Think Progress

McClellan: ‘I Could Not Say Honestly Today That This Administration Does Not Believe In Torture’ »

In 2005, as Congress debated legislation to ban cruel and inhumane treatment of prisoners in U.S. custody, then-White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan repeatedly asserted that the Bush administration “does not condone torture” and would “never authorize the use of torture.”

But in a podcast interview with ABC News’s Jake Tapper yesterday, McClellan disavowed his previous defenses of the Bush administration’s interrogation policies. “I would have never made those comments from the podium had I known exactly what was happening,” said McClellan.

He then told Tapper that because of “waterboarding and some other harsh interrogation methods” used by the administration, he “could not say honestly today that this administration does not believe in torture”:

Now, looking back on that, I hold a very different view when I know today that were engaged in waterboarding and some other harsh interrogation methods and I would have never made those comments from the podium had I known exactly what was happening in some of those settings. Whether or not it was illegal is a matter for other people to address, but I could not say honestly today that this administration does not believe in torture, does not engage in torture.

Listen here:

Earlier this month, after he had himself waterboarded, journalist Christopher Hitchens wrote, “believe me, it’s torture.” “If waterboarding does not constitute torture, then there is no such thing as torture,” said Hitchens.

Apparently, Scott McClellan agrees.

Transcript: More »« Less

McClellan: Iraq’s Oil ‘Certainly Played Heavily’ In Cheney’s Desire To Launch War

Former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan appeared on CBC Radio One’s “The Current” this morning to discuss his recent memoir, in which, he asserts that the Bush administration waged a “propaganda” campaign in order to “sell the war” in Iraq to the public.

Inquiring about Vice President Dick Cheney’s motivations to go to war, host Jim Brown noted that Cheney “doesn’t strike me as someone who would be particularly motivated by idealistic visions.” McClellan agreed, adding that Iraq’s oil occupied Cheney’s mind more than anything else:

MCCLELLAN: Certainly you can’t discount the large oil reserves inside Iraq and how much that plays into our national security interests and I don’t think you can discount how much that plays into the vice president’s thinking.

BROWN: Or his portfolio for that matter.

MCCLELLAN: Or his portfolio for that matter, absolutely with that being a former chief executive officer for Halliburton and that certainly played heavily into his thinking more so I think than the idea of transforming the Middle East into a beacon of democracy.

Listen here:

McClellan later added that he believes that Bush never “would have made the decision to go in and invade Iraq” if “he could see what had happened.” But when asked if Cheney “would do it differently a second time around,” McClellan said flatly: “No.”

BROWN: Do you think Dick Cheney would do it differently a second time around?

MCCLELLAN: No. Well he might have done some military things differently but I think he was determined to see Saddam Hussein removed from power and would have continued to encourage that.

During a speech at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco last month, McClellan suggested some book titles for Cheney should he choose to write a memoir of his own after leaving office: “The Lies I Told,” or “I Upped Halliburton’s Income – So Up Yours.”

Digg It!

Lamar Smith Compares McClellan To Judas, Declares ‘It’s Hard To Take Mr. McClellan Too Seriously’

Last month, former White House press secretary Scott McClellan published a memoir asserting that the Bush administration waged a “propaganda” campaign used to “sell the war” in Iraq to the public. He also said that Karl Rove and Scooter Libby deliberately sent him to the press to lie about their connection to the leak of covert CIA agent Valerie Plame’s identity.

Today, McClellan is testifying before the House Judiciary Committee. In his opening statement, the committee’s ranking member Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), one of Bush’s most loyal defenders, derided the hearing as the committee’s “first book-of-the-month-club meeting,” and suggested the next book should one by right-winger Ann Coulter. Lamar also compared McClellan to Judas, insisting he was “selling out the president” for “a few pieces of silver”:

SMITH: Welcome to the House Judicary Committee’s first book-of-the-month-club meeting. I propose that next time we consider Ann Coulter’s book, “How To Talk To A Liberal If You Must.” It’s hard to take Mr. McClellan or this hearing too seriously. … Scott McClellan alone will have to wrestle with whether it was worth selling out the president and his friends for a few pieces of silver.

There’s no comparison between Coulter — who never served in the administration — and McClellan, who was a member of Bush’s inner circle for most of the past decade. Later in the hearing, Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) apologized to McClellan for the “aspersions as to your motives…that we heard a few minutes ago.” “Such character assassination has no business in this committee,” Nadler said.

Lamar’s attempts to dismiss McClellan’s testimony echoes the strategy on the right to write off McClellan’s complaints as unimportant and disloyal. McClellan’s former boss Ari Fleischer insisted that only “Washington and people who follow Washington” cared about McClellan’s allegation. “I’m bored,” Bill O’Reilly complained, while Former House Speaker declared, “I’m more concerned about American Idol than I am about Scott McClellan.” White House officials also blasted him as a “traitor” and a “Benedict.”

McClellan: White House Officials Blocked Intelligence Report, ‘Continue To Bury Their Heads In The Sand’

Yesterday, former press secretary Scott McClellan appeared on MSNBC’s Countdown to discuss last week’s Senate Intelligence Report, which found that the White House “built the public case for war against Iraq by exaggerating available intelligence and by ignoring disagreements among spy agencies about Iraq’s weapons programs and Saddam Hussein’s links to al Qaeda.” McClellan accused White House officials of having their “heads in the sand” and said they tried to block the committee’s investigation:

The White House never wanted to have the way the case was made, the way the intelligence was used to sell the war to the American people looked into by Congress. This was delayed for quite some time and Senator Rockefeller pushed this forward to get to the truth. And, the White House can continue to bury their heads in the sand but the reality is still the same.

I think the American people see it for exactly what it is. … We came to the very same conclusion that the intelligence was used in a way to make the threat sound more grave and urgent and serious than it was.

Watch it:

Before January 2007, the Senate Intelligence Committee was headed by Sen. Pat Roberts (R-KS), who used his position to delay, block, and stonewall the release of Phase II of the report:

“That [the Phase II report] is basically on the back burner.” [UPI, 3/10/05]

“I don’t think there should be any doubt that we have now heard it all regarding prewar intelligence. I think that it would be a monumental waste of time to replow this ground any further.” [U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, 3/31/05]

“To go though that exercise, it seems to me, in a post-election environment – we didn’t see how we could do that and achieve any possible progress. I think everybody pretty well gets it.” [U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, 3/31/05]

Current Chairman John Rockefeller (D-WV) said the committee faced “constant” pressure from Vice President Cheney to delay the report, and Roberts and his allies went “along with the administration.”

Duffy: ‘White House Lawyers Are Concerned’ McClellan’s Book Will Reignite ‘The Valerie Plame Business’

In his explosive new memoir, former White House press secretary Scott McClellan claims that Karl Rove, Scooter Libby, “and possibly Vice President Cheney” encouraged him to “repeat a lie” to the American people about the administration’s role in the leaking of Valerie Plame’s identity. This assertion, along with others, has led members of Congress, like House Oversight Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA), to again ask questions about the CIA leak scandal.

On NBC’s The Chris Matthews Show today, Time magazine assistant managing editor Michael Duffy said that the renewed attention to the scandal is causing White House lawyers to be “very concerned”:

DUFFY: White House lawyers are concerned, very concerned, now that Scott McClellan’s book has led Henry Waxman and John Conyers to take another look at the Valerie Plame business. There may be hearings. Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald may be called. Just another way in which a Democratic Congress might make a difference during the fall.

Watch it:

Last week, Waxman sent a letter to Attorney General Michael Mukasey, requesting that the Justice Department turn over FBI interviews of President Bush and Cheney that were conducted during the CIA leak scandal investigation. In the letter, Waxman cited “new revelations” from McClellan’s book, including the claim that “[t]he President and Vice President directed me to go out there and exonerate Scooter Libby.”

Additionally, White House lawyers are likely “concerned” that CIA leak special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald indicated this week that he would be willing to testify before Congress about alleged efforts to push him off of politically sensitive cases like the leak scandal.

As Duffy said, this “could make things rough for everyone who was affiliated with the Plame affair.”

McClellan: Rove Is ‘Pretty Disingenuous’ When He Talks About CIA Leak, He Should Have Been Fired

In his explosive new memoir, former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan claims that on Sept. 27, 2003 he asked Karl Rove “an unambiguous, unqualified catch-all question” about whether he was involved in “any way” with the leaking of CIA agent Valerie Plame’s identity. “Karl replied categorically, ‘No. Look, I didn’t even know about his wife,’” writes McClellan.

But on Fox News this week, Rove disputed McClellan’s description of their conversation, claiming that “Scott’s questions to me were: did I leak Valerie Plame’s name, and the answer is no.”

On NBC’s Meet The Press today, host Tim Russert asked McClellan about the discrepancy between his and Rove’s stories, pointing out that “one of you is not telling the truth.” Rove’s story is “pretty disingenuous,” replied McClellan. McClellan then added that he said the same thing under oath to a grand jury:

MCCLELLAN: But, let me mention this, that question, when I said, “were you involved in this in any way” and he categorically said, “no.” That is absolutely true. It is what I said under oath to the grand jury. It is what I told investigators. And, secondly, that is the same question I asked Scooter Libby. The very same question I asked Scooter Libby.

Watch it:

As McClellan points out, Rove was in fact involved in the outing of Valerie Plame, speaking about her to two reporters, including Robert Novak, whose column eventually outed her.

Later in the interview, Russert asked about whether President Bush should have fired Rove after his involvement was revealed. Recalling his own statement on behalf of the administration that “If anyone in this administration was involved in it, they would no longer be in this administration,” McClellan said, “I think the president should have stood by the word that we said”:

RUSSERT: But you believe Rove should have left?

MCCLELLAN: I think the president should have stood by the word and that meant Karl should have left.

As McClellan notes, “the bar was moved” by President Bush when it was revealed publicly that his top adviser was involved in exposing an undercover CIA agent. “He said we were going to set the highest of standards, we didn’t live up to that,” said McClellan.