Prosecute the torture.

June 10, 2008

It's Good To Be A Republican These Days (Part II)

Scott McClellan has agreed to testify under oath to Conyers' committee.
President Bush's former spokesman, Scott McClellan, will testify before a House committee next week about whether Vice President Dick Cheney ordered him to make misleading public statements about the leaking of CIA agent Valerie Plame's identity.

McClellan will testify publicly and under oath before the House Judiciary Committee on June 20 about the White House's role in the leak and its response, his attorneys, Michael and Jane Tigar, said on Monday.

In his new book, "What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington's Culture of Deception," McClellan said he was misled by others, possibly including Cheney, about the role of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby in the leak. McClellan has said publicly that Bush and Cheney "directed me to go out there and exonerate Scooter Libby."
And according to Think Progress, the White House is worried:
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.
Then there's the Abramoff scandal. From The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, we learn that:
Chairman Waxman and Ranking Member Davis issued a proposed Committee report on White House contacts with Jack Abramoff that concludes that Mr. Abramoff had personal contact with President Bush, that high-level White House officials held Mr. Abramoff and his associates in high regard and solicited recommendations from them on policy matters, that Mr. Abramoff and his associates influenced some White House actions, and that Mr. Abramoff and his associates offered White House officials expensive tickets and meals.
And ABC is reporting:
The White House had stronger ties to disgraced superlobbyist Jack Abramoff than it has publicly admitted, according to a draft congressional report released Monday.

President Bush met Abramoff on at least four occasions the White House has yet to acknowledge, according to the draft report by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

And White House officials appeared as comfortable going to Abramoff and his lobbyists seeking tickets to sporting and entertainment events, as they did seeking input on personnel picks for plum jobs, the report found.

President Bush himself met Abramoff on at least six occasions, the report said, citing White House documents; the White House had previously acknowledged only two.
Of course.

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

John K. says: So how many times has Obama met Rezko. And how many of Rev. Wright's sermons has Obama listened to. You know what is cool about Obama is that after they pin some person with problems to him he always says, " This is not the person I knew." Not a good judge of character is he? LOL LOL Bring on McClellan. Who on the right thinks we are ducking this guy. Put him under oath. Speaking of under oath you ought to put Obama under oath also.

Anonymous said...

John K. also says: Yes it is good to be a Republican. We lowered your taxes, kept the country safe from attack and smashed Al Queda. Got 'em on the run. Just ask Brian Williams on NBC. And now we are purging our party of all the fake Republicans and sending them over to the Democrats. Thanks to your help Democrats.

Schmuck Shitrock said...

We...kept the country safe from attack

Ummm...John? Does 9/11 count? Remember who was president? Remember who ignored the warning "Al Qaeda determined to attack inside the US?" Remember who never held a terrorism meeting until 9/9? Remember who said, "Bin Laden can run but he can't hide?" Remember who let the Taliban come back? Remember who killed more than 4000 American kids?

(Hint to all the questions above: You want to have a beer with him, except he's not allowed to drink.)

Anonymous said...

John K. says: Yes I do remember who ignored Bin laden, Bill Clinton. He had numerous warnings in the 1990's to take some sort of action and failed. Now this Bush guy, he took the fight to the enemy and kicked butt. Is drinking that important to the left? Clinton broke his knee while drunk at the Australian golfer's house. We will ignore that.

Schmuck Shitrock said...

I'm afraid that's incorrect. President Clinton fired missles at Bin Laden several times, once barely missing him. OTOH, President Bush had Bin Laden cornered, but let him go so that he could launch his "Mission Accomplished" invasion of Iraq. Bin Laden's butt is quite unkicked, I'm afraid. In fact, Al Qaeda -- the REAL Al Qaeda I mean -- continues to plot against us in the mountains of Pakistan.

Is drinking important to the Left? You bet. I don't like to let a single week go by without having one! Try it. You might like it even better that whatever drug you currently prefer.

Anonymous said...

John K. says: That's it? Clinton fired missiles long after Bin laden was given warning and fled. That's the extent of Clinton's handling of terrorism? He let Saddam Hussein kill his own people by stealing their food in the food for oil program. And paid Palestinians $25,000 a person to blow themselves up along with some Jews. And Clinton ignored that. Like I said, you left wingers are not opposed to the war in Iraq. You just want credit for it.

Schmuck Shitrock said...

The point is that President Clinton went after Osama. President Bush, having been warned, did not. In fact, Bush let Bin Laden get away.

You have a point about Saddam and his evils, but here are evil dictators all over the world. Unfortunately, this administration's choice about which one to pursue was the choice that caused America the greatest possible damage. On top of that, their conduct of the war has been manifestly dismal.

Poor choices, poor tactics, deliberate neglect in planning, inappropriate use of resources, indifference to world opinion, corruption on a galactic scale, ...the Bush administration is demonstrably a complete disaster for which our grandchildren will pay. And Senator McCain promises to keep the disaster rolling along for 100, even 1000 years.