Newest Attack on Clarke

[QC]

A transcript of a briefing he gave some reporters in August 2002 that apparently contradicts much of what he is saying now.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,115085,00.html

Yes, it's at FauxNews, but the wingnuts are busy circulating it. so it's worth taking a look--I think we know now what the new talking points will be.

Any comments on how damaging this is, if at all, how to counter it, etc?

[RobertSeattle]

1. cleared by the White House on Wednesday for distribution...

Funny how the White House clears things quickly when they need to.

Why not release the Energy Task Force?
Release Novak from confidentiality with source?
Release the Harken Insider Trading investigation files"

[swag]

4. The same White House cleared Clarke's book

Funny, huh?

[swag]

2. Bizarre

Looks too perfect, doesn't it?

Kind of like a forgery, but we'll see.

I believe this is in direct contradiction to a 2002 Washington Post article, which I'll try to dig up.

[Ganja Ninja]

3. That's my thought too - forgery.

No doubt we'll see that it has been altered or taken out of context. Then it will be followed by the correction at 3 o'clock in the morning a couple days later.

[cspiguy]

15. it is supposedly a videotape - not a letter.

Faux has been blowing it around all day and probably gave it to Herr PainKiller.

[swag]

7. Okay, I think the WP 2002 article was posted somewhere here

yesterday, but even though I have given DU money, I don't have the search function. Guess I'd better talk to the Admin's about that.

Conason discusses Clarke's agitation in August 2002 Salon journal, and refers to a WP article of months before.


The WH issue directly contradicts everything that was swirling about Clarke contemporaneously. Seems to be manifestly untrue.

I'm sure the WH thinks lying is okay in the name of "national security," i.e., keeping the crooks and liars in power.

The WH release is nonsensical. Clarke was on record counter to everything the release says. Clarke has been corroborated by multiple WH sources.

The doc looks to me like WH fraud.

[underpants]

11. Any of these?

ON EDIT-sorry I can't post a search page.

if not give me an idea of the title and which forum it was in and I will try to find it.

[swag]

14. Thanks for trying

I posted and read a lot of stuff last night, so can't be more specific. If I find it, I will post.

Clarke on in 35 minutes. We shall see, we shall see.

[Mountainman]

5. We have several testimonies saying that BushCo had no plan

they did not follow up with Clinton's plan, we have testimony that BushCo was more interested in Iraq than the real terrorists. And then we have Faux News, a right wing propaganda machine which has a different story.

How many other sources back up what Faux is saying? NewsMax?

[meti57b]

6. LOL ... upon seeing this, I checked the non-political board I visit ....

occasionally, and sure enough .... one of the local republicans started a thread on it.

[underpants]

8. Interesting that Angle was so concerned about this

don't remember hearing that this was a big issue at the time. I am assuming that "Andrea" is Andrea Mitchell of NBC.

I would be interested to hear what Clarke has to say about this or if anyone who was there remembers it this way.

[Indiana Democrat]

9. That's not good.

It's in his own words.

What a freaking mess!

[buddy22600]

10. Rush is reading it

word for word right now

[skeptic9]

12. If that's a "transcript", how come the only "reporter" asking questions is...

...Jim Angle of Fox "News"? The preamble says it's a "transcript" of a "background briefing" for "a handful of reporters". The only reference to another reporter besides Jim Angle that's left after apparently highly selective editing comes in a sentence attributed to Clarke: "There was never a plan ANDREA".

What was "Andrea's" question? Why was it omitted from this "transcript"?

The only White House press corps member named Andrea I know of is Alan Greenspan's wife Andrea Mitchell. Why would such a high-powered reporter defer to a no-name from Fox? There must be a LOT omitted from this "transcript", and the only reason for omitting it would be that including it would not undermine Richard Clarke just before his 9-11 Commission testimony.

[Mistress Quickly]

17. It shows the question

here:
snip>>>
QUESTION: Were all of those issues part of alleged plan that was late December and the Clinton team decided not to pursue because it was too close to ...

CLARKE: There was never a plan, Andrea. What there was was these two things: One, a description of the existing strategy, which included a description of the threat. And two, those things which had been looked at over the course of two years, and which were still on the table.

QUESTION: So there was nothing that developed, no documents or no new plan of any sort?

CLARKE: There was no new plan.
end snip>>>

The only questioner identified outside of actual quotes is Jim Angle. But how many other Andreas are there in the news business that would cover this, and that Clarke would call by name? She needs to be asked about this, and quick, before Clarke testifies.

[bobbyboucher]

13. This needs to be fact checked to the highest order.

It looks like fiction. Any other, non-biased, sources for this interview?

[Lex]

16. Fox specializes in Fiction.

So I wouldn't be surprised if it's total BS.

[Mistress Quickly]

18. Did CNN just confirm this?

They are having a ball over at FReeperville with this.

:mad:

[swag]

19. PROOF OF BULLSHIT: TIME MAGAZINE AUGUST 4 2002

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,333835,00.html

[Skip Intro]

20. "swatting at flies"

How many times have we heard that term from the bush gang since Sunday? (Didn't bush use this exact term yesterday?) And now, here is a transcript, right out of Clarke's mouth. This smells.

"When President Bush told us in March to stop swatting at flies and just solve this problem, then that was the strategic direction that changed the NSPD from one of rollback to one of elimination."

Exactly the talking points the thugs have been tossing about the last few days. BS meter is going off.

[Snow]

21. This is excellent - the wingnuts/bushco are on the defensive....

they'll be spending time & money trying to deal with this, voters will hear a lot about the clarke book, rove won't be slamming the dems & kerry....nothing like getting a political opponent on the defensive.

[maxsolomon]

22. he was in the bush admin at the time, therefore HE WAS LYING.

1 + 1 = 2.

how do you know a bushie is lying? he's talking.

[buycitgo]

23. your expalanation seems to be about the only defense at this point

unfortunately, there are either audio or video (both?) clips of this, as mentioned on both Faux and CNN.....saw this mentioned on both channels

SO.......Clarke may have been toeing the company line there

as to why, I'm SURE somebody from the commission....most likely Lehman, or maybe they'll finally let that schweinhunt Silberman open his pussfilled piehole and go after him.

OR, they'll have Armitage/Steiger go after him, once Clarke is finished

this is most disturbing

[formernaderite]

25. Well it was good while it lasted.... :(

....unfortunately since the Clinton scandals, it seems the public has become innoculated to scandal of any kind. Seriously, I used to tune out the news after 1996, I sort of took a "whatever" stance. These stories are playing well to the base in either camp.
Once again, the country will be held hostage to the uninformed "Independant" vote.

Can you say October surprise?

[Zorra]

24. After the transition between Administrations

new information revealed that the situation was rapidly becoming critical and that al Qaeda was preparing an imminent attack on the US in the months preceding 9/11/2001. Clarke never praises the Bush administration in this Faux news article, he describes bureaucratic ineptitude on their part. Obviously, the Bu$h Administration should have done more and talked less after the threat of attack had accelerated, because they failed to take the steps to protect the country. There are no excuses.

Talking about fire prevention is all well and good, but when you see smoke rising from the barn, talking ain't worth a damn. You have to go put the fire out right now or the barn is gonna burn down.

Bottom line: The Bu$h Administration did too little too late and did not take effective measures to prevent the attack despite repeated warnings by intelligence that the situation had become urgent.