RWTP on Clarke: "The TIMING of this is suspicious..."

[stopbush]

I've heard this RW talking point all day long: the timing of Richard Clarke's revelations is suspect because 1) there's an election coming up, 2) he's a cohort of Rand Beers who is "John Kerry's best buddy" (according to Scott McCleland), etc.

I have one question for the media bushbots: what would be a GOOD time to release damning information about the bushies? Perhaps Clarke should take the rethug way and release damning info only after the election. But I'd like any one of them to give me a specific month in the last 2.5 years that would have been a "good" time to release such info. If it wasn't "there's a war on" it's been something else...bad foreign relations...Iraq quagmire...bad economy...and on it goes.

Just another desperate RW attempt a damage control.

[Richardo]

1. Yeah, whatever you do, do NOT discuss the content - only the timing...

Worked for Governator Ah-nult, did it not? Not this time, boys and girls.

[wryter2000]

2. Actually,

Through much of the 60 minutes coverage last night, I kept thinking "Why in hell didn't you say something BEFORE we invaded Iraq?" Maybe he could have prevented it. Still, at least the truth is getting out now.

[Wickerman]

3. I know that if I had damning evidence of Bush* wrongdoing

I would wait until I had it in a book and had a publicist and media appearances, etc. I would want my every move traced by media so when I got offed it could be traced back to these corrupt neo-cons.

I think Clarke is right to write the book and get the facts down, as well as do it within a huge glaring spotlight. The book took time, the glare protects him.

And if he feels this strongly about what occurred, he needs to make certain that Bush* does not get elected. Good moves, Clarke.

[RobertSeattle]

4. Exactly when should have Clarke released the book then?

No timing by the Bush Administration is EVERY SUSPECT.

[leetrisck]

5. He will be saying the same thing

when he appears before the commission so why would it be suspicious? Also, we know some of this stuff from others - just not Clarke's inside "stuff" - the media knows this has been out there and so do we - it's good to see it pulled together in a book. My book was shipped yesterday. Looking forward to it.

[HootieMcBoob]

6. Talking about Beers should make Bush look even more incompetent

Rand Beers was Special Assistant to the chimp and Senior Director for Combating Terrorism:

http://www.state.gov/g/inl/rls/prsrl/ps/12749.htm

He resigned from the Bush administration because he thought Bush was doing a terrible job. He's now teamed up with John Kerry. So, Clarke and Beers are the two top people in the Bush administration that have resigned because Bush is such a miserable failure.

[johnfunk]

7. Clarke: White House responsible for timing of book's publication

From the tireless Atrios:

On the Newshour, Richard Clarke just said that the publication of the book had been delayed for 3 months because the White House delayed clearing it for publication. So, if not for their meddling, it would have been before any reasonable person could have accused him of being "political" for releasing it during the election season.

KABOOM.... another Karl Röve spin point nuked by the truth...

[Rockholm]

8. Beers Works For Kerry? They Are Really Good Friends?

Well, lets compare. Who are some of *'s best bestest friends?
1. Saudi Royal Family (where most of the 9/11 hijackers were from)
2. Bin Laden Family (needs further explaining?)
3. Jerry Falwell (for the God connection)

Can ANYONE add anyone else in *'s "Friends and Family" Circle?

[Ivote]

9. All the

PNAC Neocons for starters.
Isn't this what gingrich had in mind

[grannylib]

10. Let's not forget the Nazis and their stolen money behind the BFEE