Showing posts with label Scott McClellan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Scott McClellan. Show all posts

Friday, June 20, 2008

Scottie Tells What Happenned


Well sort of.....................

Scottie Tells 'What Happened': What's In His Book and Why Congress Cares

A BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS
by Christine Bowman


Scott McClellan testified under oath today before the House Judiciary Committee, chaired by John Conyers. As committee member and Florida Democrat Wexler suggested in a recent conversation with BuzzFlash, Republican committee members would likely focus on discrediting the former Bush press secretary, while Democrats would seek to pin down responsibility for events such as the lead-up to the Iraq war on false premises; the criminal leak of CIA agent Valerie Plame's identity; and the Administration's attempt to discredit Plame's husband, Ambassador Joe Wilson, who revealed in a New York Times op-ed the administration's use of false "intelligence" to help sell the war to the American people.


Scott McClellan was President George Bush's second press secretary. His book What Happened
recounts an insider's view of the Bush Administration's mistakes and crimes. As BuzzFlash noted upon the book's release, the very fact that a former insider is "telling all" in an election season bestseller will have an impact on how Americans assess the Bush legacy and the Iraq war especially.


What has Scottie Seen?


Analysis of McClellan's testimony today will come later, but here's what piqued interest from the pages of his book. Congress will be seeking clarification on these points, made in the book:


1. The press secretary, who repeatedly assured the White House press corps in September and October of 2003 that Karl Rove and Scooter Libby were not involved in the Plame leak, was set up to lie. Chapter 10 on "Deniability" and Chapter 12, "Brush Fire," detail this. Karl Rove lied to McClellan and perhaps lied to the President about his actions, or at best he led them to draw the wrong conclusions by parsing words and obscuring details.


Regarding Libby, as Chief of Staff Andrew Card told McClellan on October 4 (page 217): "The President and Vice President had a conversation this morning. They want you to give the press the same assurance for Scooter that you gave for Karl." So Cheney spoke to Bush who then directed McClellan to relay false assurances on Libby to the press corps. Whether Cheney misled Bush or the Vice President and President together intentionally misled McClellan is unknown by McClellan. He gives the President the benefit of the doubt.


2. Karl Rove and Scooter Libby, both of whom did leak information to reporters, as the investigation eventually proved, had a private, behind-closed-doors meeting in 2005 while the Grand Jury and prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald were trying to determine the facts of the case (p. 268). McClellan saw the two go into that meeting, and he viewed it as highly unusual and suspicious.


3. In 2003, President Bush himself helped in the effort to selectively leak national security details to the media to bolster the case for war (page 294). Without telling his chief of staff, national security adviser, or the CIA director, "the president declassified key portions of information from the October 2002 NIE for the vice president and Libby to use in this effort." (p. 8)


"To defend itself against the accusations of deliberate dishonesty leveled by Joe Wilson, Vice President Cheney and his staff were leading a White House effort to discredit Joe Wilson himself. On a broader front, the White House sought to dispel the notion that the intelligence had been 'cooked' ..."


4. Four administration figures -- Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, Karl Rove, Press Secretary Ari Fleischer and Scooter Libby -- all spoke to members of the press about the fact that Joe Wilson's wife worked for the CIA (p.). Only some of them revealed her name and only some knew that her identity was a state secret(Pages 8-9).


5. McClellan shares glimpses of George W. Bush during and before taking office that highlight his faults. One conclusion is that Bush deludes himself to deal with inconvenient truths such as his probable cocaine use (p. 4), and in matters of war ((p 128-129). According to McClellan, Bush believes in a grand vision of remaking the map of the Middle East, and he saw regime change in Iraq as the first step. Bush believes in spreading freedom and democracy by using military force.

So did Hitler, delude himself about the eastern front.


What Scott Wants


McClellan's overriding purpose seems to be to process "what happened" and record for history his own assessments. He portrays himself as a Bush loyalist who was misused.


McClellan faults the primary powers in the Administration, Karl Rove and Dick Cheney, for most of what went wrong. He faults Condoleezza Rice for being weak and only attempting to act on Bush's decisions, when she might have helped shape policy direction more positively. He excuses Bush as being "only generally aware" and too easily persuaded by the administration's own spin.


O.K. , Stop Right There!!!!!


We must be suspicious, right off the bat, of any writing that lets Bush off the hook, while annihilating others in the administration. Junior once said that he liked it when people "misunderestimated" him. While hilariously funny at the time, we must always take that line into consideration. I believe that Scott told a lot of truth, most of which we already knew, but did so in such a way as to drag us into the trap of believing Junior to be an idiot.


We must not go there!


One might also conclude that McClellan, after the fact, remains selectively aware.


Still, in writing about "What Happened," McClellan has shed light on the Administration's overall errors and deceptions. He regrets and illuminates their "permanent campaign" mentality, which focused on selling their war and other agenda items as though they were election contests, with no tactics off the table. McClellan also decries excessive partisanship, manipulation, and secrecy.


(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.


Scottie And Congress.....

W.H says it's nothing new. True, so true. But they still deny most of it.

McClellan: White House hiding CIA leak info

"Back in 2005, I was prohibited from discussing it by the White House ostensibly because of the criminal investigation under way, but I made a commitment to share with the public what I knew as soon as possible. That commitment was one of the reasons I wrote my book," McClellan said in his opening statement. "Unfortunately, this matter continues to be investigated by Congress because of what the White House has chosen to conceal from the public," McClellan said. "Despite assurances that the administration would discuss the matter once the Special Counsel had completed his work, the White House has sought to avoid public scrutiny and accountability." Two senior administration officials tell CNN that the White House decided not to invoke executive privilege to stop McClellan's testimony because "there's nothing new."


(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Monday, June 9, 2008

W.H. Lawyers Are Concerned?

Why should they be?

If Waxman and others keep pushing this, Bush will pardon everyone he ever knew as he walk out of the W.H.

Of course, he may do that anyway, as he knows full well that he and his administrations have committed crimes for which they could be hung.

If he does so, he leaves the American people no legal way out of complicity in all of his crimes.

If he does so, the people may not care about legalities any more than he and his administration do.


Duffy: ‘White House Lawyers Are Concerned’ McClellan’s Book Will Reignite ‘The Valerie Plame Business’»


In his explosive new memoir, former White House press secretary Scott McClellan claims that Karl Rove, Scooter Libby, “and possibly Vice President Cheney” encouraged him to “repeat a lie” to the American people about the administration’s role in the leaking of Valerie Plame’s identity. This assertion, along with others, has led members of Congress, like House Oversight Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA), to again ask questions about the CIA leak scandal.


On NBC’s The Chris Matthews Show today, Time magazine assistant managing editor Michael Duffy said that the renewed attention to the scandal is causing White House lawyers to be “very concerned”:


DUFFY: White House lawyers are concerned, very concerned, now that Scott McClellan’s book has led Henry Waxman and John Conyers to take another look at the Valerie Plame business. There may be hearings. Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald may be called. Just another way in which a Democratic Congress might make a difference during the fall.


Last week, Waxman sent a letter to Attorney General Michael Mukasey, requesting that the Justice Department turn over FBI interviews of President Bush and Cheney that were conducted during the CIA leak scandal investigation. In the letter, Waxman cited “new revelations” from McClellan’s book, including the claim that “[t]he President and Vice President directed me to go out there and exonerate Scooter Libby.”


Additionally, White House lawyers are likely “concerned” that CIA leak special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald indicated this week that he would be willing to testify before Congress about alleged efforts to push him off of politically sensitive cases like the leak scandal.


As Duffy said, this “could make things rough for everyone who was affiliated with the Plame affair.”


(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.


Sunday, June 1, 2008

W.H.: Devil made him do it!


Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Does anyone listen to the White House anymore, I mean other than for entertainment purposes?

May 29, 2008 - 10:04am


Defenders of George W. Bush have settled upon the most outlandish "best defense is a good offense" approach in response to former press secretary Scott McClellan's damning insider look at the propaganda machine he was a part of. Their responses , as a defense of the administration, are an exercise in distraction. However, it may not change the fact that exploiting the gullibility of a large portion of the American public always worked for them before.


They always do.


In "Rove Hits Back At McClellan: 'Sounds Like A Left-Wing Blogger'; Perino, Bartlett, Fleischer Pile On" Jason Linkins (Huffington Post HERE) is updating his column with quotes from the Bush minions dismissing the damning descriptions in McClellan's book and attacking the author. These attacks boil down to a suggestion that, a bit like the quiet serial killer who lived next door, he had a dark side nobody knew about because he seemed so ordinary and nice. Only in Scott's case it wasn't a compulsion to maim and dismember, it was disloyalty.

Loyalty is not a virtue. I wish people would stop thinking that it is. The Nazis were loyal, too.


We, the gullible public, are expected to ignore Scott's book because he broke the loyalty code?


There's also the unspoken implication that the Scott they know no longer exists because his mind has been either taken over by an alien being, he's been brainwashed by left wing bloggers, or perhaps he has had a late adult life onset delusional psychosis. One, Ron Christie (on MSNBC), a former Cheney deputy, even used the words "it's very crazy" and suggests he stayed in the administration so he could later peddle a book.


So McClellan is either mentally ill or greedy, or both.


Perhaps he has been taken over by the body snatchers


That all of this is the public relations equivalent of a military aircraft throwing out chaff to confuse enemy missiles. Air Force One presumably has this capacity.


Now with the American people as the jury judging the Bush administration, let's just see if they'll buy this "the Devil made him do it" defense.



Hal Brown has been a licensed clinical social worker and psychotherapist since 1971. He often brings a psychological perspective to his columns.


(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

White House May Try To Block McClellan Testimony


This is all about "unitary executive," the "Imperial Presidency" or whatever one wishes to call it.

Scottie has already spilled the beans, he just hasn't done it under oath on the Hill, which is what they really don't want.


Who knows what the rules or the laws are anymore, since Caligula and Nero occupied the White House. It will, indeed, be interesting to see just how much intestinal fortitude McClellan has if confronted with "executive privilege."

Just how much does he really care about his country, now that he is out of the White House bubble?

Executive Privilege to Silence McClellan?

Congress may ask Scott McClellan to testify, but what will the effect of that testimony have on the Presidential race in the Fall? Of course, the White House, through Dana Perino, is making noises about preventing such testimony on the basis of “executive privilege.” Isn’t Scotty a private citizen now?

So is Harriet Myers, but they pulled that with her and she never even left Texas to honor a congressional subpoena


Commentary By: Steven Reynolds


It’s beginning to look like the attacks from commentators on FauxNews, from people still in the White House, from Rush and his dittoheads, from Karl Rove and Bob Dole. . . it’s beginning to look like these attacks are not going to be enough for the Republicans. The Democrats who run the House, including Reps. Conyers and Wexler, are talking of having Scott McClellan testify before the House about revelations in his book. The White House appears to have something to say about that. But first. . .


What good is Scott McClellan’s testimony going to be? If you really want to get to the bottom of the deception and criminality that has been the routine at the Bush White House, all the testimony in the world from Scott McClellan isn’t going to get you there. But does such testimony have value in relation to the election in November? Surely the Democrats would like the election to be a referendum on the Bush Administration, and hearings would write this story large, though if Scotty doesn’t testify to anything that isn’t in his book, it’s just a ramping up of what’s already out there. On the other side, the GOP attack machine is energized by this story like they haven’t been in the last several months. Is it wise to wake them up? I don’t have the answer to that. But I suppose I’d approach this based on how such hearings starring Scott McClellan would relate to the candidacies of Barack Obama and John McCain.


If the McClellan testimony focuses like a laser on the lead-up to the War in Iraq, and the ways in which the White House made the case through PR and what Scott McClellan calls the “permanent campaign,” then the hearings might just have a bearing on the Presidential race in the Fall. There’s nothing that separates Barack Obama and John McCain more than Obama being against the War in Iraq from its inception and John McCain carrying water for the Bushies on that same subject. Sure, there would be little in the way of testimony directly about John FlipFlopTalker McCain, but America is tired of this war. Still, I’m betting the wingers and independents who were fooled by Bush’s permanent campaigning about the War in Iraq are not likely to take kindly to being reminded that they were so duped. Yeah, I’m unsure whether this testimony would help or not.


Be that as it may, the testimony may not happen, as Dana Perino has left open the door that the White House may bar such testimony on the grounds of Executive Privelege, even though they vetted McClellan’s book on such grounds already. From ThinkProgress (they’ve got video goodness, as usual):


QUESTION: Could the White House block him from testifying, if he wanted to testify? Or how does that work?

PERINO: Conceivably?

QUESTION: Yes.

PERINO: Hypothetically, which I’m not supposed to answer a hypothetical, yes, I think so. The law would allow for that. But by saying that, I’m not suggesting that that’s what would happen or not happen.


I think this is a riot. The White House has already vetted the book on the topic of executive privilege, according to quotes from Perino in the Atlanta Journal Constitution:


Perino also said White House lawyers routinely had reviewed the book before publication “for any possible classified information or any needs for executive privilege to be asserted.”

“None of them were in this case,” she said, adding, “So we’ve known for a little bit of time that this was coming.”


So it looks like they’ll assert executive privilege just to get this thing off the news. After all, they’ve already vetted everything in McClellan’s book, so what else is there to assert that is “executive privilege.” This seems a whiny excuse to get the whole thing out of the news to me.



(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Saturday, May 31, 2008

Congressman Wexler Calls For Testimony From Scott McClellan

Impeachment it is too good for them.

Support Congressman Wexler:

The Bush-Cheney Criminal Enterprise Must be Confronted Now!


Recent revelations from the upcoming book by former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan cite the increasing need to confront the impeachment issue immediately.


Although we agree that the Bush/Cheney crime ring should have been busted long ago, with the only legal busting-tool available to the American people, impeachment and trial by the senate, I'm afraid it's much too late for that.


The other thought that has occurred to some of us is that, given that Clinton was impeached and tried by the senate for lying about adultery, impeachment and trial by the senate may be too good for Bush, Cheney and company. After all, how can the the crime of perjury in a civil matter possibly be compared to lying this nation into a war of aggression, outing a CIA agent for purely political reasons and to cover-up the deception and fear-mongering that built support among the people for the mother of all war crimes, making torture U.S. policy (again without the knowledge of the people), shredding our constitution and numerous other hideous crimes?


Congressman Robert Wexler of Florida has vigilantly pursued the necessity of impeachment hearings and of holding government officials, beginning with George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, accountable for potential "high crimes and misdemeanors" under mandate of no less than the U.S. Constitution.


And a lot of good that has done. We have come to a general conclusion that, currently, Washington, D.C. is far too corrupt to deal with criminals in power in the executive, since a majority of the congress critters who would be holding impeachment hearings are not exactly pure as the driven snow or even the dirty snow of industrial towns in the north east, if there are any left.


As so many continue to point out, this duty to pursue commission of high crimes and misdemeanors by those charged with upholding the U.S. Constitution violates that document and deems it necessary for them to answer such charges. There is a duty to pursue such acts of grievous misconduct and, when the facts warrant, remove the responsible parties from their positions of power.


McClellan reveals that Karl Rove, Scooter Libby and Dick Cheney lied about their roles in revealing the identity of Valerie Plame Wilson, actions constituting an obstruction of justice.


Surprise, surprise! Who didn't already know that, including all or most of the Republicans in Congress, not to mention the Democrats? Nothing of what I have heard about McClellan's book, which I gather are the most sensational "revelations," are barely news worthy. The only thing that makes it news-worthy is the identity of the author, a former insider in the Bush White House and a former, Texas Bush loyalist. I guess what Scottie and others, who had known Junior for years in Texas, did not count on was Cheney and the NeoCons, who were just too thrilled to make Junior a war president, which is what he wanted.



The former White House Press Secretary also wrote that there was a coordinated effort by the Bush administration to use propaganda to inflate the case for attacking and ultimately occupying Iraq and hide the projected costs of the war from the American people.


Whoa....is there anyone out there that did not know this? If there is, please, see a physician as quickly as possible. Chances are you need help.


Congressman Wexler stated May 28:


"Scott McClellan must be called to testify under oath before the House Judiciary Committee to tell Congress and the American people everything he knows about this massive effort by the White House to deceive this nation into war."


Who doesn't?


Last week a subpoena was issued for Karl Rove to testify before the Judiciary Committee. It appears that the former top political strategist for the Bush-Cheney team will pursue every legal action to block this subpoena.


The Congress should issue a warrant for Rove's arrest for contempt of Congress. He can be held in the basement of the capitol, in solitary and incommunicado, like the prisoners at Guantanamo. After all, Mr Rove has helped to more harm to this nation a than Osama bin laden could have ever dreamed about.

According to Congressman Wexler, "The truth is that Congress has the right - and obligation - to hold him (Rove) accountable now - not months or years from now. It is long past time to pass Inherent Contempt and bring Rove, Libby and others before Congress."

I would say, "responsibility," but who listens to me? Besides, that boat sailed a long time ago.

Congressman Wexler should consider the fate, as it were, of I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby. Pardoned, for all practical purposes, was he. The only thing he lost was his law license and he does not really need that to remain on the GOP/corporate gravy train. He can be a consultant, whatever the hell that is, a lobbyist, representing some of the better known terrorist heads of state, like Charlie Black of the McCain team or, maybe, an economic hit man for a big multinational. The opportunities for a man or woman without a soul are endless in Washington. Do we want Bush to pardon Rove, after double jeopardy is attached?

Could be, Bush may well pardon everyone in his administration, including himself, for all crimes, committed or not, as he is walking out of the W.H. door. I believe that I remember it was concluded by the TeeVee legal eagles of constitutional law, that there is nothing, legally, to prevent a president from pardoning himself in the way that Richard Nixon was pardoned by Gerald Ford. Of course, what Nixon may or may not have known, though he certainly should have, as he was a lawyer himself, is that to sign such a document of pardon, which one must do if one is granted any such pardon and agrees to accept it, is a legal admission of guilt, associated in a breech of the law, perhaps international, which in this case, would go completely unstated. So, admittedly, Bush and Cheney both could shout from the roof tops and laugh maniacally, while admitting to mass murder, and there would be nothing our law could do about it, nor our elected leaders....at least, not legally. Neither of them will act in such a way, because of the few Americans, out in the hinterlands or in a big urban areas who might not care about illegalities or legalities. A man, whose only son died for George's Bush's ego and a whole host of idiotic, elitists, egg-headed theories, created in the minds of men and women who have never seen a real battle ground, might just snap entirely. I've seen people snap for far less reasons, or seen the results of such mental/emotional snapping.

I would far more prefer that this gang be brought to trial, somewhere where we, the people, would not be seen as having any power nor would we have any real power to influence the trial of American war criminals at the Hague, preferably, where Saddam should have been tried.

O.K, LOL all you like, but comparatively speaking, ours' probably is one of the best when it comes to "justice." I put that in quotes, because I don't believe that mankind is capable of Justice, at least not in the essential sense of the word and not at this time in the eternity of universal time, which is well beyond the comprehension of 99.99999% of us and understandably so.

Please note that I did not say that I think there are no Americans, nor people from every other nation, who are not capable of understanding real Justice. There are many of those people, more than most people would believe. They are, for the most part, unknowns; anonymous beings who live in the poorest nations in Africa as well as the wealthiest enclaves of America and Europe. They are Scandinavian, of some variety, Dutch, Polish, English, Irish and Scottish, Spainish, Portuguese, French, German, Austrian, Lithuanian, Russian, Uzbek, Chinese, Afghans, Pakistanis, The people of the Arab Peninsula and the Middle East, Egypt and every other nation in Africa, Tibet, India, Nepal, Myanmar, Timor and all of Indonesia .......and the Australians, the Kiwis, and the people from all the islands of the pacific, in addition to all the nations of Central and South America, the Koreas and Japan and, of course, the Taiwanese. There are also the Thais, the Cambodians and, my personal favorites, the Canadians along with many other countries I didn't mention.

(I have never met a Canadian I did not like. I am, admittedly, usually no matter what, on their side about anything and I applaud them when they don't take our side about everything, when we are behaving idiotically on the world stage. Like a good sister or brother...or even a really good friend, the Canadians will simply say "no, we don't think so"....like when we suggest blowing our own foot off just to collect a huge reward for being the most retarded in the old prairie town, back when idiocy was still publicly funny. There are many other reasons, but I won't mention them here. Nevertheless, I luv me Canucks, if for no other reason than them living on top of the seemingly eternal powder keg, my country, and not doing something really awful to us when we weren't looking, which is far more than I would have thought given the budget for such things, both before and after 9/11/01.)


Any way, my point is, that there are some very aware, enlightened, attuned people in this world today. They are rarely what we think of as religious and are often short sold on their deeply held spirituality, because it is not recognized by those around them. They do, while others are still talking. They did, before others were even born and they will know those who come to them for help, wisdom, comfort and other simple needs of the people of a world in very deep trouble. Some are more easily found than others, but none will be found in the yellow pages.


There is hope, people, in spite of it all. Don't panic, friends. Just be still and listen, hear....more than likely what some of you would just as soon not hear and that which will cause joy in the hearts of others


Some of us will not hear, as our ears can still not hear, but that is not as important as the request for all of us to be still, now. As we move through summer, into Autumn, we need to return to our understanding of planetary time and start again to live by it. In most of the major faith traditions and/or philosophies, the cycles of life and the earth are honored in some fashion, as well they should be, if we can ever hope to live and truly prosper in peace, real Justice and unity on our planet.


Wexler believes that we cannot ignore these recent developments nor postpone serious inquiry until after the election. He realizes that there is a duty mandated by the Constitution to act under such circumstances, a necessity others in position of high trust need to also recognize and act upon with due speed and diligence.


Good luck with that, Congressman Wexler. I understand your outrage, but you are spitting into the win, Sir.


I could not care less about how this will effect the election, but it does not make sense at this very late date and for the reasons mentioned above. I believe it would be in the Democrats best interest, politically, to pursue impeachment, if not trial by jury and public hanging, but that is way beside the point. Mr. Wexler, you can shout 'til the cows come home, again and again and it will not matter. Nothing is going to be done to the war criminals in this administration and, in part because of that, Americans are about to learn what a hard life really is and what powerlessness really feels like. Excuse me, some of us are about to learn. Most of us already know.


(We took a poll of our members several months back and occasionally we post some of our findings, especially some the shocking and unexpected ones. One day, hopefully, we will post the whole thing, but at the moment it helps us make some analysis that is very important to us and our very near-in-the-future plans.


We all hardily encourage all Americans to cut their consumption of everything, especially fossil fuel, if not forgo its use entirely, if one can. We have proposed this simple idea since 2002 on numbers of other blogs; PROBABLY just about every year on various blogs all over the political blogopshere. One guy said, it wouldn't matter because the Chinese and the Indians will take up the slack at the oil pumps. I keep remembering what I thought was...."what the hell difference does that make at this point?


Don't you see, this is not the right or wrong, capitalist/ free-marketeer, magic move that will end all of our woes, such as they are, currently, that we are talking about here? This has to to with this world passing away, as predicted and prophesied by a number of fine holy men and women from just about every ancient tradition and a few modern day geeks, HOWEVER, not the end of the planet. She will sleep for a few thousand or so years, and life of some kind, again will emerge from those future days primordial ooze. That is, if we really screw up now by believing in the fairy tale that life in America will never change, because we somehow deserve to live the high life, even as the rest of the world and even people in our own country do not have enough food, no medical care, no jobs and no hope.


While it is hard to top the OMG! the night we discovered that only 3% of Americans had passports while 65% of us independent unbounders did, here is a poll number that comes close.


75% of independents we polled (out of 756 people, at the time) say it is more a moral question now than a question of survival to get off the grid entirely, if possible and cut fossil fuel consumption by at least 2/3 by the end of summer.


More than 230,000 Americans previously signed up at the wexlerwantshearings.com site urging that impeachment action be expeditiously taken.


I won't be one of them. That boat sailed a long time ago. Congress needs to stay out of it, before they eff it up like they have most everything else.


As for the Bush administration, its response to the McClellan disclosures show that nothing has changed since the tired old strategy of Richard Nixon and Joseph McCarthy beginning in the fifties extended to more recent times with Lee Atwater and Karl Rove. When one cannot refute a message then the strategy is to form an angry pack, then loudly and persistently attack and seek to destroy the messenger.


Day before yesterday it seemed they were trying to convince everyone that Scott was Sybil. "This is not the Scott we knew." Either that, or they were trying to get us to believe that an alien had taken over Scott's body or something. It was very strange if not creepy, but typical of this W.H.


When former Counterterrorism Coordinator Richard Clarke disclosed that the Bush-Cheney neoconservatives had pursued war with Iraq from the onset of the administration, he was attacked as a disgruntled partisan Democrat. It was pointed out that this was odd since the Bush administration had invited him to remain after Bill Clinton left office.


When former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill, after leaving office, wrote that Bush had a fixation about attacking Iraq, he was deemed to be a businessman out of his depth on foreign affairs. Did this mean that he could not observe what was occurring regularly at Cabinet meetings?


When former Ambassador Joseph Wilson refuted the neoconservative charge that Iraq's dictator Saddam Hussein was seeking yellow cake from Niger to enhance its Uranium potential in seeking a nuclear arsenal, he was accused of seeking to polish his credentials to become a possible Secretary of State under John Kerry should the Massachusetts U.S. Senator win the 2004 presidential election.


Wilson had a very simple and plausible explanation. He was seeking to prevent a war with Iraq waged on a false premise. Later after his wife, a CIA nuclear weapons expert, was outed by neoconservatives in a column by neocon columnist Robert Novak, he pointed out that he had a right and duty to protect his wife from death after her identity was disclosed as an act of political reprisal.


Emerging at the top of the current pack to attack Scott McClellan is Fran Townsend, former head of the White House Counterterrorism Office, who said, "For him (McClellan) to do this now strikes me as self-serving, disingenuous and unprofessional."


It would have struck her that way no matter when he would have done it. Ms Townsend is Miss Disingenuous, if you ask me. Does anyone pay any attention to her anymore?


Is it not self-serving to launch war on the basis of false intelligence? Is it not self-serving for Cheney to hold private meetings dividing up Iraq in advance for the corporate sector, including the company he once headed, Halliburton, along with longtime major player Bechtel?


Is it professional to engage in a pattern of continuing deception on behalf of an administration that launches war based on a tissue of lies and tramples long practiced, cherished constitutional liberties on the pretext of fighting terrorism when we have never even commissioned an independent investigation to determine what happened on 9/11?


Is it professional to engage in widespread torture at designated prison camps like Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo in violation of international law, including the UN Charter, the Nuremberg Principles and the Geneva Codes?


Is it professional to kidnap citizens of other nations and, under the guise of fighting terrorism, fly them to other countries to be subjected to long term interrogation and beatings under the guise of fighting terrorism?


Is this practice of rendition professional? Is it the practice of a democratic nation?


It is if the Democracy in question is the U.S and the people being rendered are Bush officials and they are being rendered to the Hague.




(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Wednesday, May 28, 2008

Independents Unbound and Scott McLellan

WASHINGTON — The White House called former press secretary Scott McClellan "disgruntled" after he wrote a blistering review of the administration and concluded that his longtime boss misled the nation into an unnecessary war in Iraq in a book due out Monday.


That's what they said about Paul O'Neil and just about anyone who has written or said anything negative about this appalling administration and who has been on the inside, Everyone else they just ignored, like the millions of demonstrators, most of them peaceful, world wide, who begged, pleaded and demanded that this war not happen. But as we all know, George Bush and Dick Cheney, for different and some of the same reasons, were going into Iraq if it hair-lipped hell and half of Georgia. Where, Scott, are the apologies to us; those who opposed this war in the streets and on blogs, letters to editors (which were rarely published) and letters to our congress critters. Why can't the Right ever just simply apologize to their fellow Americans who were right about this administration and this hellish war? That would go a long way toward unifying this country again. My strong hunch is that the Rights' last wish is unity. That which is referred to as the Left in this country is, more often than not, moderates who simply see things as they are and they don't like it one bit and so they move to the left. Seems the only thing to do when the Right has slipped into a very dangerous theocratic fascism that will destroy this nation just as surely as Hitler and his band of happy corporatists brought on the destruction of Germany.


"History appears poised to confirm what most Americans today have decided — that the decision to invade Iraq was a serious strategic blunder," McClellan wrote in "What Happened," due out Monday. "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."


Scott, we are already feeling it's impact and it is only going to get worse because no matter whom we elect in November, the Bush administration has made sure that the final collapse will be on someone else's watch. But history will know who caused this catastrophe for our nation and for the Iraqi people, as well as others around the globe who will suffer as a result of being to closely tied to us and our economy (read sociopathic corporations which form this horrendous empire).


"What I do know is that war should only be waged when necessary, and the Iraq war was not necessary," he wrote in the preface.


So, it was a war of aggression, Just as we all said it was, the mother of all war crimes, from which other war crimes are born, like the son's of the real Whore of Babylon, the multinational corporations, which are raping and pillaging a land for no good reason, killing and torturing innocent people who have never been any threat to us. Of course, this is only the most obvious incidence of that. It has been going on for years. Just ask the people of Bhopal, India.

Scott, why haven't your blown your own brains out by now, like many of our soldiers who cannot sleep and have nightmares of wrong doing and risking their lives for George W Bush and his corporate pals? I can't help but wonder.


White House aides seemed stunned by the scathing tone of the book, and Bush press secretary Dana Perino issued a statement that was highly critical of their former colleague.


Oh who cares what that addled bitch has to say? She is simply a better liar than Scott.


"Scott, we now know, is disgruntled about his experience at the White House," she said. "For those of us who fully supported him, before, during and after he was press secretary, we are puzzled. It is sad - this is not the Scott we knew."


Perino said the reports on the book had been described to Bush, and that she did not expect him to comment. "He has more pressing matters than to spend time commenting on books by former staffers," she said.

Yeah I bet he won't care to comment. I doubt anyone but the usual 30 percent of delusional "bags of hammers" in America would listen anyway.


The volume makes McClellan, a Texan picked by the president and paid by the people to help sell the war to the world, the first longtime Bush aide to put such harsh criticism between hard covers. It is an extraordinarily critical book that questions Bush's intellectual curiosity, his candor in leading the nation to war, his pattern of self-deception and the quality of his advisers.


His adviser were mostly NeoCon egg heads who, like Bush himself, had never been in a field of battle as a soldier, actually went out of their way to avoid serving their country, even during peace time. Hell, none of them even served in the Peace corps. All of that drudgery is beneath them. yet, they have the unmitigated gall to call Obama an elitist? Black is White, War is Peace, up is down, and Eurasia has always been at war with Oceana. Orwell is spinning in his grave.


"As a Texas loyalist who followed Bush to Washington with great hope and personal affection and as a proud member of his administration, I was all too ready to give him and his highly experienced foreign policy advisers the benefit of the doubt on Iraq," McClellan wrote.


Bad move, Scottie. This should be a lesson to you and everyone else about loyalty, Loyalty is not listed among the virtues for a very good reason. Loyalty, in and of itself, is not a virtue. The Nazis were loyal too, Scott. Having faith, real faith in your own mind, heart and instincts, working in balance, and the courage to step up or down, whatever the situation calls for, is a virtue. Scott, you, like Coln Powell should have stepped down and told the American people the truth then. It doesn't do much good now. But thanks for saying what most of us already knew.


"Unfortunately, subsequent events have showed that our willingness to trust the judgment of Bush and his team was misplaced."


Misplaced isn't the word for it. This administration has committed war crimes and should be in the dock at the Hague and I'm afraid, Scott, confessions in book form, from which you will probably make a mint, won't help you if that day ever comes.


McClellan worked for Bush from 1999, when he signed on as a deputy in the governor's press office, until 2006, when he was forced out as White House press secretary.


"President Bush has always been an instinctive leader more than an intellectual leader. He is not one to delve into all the possible policy options — including sitting around engaging in extended debate about them — before making a choice," McClellan wrote. "Rather, he chooses based on his gut and his most deeply held convictions. Such was the case with Iraq."


Which makes him an idiot, just as we have all suspected, People like him, while seeming decisive, are not. Long intellectual, insightful discussions bore him or throw him off balance because he already knows what he wants to do and he's going to do it, because the god-damned Supremes put the idiot in power. Had there been no George Bush in the White House, there probably would have been no 9/11 and if there had been, I doubt very seriously that Al Gore would have started WWIII over it.


In an interview Tuesday, McClellan said he retains great admiration and respect for Bush.


Then you, Sir, are as big an idiot than he is. Why don't you tell that to the grieving families and friends of our fallen.


"My job was to advocate and defend his policies and speak on his behalf," he said. "This is an opportunity for me now to share my own views and perspective on things. There were things we did right and things we did wrong. Unfortunately, much of what went wrong overshadowed the good things we did."


Just following orders, eh? That didn't fly to well at Nuremberg, as I recall.


He said the Bush administration fell into the "permanent campaign" mode that can cripple a White House and has tainted much of Washington.


Of course it did, because from the get-go, it was all about power and creating a one party rule for generations to come. Just ask Karl Rove and Dick Cheney. Junior made a very good cheerleader and that was, essentially, his job....well, that and firing any general that disagreed with him.


In the book — subtitled "Inside the Bush White House and Washington's Culture of Deception" — McClellan said that Bush's top advisers, including Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, "played right into his thinking, doing little to question it or cause him to pause long enough to fully consider the consequences before moving forward," according to McClellan.


"Contradictory intelligence was largely ignored or simply disregarded," he wrote.


Or intercepted by Cheney


Bush's real motivation for war


In Iraq, McClellan added, Bush saw "his opportunity to create a legacy of greatness," something McClellan said Bush has said he believes is only available to wartime presidents.


So, that is why we now have the deaths of millions and their blood on our hands? The man is a twisted sociopath, one of the most narcissistic people I have ever encountered. He should be tried for murder, right along with Cheney, Rice, and all the rest that aided and abetted this insane individual.


The president's real motivation for the war, he said, was to transform the Middle East to ensure an enduring peace in the region. But the White House effort to sell the war as necessary due to the stated threat posed by Saddam Hussein was needed because "Bush and his advisers knew that the American people would almost certainly not support a war launched primarily for the ambitions purpose of transforming the Middle East," McClellan wrote.


Of course we wouldn't. Because, it is not our place to transform anything or anyone. We can assist a peoples' own efforts to over throw a cruel dictator and to join with other countries in stopping genocide, But the very thought that this war was about re-creating the middle-east is nothing more than a NeoCon wet-dream and it is sickening. Furthermore, the NeoCons should be treated as just what they are: Real modern day Nazis who feel that it is quite OK to murder millions of innocent people because they have a theory of how wonderful things will be, once the enemy, which seems to be the entire Muslim world, gives up the fight and does what they are told.


Well, problem is, you murderous egg-heads, you don't know your enemy. They won't give up, You can nuke them, and they still won't give up. These people have seen evil empires before. They have seen shock and awe before. All you have done is manage to cause more and more people to hate Americans. You should all be rounded up and put on trial, just like the Nazis, because that is who you really are.


"Rather than open this Pandora's Box, the administration chose a different path — not employing out-and-out deception, but shading the truth," he wrote of the effort to convince the world that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, an effort he said used "innuendo and implication" and "intentional ignoring of intelligence to the contrary."


Oh screw all that. They flat out lied to the American people and to Congress, over and over again. Deception and fear-mongering like I have never seen before was on the news every damned day. Calling anti-war people traitors and questioning everyones' patriotism, while all the while, shredding the Constitution and habeas corpus. If I had my way, you would all be hanged on the National Mall, an example to any other presidential candidate and any future administration: The American people will not put up with international criminals in power in this nation, nor enemies of our constitution.


"President Bush managed the crisis in a way that almost guaranteed that the use of force would become the only feasible option," McClellan concluded, noting, "The lack of candor underlying the campaign for war would severely undermine the president's entire second term in office."


Well, of course he did, because he was planning to invade Iraq long before he was even selected. Get real Scott! Do you really believe that he told his public spokesperson the truth about everything? What president does that?


Bush's national security advisers failed to "help him fully understand the tinderbox he was opening," McClellan recalled.


He would have fired them if they did. Just look at all the fired generals, you know the ones he always claims he listens to? General who know w heel of a lot more about war than the slackers in the White House.


"I know the president pretty well. I believe that, if he had been given a crystal ball in which he could have foreseen the costs of war — more than 4,000 American troops killed, 30,000 injured and tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis dead — he would never have made the decision to invade, despite what he might say or feel he has to say publicly today," McClellan wrote.


He would have busted it into a gazillion pieces and gone to war anyway, because he wanted to be a war president. He told any one who would listen that that is what he wanted.


'Plenty smart enough'

In a summation, McClellan said the decision to invade Iraq "goes to an important question that critics have raised about the president: Is Bush intellectually incurious or, as some assert, actually stupid?"


"Bush is plenty smart enough to be president," he concluded. "But as I've noted his leadership style is based more on instinct than deep intellectual debate."


Then, he isn't smart enough. We should not think with our gut. That is not the purpose of the gut, Scott.


McClellan also expresses amazement that Bush seemed flummoxed by a query by NBC's Tim Russert in February 2004 as to whether the invasion of Iraq was "a war of choice or a war of necessity."


"It strikes me today as an indication of his lack of inquisitiveness and his detrimental resistance to reflection," McClellan wrote, "something his advisers needed to compensate for better than they did."


How in the hell can anyone compensate for a stubborn mule who believes he is God's chosen president, with help, I'm very sure, from the TheoCons, and therefore can make no mistakes. No one can compensate for someone who is truly delusional. Besides, they did not want to compensate for it, as his delusion played right into the NeoCon vision as plainly laid out in the Project for the New American Century. Like Mien Kemp, any one who had read the PNAC document, knew exactly what was coming the minute Cheney was chosen as Vice President. I knew when Bush was selected that we would be in Iraq within two years. Afghanistan slowed Bush down a bit, but it would have been hard to ignore Osama all together. That would have seemed too strange even for the most retarded among us, especially the vengeance seekers.


McClellan tracks Bush's penchant for self-deception back to an overheard incident on the campaign trail in 1999 when the then-governor was dogged by reports of possible cocaine use in his younger days.


The book recounts an evening in a hotel suite "somewhere in the Midwest." Bush was on the phone with a supporter and motioned for McClellan to have a seat.


"'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?" McClellan wrote. "How can someone simply not remember whether or not they used an illegal substance like cocaine? It didn't make a lot of sense."

That's not all that odd for a full blown alcoholic at a young age, when still partying hardy. He may well have blacked-out regularly. There is no memory trace made-while a person is in a blackout from bathing their CNS in a sedative anesthetic on a regular basis and in large quantities. Of all the insanity that has gone on in the Bush administration, this is run-of-the-mill stuff for an alcoholic. It would have been a good thing to know that he said that before he was president, but now the damage is done.

It is however another plank in the platform for the public demanding that anyone wanting to run for president or vice president have a thorough mental work up, and then every two years, if they should win. If campaigns are so damned rigorous that it causes people to imagine they were under sniper fire when they weren't, just think what the presidency must be like. I would like to be told whether or not he is off his rails. This administration, if not a number of them in my lifetime, convince me that we need reports on the president's and vice president's complete health. This is especially true of a president and vice president who are in office when something terrible does happen, like 9/11.


Bush, according to McClellan, "isn't the kind of person to flat-out lie."


Not unless he has to. He would prefer to leave the lying to others. Plausible deniability and all that, don't you know.


"So I think he meant what he said in that conversation about cocaine. It's the first time when I felt I was witnessing Bush convincing himself to believe something that probably was not true, and that, deep down, he knew was not true," McClellan wrote. "And his reason for doing so is fairly obvious — political convenience."


Uh huh. That's the reason for everything all of you did because the main goal of this administration, other than the NeoCon thing, was holding power in the Republican party forever.


In the years that followed, McClellan "would come to believe that sometimes he convinces himself to believe what suits his needs at the moment." McClellan likened it to a witness who resorts to "I do not recall."


The greatest deceiver of all is the deceiver who first completely deceives himself. Scott, you are a Bible-toting republican. Do you remember who the great deceiver is?


"Bush, similarly, has a way of falling back on the hazy memory to protect himself from potential political embarrassment," McClellan wrote, adding, "In other words, being evasive is not the same as lying in Bush's mind."


Of course not, because he is a liar. People who aren't born-liars, like most really good politicians and corporate officers are, know that a lie of omission is as bad as a lie of commission, as long as it is intentional and meant to deceive for personal purposes of self-gain or protection and we know by now that Bush lies are intentional because, you see, they are always done to further his goals or to protect his political power.


And McClellan linked the tactic to the decision to invade Iraq, a decision based on flawed intelligence.


A decision, based on ignored intelligence - not so much flawed as ignored, Scott. Here's the question for you, Scott. How come we all knew, and in "we," I include Obama? We all know that the chances of Saddam having a nuclear weapon within the next 20 years was almost nil and that's the one that always scares Americans witless and your bosses knew that Scott. Americans have a huge fear of karma, especially the nuclear kind, as well we all might. When our very own government uses that against us, then our very own government can be called terrorists. Then they also played the vengeance card, Scott. Saddam had something to do with 9/11 and was tennis partners with Osama at the Baghdad country club or whatever. It was ludicrous, absolutely, ludicrous, and anyone who had the good sense to educate themselves about Islam and its history, after 9/11, would have known it, but you guys count on us being anti-intellectual, dumb-bells, totally incapable of picking up a few books and reading them or even, God forbid, asking Muslims to educate us about what they knew about their own religion and its laws or being capable of understanding anything longer than a sound bite. Didn't God say, "vengeance is mine," Scott? Oops. So, much for the moral high ground, let alone the Christian one.


"It would not be the last time Bush mishandled potential controversy," he said of the cocaine rumors. "But the cases to come would involve the public trust, and the failure to deal with them early, directly and head-on would lead to far greater suspicion and far more destructive partisan warfare," he wrote.


Partisan warfare? If you ask me, there was far less partisan warfare than I would have liked to see, but then I don't trust either of the political parties any further than I could throw Dennis Hastert, and the whimpy way the dembulbs have behaved just proves my point. Anytime some president, I don't care with which party he or she identifies him or herself, makes a lame attempt to lie the American people into an illegal, unjust war, all hell should break lose. The opposing party should go crazy and the news media should go ballistic. (That's how you get the average American's attention.) It isn't patriotic to keep mum at a time like that, nor is it in the best interest of this country or her people.


'Too stubborn to change and grow'


The book also recounts Bush's unwillingness or inability to come up with a mistake he had made when asked by a reporter to do so.


"It became symbolic of a leader unable to acknowledge that he got it wrong, and unwilling to grow in office by learning from his mistake — too stubborn to change and grow," McClellan concluded.


God' chosen president does not make mistakes, Scottie.

The next president had better know how to admit mistakes, because there are a number he will have to admit to, on behalf of our nation. We cannot fix anything until we admit there is a problem. We cannot possibly expect to regain the trust and friendship of the world until we admit that Iraq was not only a huge blunder but was a crime as well and that we, as a people, intend to do all we can to see justice served and the people of Iraq are safe from outside interference at the point of a gun and it's borders secured by a multinational force, including their neighbors, and be able to re-build there own country with the help of the world community. They are a damaged but proud people. What's more, they are a part of the same human family that the we all belong to.They must be protected from those who would harm or steal from them, while they decide what kind of government and life they want for themselves and their progeny. If that is some form of democratic socialism, so be it. The Scandinavians seem to do that well. They are a lot better off than we are.


Capitalism (or the worship of capital) is not the only economic system that goes well with democracy. As a matter of fact, we are seeing that it does not go so well, when it becomes corporatism or fascism, which are the same thing and where capitalism goes off the rails with greed gluttony and lust for power fascism is the result, just as when socialism goes too far, it can become a totalitarian communism that is just as bad for the people. Odd, isn't it, that it is almost always the same "cardinal sins" that push any economic system over the edge; greed is always number one and lust (for power), a close second.


A page later, he recounts what he perceived as a moment of doubt by a president who never expresses any. It occurred in a dimly lit room at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, a room where an injured Texas veteran was being watched over by his wife and 7-year-old son as Bush arrived.


The vet's head was bandaged and "he was clearly not aware of his surroundings, the brain injury was severe," McClellan recalled. Bush hugged the wife, told the boy his dad was brave and kissed the injured vet's head while whispering 'God bless you' into his ear.


"Then he turned and walked toward the door," McClellan wrote. "Looking straight ahead, he moved his right hand to wipe away a tear. In that moment, I could see the doubt in his eyes and the vivid realization of the irrevocable consequences of his decision."


Scott, if you were much of a history student, you would know that Hitler, the greatest evil in modern times, one would think, although I can name quite a few more, could not bear to look at the soldiers coming home from the eastern front, the opening of which was a stupid move on his part. Maybe looking at them made him question his own wisdom, as it certainly should have and perhaps it also made him sad. (Of course, Hitler, was a delusional psychopath, made that way by years of self-hatred, a terribly dysfunctional family, fighting in WWI and, finally, the people who surrounded him as he rose to political power, who fueled Hitler's delusions until he thought that he was sent by God to spread the "glories of Nazism" and get rid of what was then called the "Jewish problem."


But, he added, such moments are more than counterbalanced by deceased warriors' families who urge him to make sure the deaths were not in vain.


Since when does more blood honor those already fallen in a senseless war such as this. The best way to honor our fallen is to try our own war criminals or, even better, send them to the Hague and then make it really plain, once and for all, that there will always be a band of citizens watching this government and that a similar fate will befall other leaders who lie to their people about something as serious as war crimes. When America is restored as a nation, a true democratic republic and not a corporate empire, and the people who created this mess are held up before the world and punished according to the roles they played, these soldiers will not have died in vain.


Rice, Cheney not spared from criticism


McClellan's criticism of Rice — who he pegs as "hard to get to know" — is blistering.


"I was struck by how deft she is at protecting her reputation," he wrote. "No matter what went wrong, she was somehow able to keep her hands clean, even when the problems related to matters under her direct purview, including the WMD rationale for the war in Iraq, the decision to invade Iraq ... and post-war planning and implementation of the strategy in Iraq."

With the outstanding exception of Richard Clarke who nailed her big time in his testimony before the 9/11 commission.


McClellan predicts a harsh historical review of Rice.


We are not fooled by her one iota, so don't worry Scott. When war crimes trials are held, she will be right up there with the big boys. If war r=crimes are not held, she will be on someone's hit list.


"But whatever her policy management shortcomings, Rice knew public relations well. She knew how to adapt to potential trouble, dismiss brooding problems and come out looking like a star," he wrote. "Few performed better under the spotlight, glossing over mistakes with her effortless eloquence and understated flair."


In other words, she is intelligent evil, the worst kind.


McClellan brands Vice President Cheney as "the magic man" mysteriously directing outcomes in "every policy area he cared about, from the invasion of Iraq to expansion of presidential power to the treatment of detainees and the use of surveillance against terror suspects."


"Cheney always seemed to get his way," McClellan wrote.


Cheney is a pit viper, slithering around the back halls of power, accountable to no one, unavailable to the press, except for Faux News, almost as evil as he is.


The book is so critical that it becomes difficult to imagine a future scene that Bush predicted on the day that McClellan's forced resignation was announced.


"One of these days," Bush, with McClellan at his side, told reporters that day, "he and I are going to 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 McClellan no longer cares to hang out with this bunch. I know I wouldn't be wanting to, especially after they leave the White House.


(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Friday, November 23, 2007

Don't Expect Truth From McClellan

We won't be shelling out bucks for bullshit.

That's for sure. Maybe Cheney can buy several million of this BS book. He can afford them. But from what we understand, the little dough boy and Darth don't get along all that well.


Even little press secs. have an ego.

If the Democrats can't bring themselves to act on Bush and Cheney, all is lost for America.

Were I not already dying, I would be making plans to leave.

November 21, 2007

A Final Plea To Congress To Out This Accountability-Denying, National Security-Breaching, Justice-Obstructing Administration

Former Press Secretary Scott McClellan remains the master of Orwellian obfuscation, only these days for fun and profit.

The Bushies -- who now include a long and growing list of former acolytes, such as McClellan -- as well those constitutionally charged with overseeing their misdeeds, can't even do scandal in a traditional way. You'll recall during the Nixon administration there was a thing called the smoking gun -- guns, actually. We had real investigative committees grilling thoroughly corrupt insiders and getting to the actual truth. The guns blasted and smoked almost daily. Mistakes were made, indeed, but we got to the criminal bottom of each and every one, and before the chief perp left office.

(As much as we love you P.M., we simply must add a correction. If there is anything the last 40 years have taught us it should be that we didn't get anywhere near the unholy bottom of Nixon's crimes, nor will we now, get to the bottom of the Bush crimes, all of them, I and II. What's more; Nixon should not have been allowed to resign, thus avoiding trial by the Senate. How can the U.S. ever be trusted when we allow our criminals in high office to walk away?)

In a way, those were the days. As dark and squalid as they were, we nevertheless pulled ourselves out of the muck by exposing it to the clean light of day. And we did it by the book, which is to say, the U.S. Constitution.

Today? We see medals donned on the criminally incompetent. We witness internal promotions in repayment for the most despicable of on-the-job screw ups. We watch neocon nincompoops escape accountability and settle into cushy think-tank jobs. We get Congressional excuses and foot-dragging and table-offing.

And, we get memoirs -- those telling-all while saying-nothing memoirs, guaranteed to rake in the cash for the criminals, incompetents and nincompoops.

In April, we'll get Scott McClellan's: "What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and What’s Wrong With Washington."

Mr. McClellan probably does know much of what actually happened, but if you think he's about to tell us, think again. His publisher, PublicAffairs, will release 400 pages of little more than fog and shadows. That's what "Scottie" excels at generating; and that, of course, is the principal if not only reason he was Bush's spokesman. Clarity is the enemy of national betrayal.

His story on the Plame affair, no doubt, will stop where his publisher's teaser leaves off: "I had unknowingly passed along false information. And five of the highest-ranking officials in the administration were involved in my doing so."

What the hell does that mean? Of course they "were involved" -- an inconsequential passive usage that fails to compete with even the just as inconsequential but at least more rhetorically ominous, "mistakes were made."

Note what he didn't write: "five of the highest-ranking officials in the administration were directly and knowingly responsible for my doing so."

The latter may well be the case, but we won't read or hear it from Scottie. Indeed, he's already gone as far as he'll publicly go, without penalty of perjury. On the day Scooter Libby was convicted of just that, McClellan, who had long since left his White House podium, "made no suggestion" to CNN's Larry King "that Bush knew either Libby or Rove was involved in the leak. McClellan said his statements to reporters were what he and the president 'believed to be true at the time based on assurances that we were both given.'"

What's more, "In recent conversations and in his many public speaking engagements, McClellan has made it clear he retains great affection for the president." So don't count on anything more appearing in print, come April.

So when it does come to getting at the truth, what's missing? Think back to the Nixon days, and the missing piece looms large.

An aggressive Congress; one willing to take on a sitting president, to let the subpoenas fly and the investigators delve -- one willing to demand answers that travel beyond the obfuscating fog and arrive at the liberating truth. McClellan's "teaser" may in fact say little of authentic substance, but it does profoundly add to Congress' already plentiful cause for investigating obstruction of justice at the highest level.

I realize there are Democratic swing districts that might be endangered by an aggressive Congress, and that upholding the rule of law and enforcing constitutional imperatives pale in comparison to such electoral exigencies. But millions who retain some affection for the Constitution are beggin ya: Give it a go, anyway. You might be surprised at the public's reception -- a public that has had enough of this accountability-denying, national security-breaching, justice-obstructing administration.


(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Cheney Outed Bush For Treason long before Scotty Tries To Cash In On His W.H. Years

Good "reminder article" by Mark at Buzzflash.

It also gives us another opportunity to put forth our hypothesis regarding the Plame outing:

Not long after it became apparent that the Scoot-man was going to take the hit for outing Plame and that Fitzgerald was going to allow it, at least for the foreseeable future, it dawned on me that the outing of Plame wasn't done just to "get" Joe Wilson.

If the whole treasonous affair had been allowed to go on, without any investigation of any kind, how would the story Novak wrote have discredited Joe Wilson? Even if Valerie had sent Joe to Niger, or suggested him to her superiors or whatever, how in the world does that discredit Wilson's report? Does anyone really buy the BS about nepotism and/or the "castrating" effects of having one's wife get one a junket to Niger, of all places. We're aren't talking about Paris or a Club Med..

Was the White House trying to suggest that Valerie and Joe Wilson are the Rosenbergs of the 21st century, a couple of traitors to the U.S., willing to plant false stories in the chain of intelligence regarding Saddam and uranium yellowcake? (We would be remiss, if we did not point out that many people today, and a few back then, do not believe that the Rosenbergs did betray the U.S., but at the time there was so much hysteria about communism, our government could have re-crucified Jesus, himself, with the approval of the people, if he was accused of giving or selling atomic secrets to the Soviet Union.). If that is what they were attempting to suggest to the American people, or at least to their own political base, the Wilson's should have been arrested and the accusation made from behind the White House podium, as that would be a very serious accusation, not merely an attempt to discredit someone.

Nevertheless, according to the news media, even now, that is all CIA leak was about. It was only intended to discredit Joe Wilson. Now, we all know how seemingly incompetent the Bushites are when it comes to....well...almost everything. But this particular leak was incredibly stupid, even given the Bushite, imperial hubris with which we have all become so familiar since election 2000.

So how in hell does this story make any sense at all?

Certainly Cheney would have gone ballistic for the simple reason that the trail of all of the nuclear lies could be followed directly to his office door, and we all know that it was that particular pack of lies that won the support of the people for the illegal, unjust war in Iraq. But to out a CIA NOC in order to plant a story that made no sense, as far as discrediting her husband? Libby is a lawyer. He has to know that disclosing the identity of a CIA agent is serious business, especially in a time of war. Red flags should have gone up everywhere in the upper echelons of the W.H. inner circles. Was it worth it, just to "get Joe?"

But what if, in Cheney's investigation of Joe Wilson, and we know that there was one...quite intensive, actually, old Darth saw another big problem and another opportunity for a preemptive strike on another possible "enemy." That enemy, in his paranoid, psycho-mind would be Valerie Plame Wilson, herself. Cheney would have found out that Plame-Wilson was not just any old NOC, but one whose specialty was non-proliferation of WMD. Her focus was Iraq and Iran. She knew a lot about those two countries in particular. Those two countries also happen to be in Bush's axis of evil and were known targets of the Neoconservatives in their plan for a New American Century. Outing Plame-Wilson didn't do much to discredit Joe Wilson, but it had to have created a blind spot the size of Texas when it comes to Intel. on Iran, and it has now come to that as Cheney knew that it would, sooner or later.

As Joe Wilson noted, Plame-Wilson's outing also sent a message in neon lights to any other Intel. Agent from any agency about messing with Cheney and/or the neocon plan for the middle-east by telling the truth.

So far, all is working out very well for Bush and Cheney, but mostly for Cheney. The man is a multi-millionaire by now and we can change that to billionaire when we strike Iran and oil jumps to 300 - 500 a barrel over night; $13.00 a gallon.

Cheney will still be driving. Will You?

Where in hell is Congress?


Scott McClellan Didn't Out Bush for High Crimes and Misdemeanors, Cheney Did.

The BuzzFlash Editor's Blog.

Mark Karlin, Editor and Publisher, BuzzFlash.com

November 23, 2007

As we’ve noted before, BuzzFlash feels personally invested in the exposing of the White House treason surrounding the outing of Valerie Plame, which resulted in impairing our national security when it comes to tracking weapons of mass destruction. Following up on a David Corn commentary shortly after the infamous Bob "The Traitor" Novak column, BuzzFlash helped Corn raise the alarm about the dangerous and illegal significance of the identification of Plame as a CIA operative.

So it is with astonishment that we have watched the mainstream media ignore or dismiss the revelation by once White House loyalist Scott McClellan that Cheney and Bush were likely involved in the outing and knowingly sent him out to lie to the press about the role of the two key messengers: Libby and Rove.

You’ve no doubt heard by now that the McClellan admission was made in a first person excerpt from a book being printed early next year by Public Affairs Press (affiliated with the Perseus Group).

While the first person confirmation of what anyone with a pea for a brain knew all along caromed across the Internet, the Washington Post and the New York Times gave it the cold shoulder, among other mainstream media outlets.

In the meantime, we suspect that the White House hit men gave McClellan
and his publisher the same treatment that they have given other "made men" that ratted on them: the brass knuckles and warnings to back off if they cared about their families.

As one blogger noted: "John Dillulio calls them "machiavellian mayberries" and suggests that they politicize everything--yet a week later he backs down completely. Paul O'Neill says that they planned on invading Iraq from the beginning, he is savaged by the machine."

So the publisher, within a day backed off the first person quote by McClellan, with a rather bizarre claim that the book wasn’t finished yet, even though it was the publisher that posted the quotation on its website. McClellan was in seclusion, of course, no doubt being waterboarded by some of Cheney’s crew.

In an all too fitting and tragic irony, the mainstream media only took notice of the damning revelation of criminal behavior – certainly in the high crimes and misdemeanors category, as Valerie and Joe Wilson charge
– on cue from the White House once the publisher recalled the first person quotation, which is indeed quite a remarkable feat, since clearly it would only be done under pressure, since it is hard for a publisher to post a first person quote and then claim that it was premature. What kind of credibility does that leave you with? But it was probably preferable than running a publishing house with two broken arms and a pencil rammed through your ear.

All along, U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald noted in his investigation that a cloud of suspicion hung over Dick Cheney, and he all but said that Cheney was the key culprit. In fact, Scooter Libby’s crime – the one he was convicted for – was integrally related to an obstruction of justice essentially revolving around the reality that he was covering up for Cheney.

Long forgotten – and barely noticed during the trial – was a document introduced during the case that directly implicates Bush. And the notes on the document that point at Bush as being a co-conspirator were written by Dick Cheney.

Truthout.org covered this crucial link to Bush, including a copy of the handwritten note:

Copies of handwritten notes by Vice President Dick Cheney, introduced at trial by attorneys prosecuting former White House staffer I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, would appear to implicate George W. Bush in the Plame CIA Leak case.

Bush has long maintained that he was unaware of attacks by any member of his administration against [former ambassador Joseph] Wilson. The ex-envoy's stinging rebukes of the administration's use of pre-war Iraq intelligence led Libby and other White House officials to leak Wilson's wife's covert CIA status to reporters in July 2003 in an act of retaliation.

But Cheney's notes, which were introduced into evidence Tuesday during Libby's perjury and obstruction-of-justice trial, call into question the truthfulness of President Bush's vehement denials about his prior knowledge of the attacks against Wilson.

The revelation that Bush may have known all along that there was an effort by members of his office to discredit the former ambassador raises the question: Was the president also aware that senior members of his administration compromised Valerie Plame's undercover role with the CIA?

Further, the highly explicit nature of Cheney's comments not only hints at a rift between Cheney and Bush over what Cheney felt was the scapegoating of Libby, but also raises serious questions about potentially criminal actions by Bush. If Bush did indeed play an active role in encouraging Libby to take the fall to protect Karl Rove, as Libby's lawyers articulated in their opening statements, then that could be viewed as criminal involvement by Bush.

Last week, Libby's attorney Theodore Wells made a stunning pronouncement during opening statements of Libby's trial. He claimed that the White House had made Libby a scapegoat for the leak to protect Karl Rove - Bush's political adviser and "right-hand man."

"Mr. Libby, you will learn, went to the vice president of the United States and met with the vice president in private. Mr. Libby said to the vice president, 'I think the White House ... is trying to set me up. People in the White House want me to be a scapegoat,'" said Wells.

Cheney's notes seem to help bolster Wells's defense strategy. Libby's defense team first discussed the notes - written by Cheney in September 2003 for White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan - during opening statements last week. Wells said Cheney had written "not going to protect one staffer and sacrifice the guy that was asked to stick his head in the meat grinder because of incompetence of others": a reference to Libby being asked to deal with the media and vociferously rebut Wilson's allegations that the Bush administration knowingly "twisted" intelligence to win support for the war in Iraq.

However, when Cheney wrote the notes, he had originally written "this Pres." instead of "that was."

In another story on Truthout at the time of the Libby trial, it details other documents that indicate Cheney had claimed authorization from Bush to disclose classified information from a National Intelligence Estimate in order to try and discredit Joe Wilson.

It should also be remembered that Bush retained a private attorney in regards to the Libby case, a highly curious move for an innocent president. Furthermore, Bush promised to get to the bottom of the leak himself and fire anyone involved after the CIA formally requested a Justice Department investigation into Valerie Plame’s outing, because of the potential harm it had done to national security. As we now know, Bush, if he kept his word, would have ended up firing Dick Cheney and himself.

*( Bush could not fire Cheney even if Cheney murdered a small child in the Rose Garden in full view of every news camera in Washington D.C. because Cheney is an elected official, or so the story goes. Of course most of us don't believe that neither Bush nor Cheney has ever won a national election, but since Bush and Cheney are being allowed to play president and vice president on TeeVee, Cheney cannot be fired by Bush, even if Bush wanted to, for legal reasons, the same reasons that the Senate cannot fire Larry Craig. He was elected by the people, therefore impeachment or failing to re-elect are the only ways of getting rid of an elected, evil, scumbag. In this case, it is Congress , more particularly the House of Representatives that are not doing their jobs.)

It is a testament to the persistent tacit alliance of the corporate media with the Republican Party (to ensure favorable big media regulations, tax cuts, and anti-trust favors) that damage done to the national security of the United States -- authorized in all likelihood by the President of the United States and most certainly orchestrated by the Vice-President of the United States -- is either roundly ignored or dismissed as insignificant.

(Actually, Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann have been throwing nightly fits about this latest development and, to many of us, this does sound like old news because it is, thanks to the bloggers who sat through the trial and reported every detail, at the time of the trial. However, thanks to the corporate corn-pone news media, especially cabal news, this comes as quite a revelation to many Americans. McClellan's book, when published in April, will not carry such a strong accusation against Bush. It will be watered down quite a bit. Wanna Bet?


Does anyone else wonder about the timing of this publisher's excerpt? Certainly seems odd to us.)

Scott McClellan did not pen a rogue statement in his forthcoming book. What he said is entirely consistent with the information disclosed at the Libby trial, and even – ironically – with the defensive strategy of Libby’s own legal team, which was to position "Scooter" as a fall guy for the White House.

That may have, indeed, been the sole true assertion made on behalf of Mr. Libby.


(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.