Exclusive: McClellan whacks Bush, White House

[Neil D]

Ok, bush defenders....defend bush now.....

Mike Allen

Tue May 27, 7:18 PM ET

Former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan writes in a surprisingly scathing memoir to be published next week that President Bush “veered terribly off course,” was not “open and forthright on Iraq,” and took a “permanent campaign approach” to governing at the expense of candor and competence.

Among the most explosive revelations in the 341-page book, titled “What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington’s Culture of Deception” (Public Affairs, $27.95):

• McClellan charges that Bush relied on “propaganda” to sell the war.

• He says the White House press corps was too easy on the administration during the run-up to the war.

• He admits that some of his own assertions from the briefing room podium turned out to be “badly misguided.”

• The longtime Bush loyalist also suggests that two top aides held a secret West Wing meeting to get their story straight about the CIA leak case at a time when federal prosecutors were after them — and McClellan was continuing to defend them despite mounting evidence they had not given him all the facts.

• McClellan asserts that the aides — Karl Rove, the president’s senior adviser, and I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, the vice president’s chief of staff — “had at best misled” him about their role in the disclosure of former CIA operative Valerie Plame’s identity.

A few reporters were offered advance copies of the book, with the restriction that their stories not appear until Sunday, the day before the official publication date. Politico declined and purchased “What Happened” at a Washington bookstore.

The eagerly awaited book, while recounting many fond memories of Bush and describing him as “authentic” and “sincere,” is harsher than reporters and White House officials had expected.

McClellan was one of the president’s earliest and most loyal political aides, and most of his friends had expected him to take a few swipes at his former colleague in order to sell books but also to paint a largely affectionate portrait.

Instead, McClellan’s tone is often harsh. He writes, for example, that after Hurricane Katrina, the White House “spent most of the first week in a state of denial,” and he blames Rove for suggesting the photo of the president comfortably observing the disaster during an Air Force One flyover. McClellan says he and counselor to the president Dan Bartlett had opposed the idea and thought it had been scrapped.

But he writes that he later was told that “Karl was convinced we needed to do it — and the president agreed.”

“One of the worst disasters in our nation’s history became one of the biggest disasters in Bush’s presidency. Katrina and the botched federal response to it would largely come to define Bush’s second term,” he writes. “And the perception of this catastrophe was made worse by previous decisions President Bush had made, including, first and foremost, the failure to be open and forthright on Iraq and rushing to war with inadequate planning and preparation for its aftermath.”

McClellan, who turned 40 in February, was press secretary from July 2003 to April 2006. An Austin native from a political family, he began working as a gubernatorial spokesman for then-Gov. Bush in early 1999, was traveling press secretary for the Bush-Cheney 2000 campaign and was chief deputy to Press Secretary Ari Fleischer at the beginning of Bush’s first term.

“I still like and admire President Bush,” McClellan writes. “But he and his advisers confused the propaganda campaign with the high level of candor and honesty so fundamentally needed to build and then sustain public support during a time of war. … In this regard, he was terribly ill-served by his top advisers, especially those involved directly in national security.”

The rest of the story or at least the article

[Woody]

Quote:

McClellan is on the lecture circuit

Bashing Bush is a popular way to make money nowadays. Defending him for sure would not make much.

[Neil D]

Doesn't make what McClellen is saying anything less true....

[Dr. Shane]

"Tell-all" books often tell us more about the author than they tell us about their subject. Bush has made a lot of mistakes. There is little doubt about that. He would be foolish to admit such mistakes while he is the sitting president. If and when he writes his memoirs he may well discuss mistakes he made. Only then would it be appropriate. Some presidents have done so but not allowed them to be released until after their death.

Isn't it interesting that everyone made mistakes in the Bush Administration except McClellan?

Donald Regan wrote a tell-all book after he was fired in 1987. During a press conference someone asked President Reagan if he was worried about the book. President Reagan responded by saying Donald Regan was a friend and he (President Reagan) was indeed worried about how the book would affect his (Donald Regan) reputation. I can't recall the exact quote but it was something like, "Donald Regan is a friend of mine and I am worried about how this will affect his reputation."

[jasd]

>>Doesn't make what McClellen is saying anything less true....<<

Abduction?

[Jeannieb43]

And Rove, et al., are just waiting in the wings to bash the Democratic nominee as soon as the general election gets underway. If we thought the Swift Boat guys were bad, just wait till Rove & Co. bring in the KKK, etc., against Obama. They'll stop at nothing.

[Dr. Shane]

The KKK has already come on the scene. Bill O'Reilly (not really on the far right) is calling for the Secrete Service to haul in the KKK gran wizard and "rough him up". Karl Rove is working for FOXNews as a consultant so I doubt he will be directly involved with any campaigns. Although he may get involved with a 527 group. I seriously doubt many mainstream Republican groups will attack Obama on race... although I think that is wondering off topic.

[Dr. Shane]

YouTube:

Rove: McClellan Sounds Like a Left Wing Blogger

[jasd]

>>And Rove, et al., are just waiting in the wings...<<

Mercy, thank-you fates! that one such as Rove takes up the gauntlet – against the likes of the presumed nominee of the Dem’crat Party!

>>...to bash the Democratic nominee as soon as the general election gets underway.<<

Shhhh, on the QT, there’s rumored a video tape exists which portrays Michelle Obama using the W-word, ipso..., “Whitey”. It’s also bruited that the ‘publicrats are using that tape under deep cover to generate funds for the campaign – and that it will be an October Surprise! Oy vay!

>>If we thought the Swift Boat guys were bad,<<

Swift Boat guys spoke truthfully. ...we have something against ‘Truth’?

>>...just wait till Rove & Co. bring in the KKK, etc.,<<

KKK? I’ve no truck with them, and agree they should be censured strongly – as they’ve left their original charter and believe errantly and behave abominably; however, on the flip side,

have you acquainted yourself with Marxism and its diseased variants?

>>They'll stop at nothing.<<

Sounds more like an indictment of the Dem’crat Party

[Woody]

This is typical of someone like Scott McClellan who was pretty much fired from his job. He is bitter about it and has stated so. He felt betrayed. But the truth is ... he was doin a lousy job.

[jasd]

Re: Mike Allen and Scott McClellan

>>McClellan charges that Bush relied on “propaganda” to sell the war.<<

Like, Dubya needed to use “propaganda”! Congress demanded he come tah the Hill that they might get on record as supporting the war. They presented Dubya with a

Carte Blanche (Unrestricted power to act at one's own discretion; unconditional authority).

>>He says the White House press corps was too easy on the administration during the run-up to the war.<<

First, highly subjective. Second, yah think, mebbe, they’ve made up for that ‘oversight’ since?

>>He admits that some of his own assertions from the briefing room podium turned out to be “badly misguided.”<<

Sheesh! like, how many years ago was it that he misguided? and ne’er a peep until this major election cycle? c’mon, methinks that mischief is afoot.

>>The longtime Bush loyalist also suggests that two top aides held a secret West Wing meeting to get their story straight about the CIA leak case at a time when federal prosecutors were after them — and McClellan was continuing to defend them despite mounting evidence they had not given him all the facts.<<

Ain it sad how being asked to resign will turn a guy’s ethical underpinnings like, weird?

Must be talkin’ ‘bout Rove and Scooter.

Hadn’t they lawyered-up by then and wouldn’t their separate lawyers have advised them tah keep it zipped? Yet, they had no qualms about McClellan being privy to ‘conspiracy’? Sheesh, can we say, “Get real!”

Aren’t the ‘facts’ – it was Richard Armitage?

>>... “had at best misled” him about their role in the disclosure of former CIA operative Valerie Plame’s identity.<<

Ditto, above.

>>...expected him to take a few swipes at his former colleague in order to sell books...<< [ed.jasd]

Don’t that just beat all...!?

>>“spent most of the first week in a state of denial,”<<

What kind of assessment is that? Is McClellan saying that Dubya, et al had no knowledge of Katrina?

>>...the president comfortably observing the disaster during an Air Force One flyover.<<

“comfortably”? yah think, mebbe, the above is utilizing semantics? And That! from a former [loyal] news guy pontificating upon matters slightly above his pay grade! Reality check: would it have been better should Dubya have landed and created the usual hulla-bayou-baloo – when more immediate and important activities were in order. I say that indicates the good sense of a thinking POTUS. Sheesh!

>>Katrina and the botched federal response to it would largely come to define Bush’s second term,” he writes. “And the perception of this catastrophe...<<

“botched federal response”. Like, Kathleen Blanco and Ray Nagin hadn’t been more concerned with protecting Dem’crat politikal turf – than to ask for Federal Assistance? Gimme a break!

How effectively McMedia manipulates the attention span of those susceptible to ‘perceptions’!

>>...the failure to be open and forthright on Iraq and rushing to war with inadequate planning and preparation for its aftermath.”<<

Seems Dubya was “open and forthright” sufficiently to satisfy Congress at the time. Now, “inadequate” whatever..., hindsight’s kinda cool , as well quarterbacking from the bleachers, Ain it?

>>...so fundamentally needed to build and then sustain public support during a time of war.<<

Dubya’s albatross was and is the fourth estate. He would have been better-served to have closed McMedia down and thrown their editors in jail, a la Abe Lincoln. Instead,

he embedded the blokes. Yikes! sometimes, what one does tah be liked – can get one killed - or at least,

seriously mauled: witness Dubya.

[Bravus]

The truth is, he had faithfully lied for the White House for so long that he had zero credibility left - even the fawning and pathetic press just laughed in his face. So they needed to bring in a new face - from Faux News as it happened - that hadn't been tarnished by the lies.

[Dr. Shane]

Scott McClellan did a terrible job. Like too many in the Bush cabinet, Bush kept him around too long. Tony Snow did a much better job. He quit after being diagnosed with cancer. The fact that he was a speech writer for George Bush the elder probably had more to do with him becoming G.W.'s press secretary than his work at FOXNews did. Dana Perino is the current press secretary and I think is the best yet. Scott McClellan really did a horrible job! The radio talkshow hosts did a better job of defending the administration than he did.

I have been watching the news coverage on ABC and CNN and McClellan is really being taken to the cleaners. This book really does tell us more about him than it does about Bush. In the end I think it is McClellen who is going to be discredited, not Bush.

[Woody]

Quote:

he had zero credibility left

I agree that he has no credibility. Just toss his book in the trash for that is what it is.

[Dr. Shane]

Just a little side note about Tony Snow, he is now employed by CNN and has stated his brain cancer is in remission.

[Neil D]

McClellan says he believed in Bush as war started

1 hour ago

WASHINGTON (AP) &#8212; Former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan says he didn't object to the way the war in Iraq was sold to the American people at the time because he, like other Americans, gave the president the benefit of the doubt.

McClellan told NBC's "Today" show on Thursday that although he had worried about the rush to war, he felt affection for President Bush and trusted his foreign policy advisers.

McClellan says in his new memoir that he came to realize that the war was sold with propaganda that inflated the threat posed by Saddam Hussein. He says administration officials didn't deliberately lie &#8212; but they became wrapped up in trying to shape the story to their advantage, and ignored intelligence that didn't fit the picture.

Holy toledo....Where have we heard this before??? Oh yeah, the democratic party has been saying this for years...

As for him doing a "loosey job", kinda hard to keep juggling lies and keep some sort of credibility at the same time....

It seems to me that all the Bushies here don't want to admit that they were sold a bill of goods that was pure propoganda and they don't want to admit that they were lied to....Tough luck, guys.

[Dr. Shane]

The Left is loving this book so much McClellan might actually end up getting a job as a commentator for one of the mainstream networks. I heard it being reported this morning that McClellan wasn't included in the White House meetings to be able to know enough to be making the claims he does in the book. Those that have hated Bush all along are going to take this all in hook, line and sinker. I think those of us in the middle are going to be a little more skeptical of it.

[Neil D]

I think those of us in the middle are going to be a little more skeptical of it.

Shane, you forgot to add the words "in the middle and to the right".....

[Woody]

Neil. You made a typo. You were 'wrong'. It should read "IN the Right".

[Dr. Shane]

I think it is a given that those on the right are going to be skeptical. More stuff is being reported in mainstream sources like the AP that is bringing McClellan's knowledge into question. It seems he has written about a lot of stuff that he wasn't involved with and wouldn't have any first-hand knowledge of.

[Woody]

Sounds typical of the 'Left' ... talking about things they know nothing about. Hmmm... I find that the 'Left' is usually wrong and the Right is usually 'right'.

[lazarus]

Let the man speak for himself

It was the decision to go to war in Iraq that pushed Bush’s presidency off course. It was a fateful misstep based on a confluence of events (the shock of 9/11 and our surprisingly — and deceptively — quick initial military success in Afghanistan), human nature (ambition, certitude, and self-deceit), and a divinely inspired passion (President Bush’s deeply held belief that all people have a God-given right to live in freedom). For Bush, removing the “grave and gathering danger” that Iraq supposedly posed was primarily a means for achieving the far more grandiose objective of reshaping the Middle East as a region of peaceful democracies.

History appears poised to confirm what most Americans today have decided — that the decision to invade Iraq was a serious strategic blunder. 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. What I do know is that war should only be waged when necessary, and the Iraq war was not necessary.

Waging an unnecessary war is a grave mistake. But in reflecting on all that happened during the Bush administration, I’ve come to believe that an even more fundamental mistake was made — a decision to turn away from candor and honesty when those qualities were most needed.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24857858/page/2/

[Dr. Shane]

We are learning more and more that the book is more of a commentary on the Bush Administration than an insider's view.

[jasd]

>>Those that have hated Bush all along are going to take this all in hook, line and sinker.<<

I take exception, Shane. I'm a fisherman. I have never seen a hook sized to fit guppies.

(Neil D, being a closet conservative, is not in view here - only those lefty, lefty-loos - not of this list)

That said, McClellan admits that his editor told him to 'tweak' [soto voce] 'those parts...'

[lazarus]

We are learning more and more that the book is more of a commentary on the Bush Administration than an insider's view.

Aw come on! If Mc' was complementary folks would claim credible account of someone who was in Bush's inner circle.

Its not credible to suggest that Mc' was not an insider.