Comments on: McClellan Walks Back Denial of NY Daily News Story

By: The William Holmes Blog » Leak Scandal Goes To The Top

The William Holmes Blog » Leak Scandal Goes To The Top — Sun, 06 Nov 2005 09:38:42 +0000

[...] What did the President know and when did he know it? Yesterday, the New York Daily News reported that, according to a “presidential counselor,” an “angry President Bush rebuked chief political guru Karl Rove two years ago for his role in the Valerie Plame affair.” According to the article, the run-in occurred “shortly after the Justice Department informed the White House in September 2003 that a criminal investigation had been launched.” If the report is true, it raises serious questions about the integrity of President Bush’s statements about the investigation. (At yesterday’s press conference, White House spokesman Scott McClellan refused to dispute the specifics of the article.) The report also suggests that testimony provided to the special prosecutor by Bush and Rove may have been inaccurate. [...]

By: Pablo in Mexico

Pablo in Mexico — Wed, 19 Oct 2005 23:39:20 +0000

Joe Wilson has the option of filing a civil suit against the shrub, and I hope like hell he does it. I knonw several hundred attorneys up there who would take the case on a contingency basis, nothing out of pocket for Wilson.

With a civil suit all the lies the shrub has told about this will be put in one place. His protection of Rove will be exposed. His knowledge of the Plame affair will be known.

Wilson could possibly strip him of every dime he has if he were to succeed in a case like this. Every dime the shrub has except for the couple billion in a bag that came out of Iraq that Dan Senior saw to it is well hidden.

By: afterthought

afterthought — Wed, 19 Oct 2005 22:03:50 +0000

Ironic indeed, dano347.
Hypocrisy is the right’s only value and
it creates big problems down the road.

By: dano347

dano347 — Wed, 19 Oct 2005 22:00:04 +0000

Is Bush going to get “Clintoned”? If Joe Wilson brings a civil suit against Bush for being DIRECTLY involved in traitorgate, and the Pres. is forced to testify UNDER OATH, to what he knows, won’t it be a fine irony; the bogus, politically-motivated precedent
which they used to impeach Clinton might also seal Bush’s fate!

By: Ryan Neat

Ryan Neat — Wed, 19 Oct 2005 20:07:09 +0000

Pablo,

That’s why he’s been desperate to avoid being booked. It will be the photograph used by every democrat in every election in the country as the symbol of republican greed and corruption!

By: progressive and proud

progressive and proud — Wed, 19 Oct 2005 19:56:12 +0000

Pablo, my man, AGREED.

By: Pablo in Mexico

Pablo in Mexico — Wed, 19 Oct 2005 19:52:20 +0000

I will be glad to see DeLays mug photo spread on every liberal and progressive blog.

Then the same photo can be used on anti-DeLay campaign literater.

When that photo goes up, it will be a great day in this nation.

When Bush is charged with lying to an investigator and named as an un-indicted co_conspirator, then we know the world really is round.

By: JimB

JimB — Wed, 19 Oct 2005 19:50:48 +0000

#9: Well, uhâ€¦ weâ€™re, umâ€¦ Ok, Iâ€™ve said before weâ€™re not going toâ€¦ uh, comment, uh hum, onâ€¦ what you know is, umâ€¦ an ongiong, uhâ€¦ criminal investigation except, ahh, to uhâ€¦

Think about the other individual that works in the White House and can’t make a coherent sentence. I think they truly want McClellan to be the “voice of the President.”

By: David

David — Wed, 19 Oct 2005 19:41:10 +0000

The transcript was hilarious. Man, these morning gaggles have been getting better and better.

#6- WTF?! I’m waiting for the mug shots. Couldn’t happen to a better person.

By: Mike

Mike — Wed, 19 Oct 2005 19:38:39 +0000

Translation:

“This is related to an ongoing investigation” = “GUILTY! GUILTY! GUILTY!”

By: Andrew G.

Andrew G. — Wed, 19 Oct 2005 19:25:10 +0000

Does the WH really think that this guy can convince anyone of anythng?

Well, uh… we’re, um… Ok, I’ve said before we’re not going to… uh, comment, uh hum, on… what you know is, um… an ongiong, uh… criminal investigation except, ahh, to uh… deny that uh, anyone in this, um… administration, did anything ever. And you know that because I said it before.

We need a photo montage of his bumbling and contraditictory utterances. He can make the point that the WH is full of babbling sycophants better than anyone else can.

By: mysticagent

mysticagent — Wed, 19 Oct 2005 19:22:40 +0000

#6 Still too early.

By: mysticagent

mysticagent — Wed, 19 Oct 2005 19:22:06 +0000

Is “I appreciate the question” a euphamism for, “That is not on the talking points list for this conference, so I won’t be answering”?

By: bill d

bill d — Wed, 19 Oct 2005 19:21:41 +0000

WHOA.
Arrest Warrant Issued For DeLay:
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2005/10/19/national/w112706D64.DTL

When is it considered too early to celebrate?

By: mysticagent

mysticagent — Wed, 19 Oct 2005 19:12:59 +0000

I don’t think its a perjury charge that they are worried about. McClellan is very choosy about what he actually will comment on, and he is avoiding anything that might be either incriminating or that might be proven in short order as a lie. The best way for pathalogical liers to not get caught in lies is to not say anything at all. Apparently the WH has no opinions on anything… just ‘talking points’.

By: "Big Dick" Cheney

"Big Dick" Cheney — Wed, 19 Oct 2005 19:10:15 +0000

The war was supposed to be over forgotten and under the rug by now. Jokes on me!
And, oh, go f*ck yourself.

By: bill d

bill d — Wed, 19 Oct 2005 19:07:28 +0000

So…if Bush did know about this two years ago is he tied in enough to actually be held accountable for anything? Unfortunately, he was not onder oath when Fits questioned him, so he can’t have purjured himself.

By: yankeluh

yankeluh — Wed, 19 Oct 2005 19:03:48 +0000

Why doesn’t McClellan just show up with duct tape across his mouth since he isn’t going to say anything. That will save everyone a lot of time and get the point across easier.