political courage in Washington, D.C.? Are you kidding me? There is a wing to be added to my mansion in Potomac, more padding to be added to my ample rump and more toe fungus to worship as I prostrate myself at the feet of the mighty – at a cocktail party. In our world, the earth is flat, and don’t ever forget it.

    Reply

  28. Sycophant Committee Chairman & CEO says:

    Political courage in Washington, D.C.? Are you kidding me? There is a wing to be added to my mansion in Potomac, more padding to be added to my ample rump and more toe fungus to worship as I prostrate myself at the feet of the mighty – at a cocktail party. In our world, the earth is flat, and don’t ever forget it.

    Reply

  29. Spunkmeyer says:

    I’m sorry, but this sort of self-serving garbage called a book should
    not even end up on bookstands. They should require any profits
    from a member of the Bush Administration to go towards the VA at
    the very least (similar to when O.J. Simpson wrote “If I Did It”)

    Reply

  30. CeeHussein says:

    Lessee…how was the public shocked into supporting the lies? Oh. 9-11.
    Get back to me when someone tells the truth about who let it happen.

    Reply

  31. Pine says:

    I’m positively shocked (shocked!) that a paid propagandist delivered propaganda. We were lied to by the Bush White House?!? Get the eff out!?
    Steve, you can’t be serious that you’re going to buy this weasely coward’s book. What could he possibly tell you that wasn’t clear to all rational people at the time?

    Reply

  32. Ken Roush says:

    Scot McClelan is a piece of dog shit on the sole of humanity.
    If he was so morally outraged while serving the President why didn’t this fat,cowardly assq hole resign.

    Reply

  33. R. Hofmann says:

    I think if he thought the President was so damn bad, he should not have waited 7 years to leave. I despise disloyalty, and I despise turning on people we have professed to love. So I won’t be buying or reading this book.

    Reply

  34. pauline says:

    If the bushwacker and his cabal lied, lied, lied to our country and the world about the run-up to the Iraq war, why would anyone in their right mind think 9/11 happened as these war criminals said it did?
    Please tell me why.

    Reply

  35. angellight says:

    Slowly, steadily the truth will emerge, layer by layer until the whole pattern takes shape and form, as in the unburdening of our conscience of some dark long-held secret — this is just a part!

    Reply

  36. Terry Wien says:

    I believe Scott should have resigned at the time he did not have confidence in his boss! Seems like his approach now is just to sell a book. Indeed, he is not a professional in my opinion!

    Reply

  37. Mr.Murder says:

    Isn’t corroborating testimony against the law? This was done in the White House? Who else was in the room seeing this?
    The OVP remains a dark cloud over the Presidency.
    Fitz is still empowered.
    The Saturday Night Massacre. He said it earlier in the week as well. No Friday news dump treament.
    This should get some major momentum.

    Reply

  38. JimN says:

    The next act in the Republican playbook will be to attack McClellan’s character–he’s lying, he’s being self-serving, he’s a turncoat, not a true conservative, etc.

    Reply

  39. peg says:

    bangzoom14 May 28, 12:27AM — i read tha article and wanted to see if anyone else was blogging about it — Col Pat Lang has
    http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2008/05/i-will-never-su.html
    i wonder if the “librul media” will do their job now that Scotty has called them out.

    Reply

  40. alan says:

    On CNN Kathy Townsend (A formet WH flunkey) does the predictable thing: Scotty was out of the loop. He was Mr Fetch and Carry. Typical bs from someone who is now part of the best political team on tv. This gang of liars have no qualms about their brazenness.

    Reply

  41. jon says:

    mcClellan’s just running to the exit, so he can salvage something
    as this Hindenburg of an administration self-immolates, and
    stands to take much else with it. He’d like to work again, and
    can’t rely on the current batch of cronies to look after him in the
    style he’s become accustomed to.
    So a little soft shoe, a little mea culpa, a little invocation of the
    innocent bystander who had no idea at all what was really
    happening nor the true import of his and others actions. But
    certainly, he had no actual responsibility for contributing to
    these calamities – nothing that needs to disrupt his comfortable
    life.
    G. Gordon Liddy’s got more integrity in his little finger than
    anyone in this pack of weasels. Fortunately, if you put them in a
    sack, weasels will turn on each other.
    I sure hope Karl Rove has the opportunity to set the record
    straight, while he’s under oath and on camera. Perhaps
    Fitzgerald can revisit events, this time with the high moral
    dudgeon he’d bring to bear on someone passing bad checks.
    Last time around it seems like he managed to limit his scope to
    the narrowest possible focus. Can’t imagine why.
    Steve, this Captcha system sucks.

    Reply

  42. Paul Norheim says:

    If these infamous gentlemen intend to attack Iran in August
    (and this is an old rumor, in circulation long before the above
    mentioned article in Asian Times Online), they obviously must
    have made a few calculations concerning the outcome of the
    domestic elections in November.
    You don`t have to be a Washington insider or a professional
    politician to figure out the domestic part of their strategy:
    “McCain can be trusted (we may even trust Hillary Clinton!). But
    we don`t trust Obama. If an attack on Iran in August or
    September seem to have been a success in the immediate weeks
    after, people may favor the GOP and McCain. But if the attack is
    the start of unfortunate series of new, violent, and
    unpredictable events in the Middle East (including attacks on
    Israel, counter attacks, involvement from Hezbollah, more chaos
    in Iraq etc.etc…), people will not take the risk of supporting
    Obama, and McCain will profit on that too.” Karl Rove`s ghost is
    still residing in the White House.
    If the infamous gentlemen get it their way, few people may see
    any significant difference between the Bush years and the years
    ahead. We live in dangerous times, and McCain, who seem to
    have rather fuzzy concepts of the Middle East and other parts of
    the world, may even make blunders of such historical
    proportions that George W. Bush will seem reasonable in
    comparison. Who knows? Only history will tell. And “history” has
    become the last consolation, the last gamble for the current
    President and his men.
    These men claim that they are friends of Israel. But trust me –
    whether you are supporting or criticizing Israel (or both): these
    gentlemen have no connection to Jerusalem, not even on a
    spiritual level. On that level, they are not even from Texas. They
    are from Las Vegas. They are gamblers. They have dominated
    the political scene almost completely, because they have played
    a permanent high risk game, with series of adventurous
    actions, steering the country and the world from crisis to crisis,
    calculating that the world would be too shocked to say: Enough
    is enough. And they will continue to do so until their last day in
    office, if nobody says: Enough is enough.
    This should be the time for the Americans, the Europeans, the
    Israelis, the Arabs, as well as other nations to tell these boys
    that history is not a poker game. I am not an optimist. I am
    afraid that Mr. Bush and his men will spend the last dollars of
    their political capital on this last big game. Their determination
    will be inseparable from their desperation. And nobody will stop
    them.

    Reply

  43. Mr.Murder says:

    Nuremberg. Liability of war contractors.
    Don’t let them all skirt away to South America and form new fiefdoms like the previous Western country did that started a world war of choice.

    Reply

  44. bob h says:

    What I do know is that causing the premature deaths of 100,000’s of innocent people for no good reason cannot lead to anything regarded as worthwhile in coming decades.

    Reply

  45. DonS says:

    Another non surprise to those of us who were simply seeing the external evidence. The question remains, is their a country called the United States of America with institutions not so corrupted by this regime worth saving. Many of us have thrown around the word “fascist” — and others argue that the definition doesn’t quite fit, and maybe it doesn’t. History won’t care: Bush and his complicit Congress and the media have forged a new corruption fit for the 21st century.
    And still the whole cabal doesn’t seem interested in rising to the level of self-correction needed; still covering their own butts by increments. Looking for ways to differentiate and self justifiy.

    Reply

  46. liz says:

    And what they fail to mention with all the war war war talk, is what all has happened at home. The Bush Administration contribution to my life is that the US Government will no longer accept valid legitimate court awards in a court of law.
    Yes you heard me right. I went in a court room and the ” Judge” refused to acknowledge, accept and admit into evidence a court award that has not expired or been voided.
    So yes, everyone, America has changed and YOUR turn is coming too….. I’ve had near about all of Bush’s foul policies on my door step. It has made my life intolerable and unlivable. There is no Constitution and YOU no longer have the right to persue happiness. I guarantee that.

    Reply

  47. TokyoTom says:

    Steve, I LOVED this screamer from McClellan:
    “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.”
    In other words, Scott is saying that “institutional problem wasn’t that the Administration was lying and that I was its mouthpiece, but that you in the press let me get away with it!”
    I agree that the press proved tragically incapable of standing up to a lying and suborning Administration, but this doesn’t at all provide grounds for letting McClellan off the hook for his OWN actions.

    Reply

  48. TonyForesta says:

    Bravo McClellan for garnering the courage to speak the truth. All the socalled conspiratorialist and socalled Bushhaters or lefty lunatics will be vindicated over time, and all the horrors, crimes, abuses, deceptions, and wanton profiteering of the fascists in the Bush government will be exposed and revealed to the light of day if Americans only dare to examine the mountains of damning evidence and the glaring facts and muster the courage to accept the terrible truth. Hopefully, then IMPEACHMENT can and will be brought back and vigorously placed on the table. It is our only hope of salvaging what little remains of America.

    Reply

  49. Kevin Hayden says:

    Read his book? Why enrich another weasel late to the confessional, who claims he and the Big Boss were deceived?
    Su-u-u-ure they were. Wait for the book to arrive at your library. The excerpts are sales pitches. I’d donate cash to a crackhead before donating to a self-exonerating toady like that.

    Reply

  50. Kevin Hayden says:

    Read his book? Why enrich another weasel late to the confessional, who claims he and the Big Boss were deceived?
    Su-u-u-ure they were. Wait for the book to arrive at your library. The excerpts are sales pitches. I’d donate cash to a crackhead before donating to a self-exonerating toady like that.

    Reply

  51. easy e says:

    Once again, in view of the following evidence…
    * ILLEGAL WAR
    * ILLEGAL SPYING
    * GENEVA CONVENTION VIOLATIONS
    * ILLEGAL DETENTION
    * ILLEGAL RELEASE OF CLASSIFIED INFORMATION
    * ILLEGAL FREEZING OF ACCOUNTS AND RESTRICTION TO FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY
    * ILLEGAL USE OF SIGNING STATEMENTS
    …please explain why TWN supports the politics of keeping IMPEACHMENT against Bush/Cheney off the table.

    Reply

  52. easy e says:

    Paul O’Neill – “The Price of Loyalty”
    Joe Wilson – “The Politics of Truth”
    Richard Clarke – “Against All Enemies”
    Bush, aides lie 935 times in run up to War
    http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/23/bush.iraq/index.html

    Reply

  53. easy e says:

    Isn’t it amazing how…
    a) TWN and mainstream media continues to proclaim surprise at the continued revelations of “even more confirmation that George W. Bush wasn’t just hoodwinked by neoconservative zealots on Iraq.”
    b) While steadfastly continuing to support Pelosi in keeping “IMPEACHMENT OFF THE TABLE”.
    In view of looming crime (Iran attack) and the scale of criminal activity that has already occurred to date, not to mention violation of our Constitution, please explain again why IMPEACHMENT charges should not be pursued against Bush/Cheney.

    Reply

  54. Syed Qamar Afzal Rizvi says:

    Richard Hass’s view regarding the Iraq war does reflect the fact that some elements of prudence,true-examination and factual realistaion may still be the part of neconservatives’foreign policy- appraisal.

    Reply

  55. bangzoom14 says:

    Why in the world is bush still in office?? The Asia Times online is reporting tonight that this white house is planning to attack Iran by August. Is this white house totally insane?? Our first response should be yes. Our second response should be IMPEACH.

    Reply

  56. Zathras says:

    What I want to know is whether there is any Cabinet officer, senior White House staffer, Secret Service agent or relative of the President and Vice President who is not either writing, planning to write or on a book promotion tour after having written his/her self-serving memoir.
    I overheard this evening someone on CNN quoting an (as usual, conveniently) anonymous White House source complaining that Scott McClellan was only trying to “restore his reputation.” Restore it from what, was my first question. My second was who the anonymous source of the quote was, and at what stage was the research for his/her own self-serving memoir.

    Reply

  57. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Yet one more slimey lyin’ piece of crap whines “Gee golly, they had me hoodwinked”.
    Well guess what, Scottie boy? They didn’t hoodwink a few million Americans. We knew it was horseshit while you were feeding it to us, and we weren’t even in the inner sanctum, like you were.
    Sorry, Scottie, but you already defined your “legacy” by your actions, and some finger pointing tome full of blameshifting and excuses doesn’t cut it. Yep, this pissant Bush sold us a bunch of propaganda wholesale. And YOU were the sales clerk on the retail end.
    By the way, Scottie, who WAS Guckert diddlin’ in the West Wing?

    Reply

  58. Via says:

    Is there any chance that this might prompt Patrick Fitzgerald to reopen the Libby case? Didn’t he leave the door open in case new evidence surfaced? Or does Mukasey need to appoint a special prosecutor? If that is the case, we are dead in the water.

    Reply

  59. ... says:

    there has been a consistent pattern of people (like mcclellan) in a position to alter the usa’s course, who act like bush administration robots.. what is this? this isn’t a democracy.. it is a tinpot dictatorship where no one speaks up for fear of reprisal from these same dictators… none of these individuals can be all that self respecting, or have a shred of credibility.. i won’t buy the book if you paid me to pick up a copy…

    Reply

  60. Carroll says:

    And will there be any punishment for neo’s and those in and around this adm that lied us into Iraqi and told a hundred other lies to the American people? If not America is finally finished as a democracy and this will happen again. Maybe Americans deserve all the blood and money it has cost them for tolerating politicans who are completely and totally corrupt.

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *