Welcome to The Conservative Cave©!Join in the discussion! Click HERE to register.
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
SoDesuKa (1000+ posts) Sat May-31-08 03:31 AMOriginal messageMcClellan Didn't Write the Book For no other reason than it seems unlikely that such an unreflective guy could write some of the passages quoted from the McClellan book, I began speculating whether this is an RNC Trojan horse. I began to suspect that McClellan is getting too much free air time for this to be entirely on the level. For instance, Russert is giving him the whole hour this Sunday. If the book were as damaging as we are led to believe, would General Electric give McClellan a whole hour?Here's the part I definitely don't believe: McClellan's assertion the Bush was led astray by ambitious underlings. McClellan told Keith Olbermann that he believes Bush is genuinely committed to democracy and freedom. In McClellan's narrative, Bush is a Shakespearean king, like Julius Caesar, full of noble intentions but surrounded by lean and hungry men. I doubt very much that this is the truth. If McClellan is lying a little bit, maybe he's lying a lot. It's a possibility. Do the Republicans have a motive to bail out on the Bush administration now? Indeed they do. They'd very much like to dissociate the party from George Bush, and create a narrative that allows them to say that was then and this is now.In short, beware of a Greek bearing gifts. I don't trust Scott McClellan, especially when he brings something sweet and good-tasting.
Nostradammit (1000+ posts) Sat May-31-08 03:37 AMResponse to Original message1. Does the word "impordent" come up a lot in the book? Cause if it does, that's our Scotty.
dragndust (944 posts) Sat May-31-08 04:39 AMResponse to Reply #112. Maybe not That's Laura's favorite word also.
Disturbed (1000+ posts) Sat May-31-08 03:40 AMResponse to Original message2. Busholini is a Silver Spoon Sociopathic Simpleton & anAsshole. Scott M. said that he "still likes & admires him". That should be a clue.Dems better fight like never before to stop McLame from taking the throne.
magellan (1000+ posts) Sat May-31-08 03:46 AMResponse to Original message3. Thank you for this thoughtful postI have serious misgivings as well. The whole thing stinks to high heaven -- the timing, the fact the WH had the book a month ago, the startling lack of the usual apoplexy and vigorous denials of the accusations, except of course from the media....I don't know what they're up to, but Scotty's transformation isn't convincing.
addreamgirl (105 posts) Sat May-31-08 03:47 AMResponse to Original message4. Hmmm... I never thought of that, but it totally makes sense. Yep... with that crowd, anything is possible.
addreamgirl (105 posts) Sat May-31-08 03:49 AMResponse to Original message5. And Olbermann gave him the entire hour on his show, as well. nt
magellan (1000+ posts) Sat May-31-08 03:54 AMResponse to Reply #56. And was too trusting of him IMOI like KO, but I watched that entire interview in a daze of disappointment. Too quick to accept Scotty's explanations no matter how lame, or how obviously evasive he was.
chknltl (1000+ posts) Sat May-31-08 03:57 AMResponse to Original message7. Something does indeed smell fishy.This book's timing for one.... I expected to see the rats abandoning the sinking ship but this particular rat had left long ago... why did he jump out from the rock he crawled under AT THIS MOMENT?If he thinks to follow David Brock's footsteps, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Brock he needs to do better. I suspect that he is holding back and I further suspect that his motives may be a bit more than what they seem.
Demobrat (1000+ posts) Sat May-31-08 04:04 AMResponse to Original message8. I know. My skin crawled when he said to KO that Bush was committedto the idea of bringing democracy to the mideast - or some shit like that. That's when I knew he was a phony. If he can still spout that bull ...something's rotten in Denmark.
Fridays Child (1000+ posts) Sat May-31-08 04:17 AMResponse to Original message9. If you consider McClellan's facial expressions, body language, word choices......voice modulation, etc., both then and now, it's obvious that he has yet to stop dissembling. He possesses the demeanor of a desperate little boy who knows he's lying badly.
curious one (113 posts) Sat May-31-08 04:18 AMResponse to Original message10. Do not agree with you. With a good editor, right criticism, and direction, anyone can publish. Can you name anyone that challenged him on facts? Has anyone said that he lied?
chill_wind (1000+ posts) Sat May-31-08 04:21 AMResponse to Original message11. What I found very telling was John Dean's dry, reserved reaction after the K.O interview. What he called it as very possibly being:"Limited Hangout". Quote(wikipedia) A limited hangout is a form of deception, misdirection, or coverup often associated with intelligence agencies involving a release or "mea culpa" type of confession of only part of a set of previously hidden sensitive information, that establishes credibility for the one releasing the information who by the very act of confession appears to be "coming clean" and acting with integrity; but in actuality by withholding key facts is protecting a deeper crime and those who could be exposed if the whole truth came out. In effect, if an array of offenses or misdeeds is suspected, this confession admits to a lesser offense while covering up the greater ones.A limited hangout typically is a response to lower the pressure felt from inquisitive investigators pursuing clues that threaten to expose everything, and the disclosure is often combined with red herrings or propaganda elements that lead to false trails, distractions, or ideological disinformation; thus allowing covert or criminal elements to continue in their improper activities.Victor Marchetti wrote: "A 'limited hangout' is spy jargon for a favorite and frequently used gimmick of the clandestine professionals. When their veil of secrecy is shredded and they can no longer rely on a phony cover story to misinform the public, they resort to admitting - sometimes even volunteering - some of the truth while still managing to withhold the key and damaging facts in the case. The public, however, is usually so intrigued by the new information that it never thinks to pursue the matter further."<1>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_hangout I'd trust his assessment.
(wikipedia) A limited hangout is a form of deception, misdirection, or coverup often associated with intelligence agencies involving a release or "mea culpa" type of confession of only part of a set of previously hidden sensitive information, that establishes credibility for the one releasing the information who by the very act of confession appears to be "coming clean" and acting with integrity; but in actuality by withholding key facts is protecting a deeper crime and those who could be exposed if the whole truth came out. In effect, if an array of offenses or misdeeds is suspected, this confession admits to a lesser offense while covering up the greater ones.A limited hangout typically is a response to lower the pressure felt from inquisitive investigators pursuing clues that threaten to expose everything, and the disclosure is often combined with red herrings or propaganda elements that lead to false trails, distractions, or ideological disinformation; thus allowing covert or criminal elements to continue in their improper activities.Victor Marchetti wrote: "A 'limited hangout' is spy jargon for a favorite and frequently used gimmick of the clandestine professionals. When their veil of secrecy is shredded and they can no longer rely on a phony cover story to misinform the public, they resort to admitting - sometimes even volunteering - some of the truth while still managing to withhold the key and damaging facts in the case. The public, however, is usually so intrigued by the new information that it never thinks to pursue the matter further."<1>
habitual (1000+ posts) Sat May-31-08 05:07 AMResponse to Reply #1113. totally agree... he is totally bullshitting and trying to make it Edited on Sat May-31-08 05:08 AM by habitualseem like * did this for some moral reason. * was just following those strong convictions of bringing peace to the middle east...HAHAHA, when i watched the interview i laughed, and i certainly didn't buy it.
Disturbed (1000+ posts) Sat May-31-08 05:57 AMResponse to Reply #1314. Remember the ex CIA Agent who was all over on TV?He was doing exactly that. Talking about Water Boarding not being a good thing but excusing it at the same time.
creeksneakers2 (1000+ posts) Sat May-31-08 06:24 AMResponse to Original message15. McClellan is only confessing part of the storyHis confession helps but its a long way from complete. McClellan needs to give more specific examples. The White House denies that they ever tried to confuse the public about Iraq's involvement in 9/11. Scott would know if there was an overt White House strategy to manipulate the public with sentences referring to both 9/11 and Iraq.The next cabal member who wants to cash in with a book deal will have to reveal more than McClellan has. Eventually, the truth will come out.
I figure soon the McClellen book will be a "distraction by the GOP to separate McCain from Boooosh by making the soon-to-be Ex-pretzledent solely responsible for all the heinous acts of his misadministration giving Gramps McSame all the room he needs to distance himself from from Ein ChimpenFührer , So they can take the election close enough to steal it. If that fails there will be a False Flag Terra attack to scare the sheeple in line so the Bush Crime Family can kill democracy once and for all when he takes over via Marshall Law (or is that Marital Law, I forget)"Sometimes I think I spend too much time observing DU -- Soon I will be fluent in Barking Moonbat -- Rosetta Stone Language program be damned..
Heh -- Quoting myself on this earlier thread.. (link in "Quote from:" line)Do I win anything ? Beer ? Cars ? Women ? Bueller.....Bueller.....Bueller.....
