Scott McClellan on "Meet the Press"

Good post, Alma. If his book leaves us in position to have a better understanding of how this administration hijacked the country, that's really all that matters.

Go ahead and attack the messenger all you want. Knock yourselves out. But in evaluating his story I'll take into account that he had pretty good access.

 

But if he's pulling shit out of his ass and his editor is "reworking" the book, we aren't really learning anything.

 

That's true. There's absolutely no proof of that whatsoever, though.

 

"Nice job, Scott. Two thumbs up." - Robert McNamara.

 

Well, other than what people who were in the White House at the time are saying. They're no less believable than McClellan is at this point.

 

Equally as possible, those same people could be lying and McClellan could be telling the truth.

 

Someone should do a story on the Stockholm Syndrome that often afflicts underlings, who -- held hostage by their own political beliefs (or perhaps by their blind ambition) -- end up doing regrettable things. McClellan certainly fits the mold. As does Anita Hill, who continued to work for Clarence Thomas -- and even had him write a letter of rec for her, if memory serves -- even after he behaved, in her telling, inappropriately.

 

Agreed. But they aren't pimping a book.

 

So his "pimping" a book automatically makes him and his premise suspect? Bullshit. Given the history of lies and misdeeds from this White House, I'm more likely to believe him than them.

 

McClellan is far more believable than the handful remaining in the bunker.

 

So I guess Richard Armitage wasn't the leak after all...

 

Of course that isn't the point, but a nice smokescreen by Novak.