[Howlin]

Why won't somebody come out and call Richard Clarke a liar?

[Pukin Dog]

Patience....

[Miss Marple]

I don't know. No one in Washington will ever use that term in public for anyone. It's like they are afraid to say it.

[dogbyte12]

Here is the problem. Richard Clarke covered his butt. Some of his allegations are really unprovable. The others he has witnesses.

But witnesses can only tell you so much. For example, on Sept 12, Clarke claims the president told him to look at links to Iraq. He said that it now appears, in front of witnesses. However, there is nothing to say that President Bush didn't pigeonhole Clarke and say "look at everything, including Iraq". Clarke's book can be both "true" and "false" in that it is misleading. If you have 10 hours of conversation, and you state one snippet, one rant, "off the cuff", it is "true" but not really true.

Clarke has put the W.H. in a bad spot. The only way they can effectively refute him, is to reveal classified info, executive conversations, etc.

[cyncooper]

Why won't somebody come out and call Richard Clarke a liar?

Wolfowitz came mighty close yesterday and referred to Clarke's "creative memory".