Can anyone summarize John Stewart's interview w/ Richard Clarke?

[Brotherjohn]

I only found 2 threads about it, and one just refers to some spammer's e-mail being mentioned, while the other just generally mentions how Stewart was his usual brilliant self in walking the fine line.

Anyone have any more detail? Please? I missed it.

[T Wolf]

1. here is a general summary

I am sure the transcript will be available somewhere, soon. Until then, here is what I saw.

Jon was great. He did not "lob softball" like a reichwinger does to administration mouthpieces. Each question he asked was slightly aggressive - what I mean is that IF Clarke had not been prepared or talking out of his ass, he would have been exposed as a phony liar or political attack hack. Of course, because Clarke is telling the truth, he was able to answer every question very well.

That being said, I did get the feeling that Jon knew that Clarke would be able to answer well (clearly, strongly, etc.). So, I am sure the cons will complain about the "kid-glove" treatment.

Another impression is that, unlike with other guests, the humor seemed a bit strained. Jon joked quite a lot, as usual, but it was subdued. It was almost as if this was too serious to make too much humor out of it.

Clarke impressed the hell out of me. I have not watched any of the hearings, but wanted to see him for myself. Of course, I do not know anything about Clarke's views on other topics. Because he is from the other side, it gives him great credibility on this issue. But damn impressive none-the-less. I kept thinking, I wish he was a Dem.

[Brotherjohn]

3. Thanks. I had a feeling the humor would be strained. This is just too...

... serious to make light of when you've got the guy one on one.

Sounds like Stewart dealt with Clarke like a real journalist would have. Even though, as he so often self-deprecatingly asserts, he's a "fake" one. Of course we all know that his "fake" news is much more revealing and insightful than most "real" news.

[Bread and Circus]

4. Jon Stewart Rocked and puts 99% of "serious journalists" to shame

[Snellius]

2. Stewart had an interesting take on the Clarke controversy

Stewart made the comment a couple of times that, after reading the book, he was actually surprised the administration was making such a big deal about it. For one, it is much less critical of Bush than he expected and, when it is, it is largely only the last 40 pages. Clarke agreed, adding that he too was surprised at the administration's panic reaction because they've had it for security approval since October of last year. (He did say the WH censored several hot passages as secret.) It all makes one wonder if Bush is not so afraid of what is known, but what may be found out if anyone is allowed to look too hard.

[Brotherjohn]

5. "Surprised at the... panic reaction ". Remember Martin Short's character?

... the old Martin Short character on SNL -- lawyer Nathan Thurm?


They'd be interviewing him on a "60-Minutes"-like show, and (obviously guilty) he'd nervously stammer things like:
"What are you talking about? I don't know what you're talking about!"
"I knew that! You think I didn't know that?"
"Is it me? Is it just me?"

All the while chain smoking and sweating more and more profusely, to the point of water literally pouring down his face.

THAT is the Bush administration's response to Clarke. It makes it painfully obvious that they have MUCH more to hide than even Clarke knows. He's just cracking the door open a bit.

[Bread and Circus]

6. Or to look at all...

[underpants]

7. Snellius and T Wolf hit it on the head

Stewart actually read the book so he asked about what was in the book as well as asking about the WH response and attack.

Clarke pointed out several times that all of this spin against him personally is done with taxpayer money. He also said that this could turn the youth cynical towards government service-we need people to serve at least a few years better if a career and that he is afraid that these attacks will dampen the interest in doing such service.

Clarke mentioned W being quoted in Woodward's "Bush at War" that he did treat it with a sense of urgency and that he was out of the loop himself. Only 1 out of 100 "prinicples" meetings was about terrorism prior to 9/11.


Clarke looked relaxed and thanked Stewart for the attention he has directed towards this matter.