1. Welcome to CowboysZone!  Join us!  Come on!  You know you want to!

McClellan blames Bush for CIA leak deceit

Discussion in 'Political Zone' started by ConcordCowboy, Nov 20, 2007.

  1. ConcordCowboy

    ConcordCowboy Mr. Buckeye

    12,747 Messages
    2 Likes Received
    Not that this should REALLY come as any surprise to anyone.


    McClellan blames Bush for CIA leak deceit


    Former spokesman says both president and vice president involved

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21903753/


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

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

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



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

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

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

    White House press secretary Dana Perino said it wasn't clear what McClellan meant in the excerpt and she had no immediate comment.

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



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

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

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

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


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

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

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

    burmafrd Well-Known Member

    41,138 Messages
    1,277 Likes Received
    Is it not interesting that NOWHERE in that article is mentioned what Fitzgerald did in his final report. RICHARD ARMITAGE was the person who outed Plame. Not rove. Or Libby. Or anyone else. Now I wonder just how this article could wander all over the place and not mention that? Or where armitage worked?
  3. jterrell

    jterrell Penguinite

    18,844 Messages
    856 Likes Received
    The article is laying blame on them for lying not the act of outing.

    We are all aware of how Plame was outed and we have a pretty good idea who all approved the outing. Approving it was the stupid move imho, not the lies afterward.
  4. burmafrd

    burmafrd Well-Known Member

    41,138 Messages
    1,277 Likes Received
    Isn't it interesting that for all the beating of chests about the so called outing of Plame no one was ever charged for that? Of course the fact that even in her own neighborhood and elsewhere in DC it was known Plame worked for the CIA. Just the act of marrying a former ambassador pretty much ended Plames career in any covert activity. Not that she ever did much there anyway. The whole thing- the CiA chief demanding an investigation- always smelled to me. dirty politics is business as usual in DC and has been so for quite a while. Strangely no one else seems to get that.
  5. burmafrd

    burmafrd Well-Known Member

    41,138 Messages
    1,277 Likes Received
    What always interested me- and for some reason the media never seemed to care- is WHY was Wilson ever chosen for that job? Its not like he was exactly respected for his integrity- or his ability. And as a noted democrat its not like he was a friend of the Administration anyway. I always thought that maybe Wilson was picked precisely because he was not expected to accomplish anything.
  6. jterrell

    jterrell Penguinite

    18,844 Messages
    856 Likes Received
    Libby was charged and convicted with lying, but was later pardoned.

    This went no where because it went to the top and wasn't gonna do more than besmirch the President, certianly not draw charges.
  7. jterrell

    jterrell Penguinite

    18,844 Messages
    856 Likes Received
    That is odd given Bush usually only appoints nephews and oil baron buddies; maybe Wilson donated heavily while ole George was 'guvnor'.

    Strange to be true.
  8. arglebargle

    arglebargle Well-Known Member

    5,005 Messages
    126 Likes Received
    When you expose an undercover CIA operative, even one no longer in the field, you also cast suspicion on everyone who had contact with them when they were in the field. You endanger their contacts. And loads of casual acquaintances. You also make it very evident to people who might be considering working with America that they can be jetisoned on some political whim.

    It's pretty morally bankrupt, especially when done as a 'get back'. But power is intoxicating.....
  9. burmafrd

    burmafrd Well-Known Member

    41,138 Messages
    1,277 Likes Received
    You don't get it. The MOMENT she married a former US ambassador she got outed. She got famous enough that she was never going to be anything but a desk jockey anyway. And its also interesting that no one ever even hinted where she could have been a covert operative - she had been a desk jockey for several years before she married him. And that was in the US where the CIA is forbidden to operate.
  10. StanleySpadowski

    StanleySpadowski Active Member

    4,815 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    He wouldn't have lived long enough to say anything under the Clinton administration.
  11. silverbear

    silverbear Semi-Official Loose Cannon

    24,188 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    Look at you, defending the outing of a CIA officer by the President of the United States, for petty partisan revenge...

    You'll justify literally anything this morally corrupt administration does, won't you??
    Dubya could sleep with your dog, and poison your girlfriend, and it would be just fine by you...
  12. ConcordCowboy

    ConcordCowboy Mr. Buckeye

    12,747 Messages
    2 Likes Received
    This isn't about whether it was Armitage/Rove/Libby leaking Plame's name or not(they were ALL involved in it)..this is about THE President AND Vice President of the United States covering up/lying about outing a CIA operative...all because her husband had the audacity to say that maybe some of their pre War intelligence was wrong.

    Ongoing investigations as well as possibly covert operatives lives could have been put in danger...not to mention maybe undermining our National Security.

    That's wrong no matter how far out on the lunatic fringe right you are.

Share This Page