Wes Clark Claims Richard Clarke Allegations "not Political" (Today Show this-dog-won't-hunt alert)

[governsleastgovernsbest]

For once, let's start with the conclusion, then get to the facts. Conclusion: the allegations by Richard Clarke that the Bush administration was asleep at the switch when it came to fighting terror pre-9/11 will not have a significant negative impact on W's re-election prospects.

The Dems have given it their best shot, starting with last night's appearance by Richard Clarke on 60 Minutes, and continuing this morning with an appearance on the Today Show of Kerry surrogate Wesley Clark.

And the reliably liberal Norah O'Donnell, in her set-up piece before the interviews of Condi Rice and Wes Clark did her best to hide Richard Clarke's Clinton ties. She never mentioned that Clarke was in the Clinton administration. At very end of he piece she alluded to the fact that he was involved with anti-terror "for a decade" but didn't put that in the political context. You might say she mentioned the fact to build his credentials as an expert rather than to expose his political bias.

Here's the case against the political significance of Richard Clarke's statements: First, he presented them in blatantly political manner. The clip shown on Today this morning shows Clarke animatedly asserting that it is "outrageous" that W is running for re-election on the basis of strong leadership on national security, whereas he in fact did a poor job.

So Clarke himself immediately casts his allegations in a political context. Given that he was a long-time member of the Clinton admin who was a hold-over in the Bush administration, his bona fides as a neutral observer are very questionable.

Next, there is the Dems problem with people in glass houses not throwing stones. As Condi Rice pointed out in her interview with Matt Lauer, Richard Clarke was the anti-terror czar during the the first bombing of the WTC bombing, of the Khobar towers, the Cole, the US embassies in Africa and most of the advance planning for 9/11. Yet he and the Clinton administration did little or nothing to stop or react to any of them.

The deluded Wes Clark was interviewed by (the ditzy) Ann Curry. Clark tried to keep a straight face - and to give him credit, he certainly didn't blink ;-) - while claiming that Richard Clarke's charges were "not political."

But even the very liberal Curry clearly was not buying. She interrupted Clark on a number of occasions, repeating the charges that Condi had made to the effect that the Clinton administration shared the blame. Clark made a pitiful effort to change the subject, claiming that the Clinton admin's responsibility is "not the question."

Curry then asserted: "but you supported the war against Iraq."

A very agitated Clark shot back: "I never supported the war!" [Well, with the exception of that first statement I made on the first day of my presidential campaign when I said I did. But that was before Mary helped me.]

Curry: "But John Kerry supported the war. He voted for the resolution."

Clark: "He supported dealing with the problem, but not in the way the Bush administration did so."

[governsleastgovernsbest]

Again, my sense is that this political dog just won't hunt for the Dems. It's such an obvious set-up. Clarke's trying to sell a book, the Dems are trying to get off the issue of Kerry's weakness on defense, Clarke is an old Clinton admin hand, the Clinton admin's anti-terror record is pathetically weak.

When the Today Show hosts show signs of skepticism about an attack launched on W, you know the Dems are in trouble!

[governsleastgovernsbest]

Today Show ping.

[The Wizard]

one democrat supporting the lies of another democrat....perfect

[mewzilla]

Diogenesis, do you still have that list of terror attacks that took place on Toon's watch? Paging Richard Clarke...

[palmer]

from Feb 2001, http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20010213-1.html
We have no higher priority than the defense of our people against terrorist attack.

[MEG33]

Governs,Condi lowered the boom on Clarke on Fox and Ijaz Monsoor called Clarke a liar without using the word.He was furious at Clarke's "story".

Maybe this won't play except to distraught 911 families,needing someone to pin their loss on...and dems,of course.

[kdot]

When you move into a new house, be sure to rid it of vermin from the previous owner. Clark belonged to Clinton.

[governsleastgovernsbest]

Glad to hear it. As you probably noticed, Condi was scheduled to come on FNC before 7 AM, but when her appearance was postponed I switched to Today.

Ijaz is a riot. He kind of reminds me of Geraldo. He's always very excited about one thing or another, but it rarely seems that his breathless predictions come true. Still, he always comes across as very authoritative, which is helpful!

[governsleastgovernsbest]

When you move into a new house, be sure to rid it of vermin from the previous owner.

Paging Tom Delay?

[mewzilla]

Clarke's book is published by Free Press, which I believe is an imprint of Simon & Shyster. Figures, doesn't it?

[anniegetyourgun]

Agreed - they were probably hoping this story would last all week too. I'm wondering if the Kerry camp was hoping to pre-empt what will undoubtedly be the very ugly reality that the U.N. oil-for-food program will unveil the fact that France, Russia and the U.N. were taking bribes to keep Saddam in place. Makes Kerry's nonsense about needing to "internationalize" (read: get U.N. approval) look like the fools errand that it was. In fact, it makes Kerry and his leftist friends look like dupes.

[governsleastgovernsbest]

Excellent point. I swear that every time Kerry mentions the words "UN" or "internationalize" in a speech, he loses a few thousand voters.

[MEG33]

Clarke was a 30 year veteran but he has a book to sell and is friendly with Richard Baer,a Kerry supporter,who may be in a Kerry cabinet if the very worst possible outcome happens.

[ru4liberty]

Clark tried to keep a straight face - and to give him credit, he certainly didn't blink

Which is not unusual for a reptile.

Great write-up. Thanks.

[TomGuy]

There is a pattern. Every few months, a Clintonite comes out of the woodwork with accusations and allegations.

I would bet these are scheduled and planned by the Clinton machine. They serve several purposes:

They try to spin event.
They try to rewrite history.
They try to cast allegations against GWB administration.

Well, sorry, Bill, but your legacy has already been cast in stone. All the spin and attempts to rewrite history just won't work. Too much truth exists. Sorry Bill.

[ex-Texan]

Richard Clarke was and is a Clintonista. He made a sweetheart deal with CBS to give his 'exclusive interview' on 60 Minutes: Viacom also owns the his publisher. He plans to make a career of these fabricated charges. I choose to believe Lieberman over this dorky, over-inflated, Clintonite wing-nut wacko.

[anniebsings]

Yesterday on newsmax.com, it was reported that according to ABC White House correspondent, Terry Moran: one of Richard Clarke's closest friends and colleagues, Rand Beers, is one of the top foreign policy advisors to Sen.Kerry. So much for this being "not political"! Interesting also how Clarke didn't want to discuss Clinton passing a number of chances to get Bin Laden.

[maica]

Again, my sense is that this political dog just won't hunt for the Dems. It's such an obvious setup
***

I agree. When the dems put ol' straight talk Wesley up against Dr Rice, they know they have a loser.

Ann Compton reported live (from the White House) on the 7AM ABC radio news and she flubbed her lines. It is the first time I have ever heard such a thing. She was clearly rattled and most likely it was because what Dr Rice said was so devastating to Clarke's accusations.

[Brandon]

Clarke has ties to the Kerry campaign. Check it out:

Source url: http://www.powerlineblog.com/

Scroll down to the heading, "Richard Clarke, Fraud"

But is Clarke only a bitter ex-bureaucrat, or is there more to his attack on President Bush? Let's consider both Clarke's personal history and his current employment. Clarke now teaches at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government; here is his Kennedy School bio, which notes that the capstone of his career in the State Department was his service as Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs.

Another professor at the Kennedy School is Rand Beers, who is evidently an old friend and colleague of Clarke's, as Beers' Kennedy School bio says that "[d]uring most of his career he served in the State Department's Bureau of Politico-Military Affairs."

So Clarke and Beers, old friends and colleagues, have continued their association at the Kennedy School. Indeed, they even teach a course together. And, by the most astonishing coincidence, their course relates directly to the subject matter of Clarke's attack on the Bush administration: "Post-Cold War Security: Terrorism, Security, and Failed States" is the name of the course. Here is its syllabus:

Between them Rand Beers and Richard Clarke spent over 20 years in the White House on the National Security Council and over 60 years in national security departments and agencies. They helped to shape the transition from Cold War security issues to the challenges of terrorism, international crime, and failed states...Case studies will include Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, Iraq, Colombia, and Afghanistan. Challenges of counter-terrorism and homeland security will also be addressed.

Why do we find this particularly significant? Because Rand Beers' bio says:

He resigned [his State Department position] in March 2003 and retired in April. He began work on John Kerry's Presidential campaign in May 2003 as National Security/Homeland Security Issue Coordinator.

There you have it: Richard Clarke is a bitter, discredited bureaucrat who was an integral part of the Clinton administration's failed approach to terrorism, was demoted by President Bush, and is now an adjunct to John Kerry's presidential campaign.

Thanks to the indefatigable Dafydd ab Hugh for noting the connections between Clarke and Beers.

[MEG33]

Rand Beers,not Richard Baers.