Clarke in '02: Bush Admin Began Counterterror Plan in Jan. '01 (Clarke Caught!Fox Exclusive!)

FoxNews ^ | 24 Mar 04 | Jim Angle

[xzins]

WASHINGTON

[xkaydet65]

Must be the twentieth time someone says this, but didn't these idiots ever hear of Lexus-Nexus and Google??The days of having to sift microfiche in the basement of the NYTimes are long over.And Bush made Clarke the head of Cyber Security?? If I were the Dems I'd point out the obvious problem with that selection.

Oh wait, to point out Clarke's unawareness of Lexus would point out that he's a liar. I guess it was easier to lie when the trails were paper. You had to leave home to find them.

[GailA]

No, it's not...the alphabet soups won't report it. It's not in their favor, it is in Dubya's.

Alternative news sources will have to do the reporting.

[JohnGalt]

I am not a strategist and don't have any suggestions outside I think they should have been more subtle in deconstructing Clarke; probably should have started a few weeks ago rather than the week he is testifying in regards to a national tragedy. It just looks partisan and crass to the unwashed middle who determine elections; these things have a way of snowballing.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

I think you are spending too much time on FR

Certainly, I think a fair case could be made that you are, at any rate.

You seem unhappy here, given the anti-FR sentiments espoused in your postings. An obvious remedy to said plaint does present itself.

[Belisaurius]

Third, partisans who still believe in the process are the only people that bother to watch network television and they like everything to be quaint Rs and Ds.

To which "process" do you refer to? You've been asked several times already, but I'll ask again. Clarke has made serious allegations. They have since been countered by tapes and letters. What would you have the administration do? Let the allegations stand as they were?

The only real question for Dick Clarke is: Was he lying then, or is he lying now?

[Wolfstar]

Typically, the art of subtlety would be to let that come out during Congressional testimony. Orchestrating this critique in the press the day he is suppose to testify makes it look like the President fears what Clarke has to say.

Horse puckey! This is no time for "the art of subtlety." For one thing, the media will not bother to report anything too subtle for their biased peabrains to pick up.

For another, a lie left on the table when it can be refuted is a lie given unnecessary credence. Have you ever heard the truism that the only thing necessary for evil to triumph is that good men do nothing?

The international and domestic Left is coming at this President and administration (and, by extension, all of us) with sledgehammers on as many fronts as they can open up. The last thing we should be doing is pulling our own punches in this very deadly struggle.

[GailA]

Make sure your local talk host get a copy of this. I've covered Nashville and Memphis, TN.

[xkaydet65]

Think you meant you're NOT a Kerrey fan...

Kerrey harkens back to a time when Democrats were patriots. How do you know a Patriot??? Most Americans were disappointed when we found no WMDs. Most Democrats were overjoyed!!! Kerrey wasn't one of them!

[omniscient]

... when your enemy is digging a hole, don't take away his shovel ...

I would love to hear more about the White House operation to smear Clarke. This should be good. There is no end to Democrat self-delusion.

[Republican Red]

Oooh, Ellen Ratner , on my list of most hated Fox News contributor, is spinning hard about the Clarke tapes but the audience is LAUGHING at her comments.

[slimer]

From what I can gather from the recent hearings the question is why Bush didn't start bombing Afghanistan right after he was sworn into office.

Remember when we launched the attack in Afghanistan? The naysayers were saying we were going to get bogged down in a quagmire and we would take a lot of casualties.

The reason that we were so successful in Afghanistan is precisely because President Bush took the time to plan the action and lay the ground work before launching the attack. The plan was greatly escalated after 9/11 but the overall strategy was being developed and things were being put into place well before 9/11.

This is the difference between lobbing cruise missles at empty tents and swating flies, which is what Clinton did, and had little to no effect at all.

[PA Engineer]

This will help you argue your case here:

Full of Liars

[William McKinley]

At this point, you are about the last person who should be telling people how to avoid damaging their own credibility.

Well, besides Richard A. Clarke, that is.

[FreedomPoster]

Hey, I'm serious. I'm someone who always put 2-3 copies of Ann Coulter's "Treason" on the top of the stacks of "Lying History" every time I went to Costco, which is generally weekly. I bet I did that for 2-3 months.

[Sacajaweau]

I'm pretty sure he's a-lying now...trying to stop the heart palpitations before his testimony.

[Wolfstar]

Daschle, the horse's arse, is an unprecedented abuse of an otherwise good senate seat!

[Qwinn]

ROTFL. Now the DU'ers are claiming that this article from Time Magazine "proves" that everything coming out today is BS.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,333835,00.html


The funny thing is, it was posted on FR yesterday as validating that Clarke was full of it! For example:

"Clarke told Time that the review moved "as fast as could be expected." And Administration officials insist that by the time the review was endorsed by the Bush principals on Sept. 4, it was more aggressive than anything contemplated the previous winter. The final plan, they say, was designed not to "roll back" al-Qaeda but to "eliminate" it."

The article -does- try to make it sound like a travesty that, before 9/11, his plan didn't get a hearing until April.... when he had just come into office three months earlier after having his entire transition repeatedly delayed over the Florida mess!!! And never mind that Clarke was utterly blown off by Clinton not for 4 months but for -2 years- since 1998, by his own words.

This is just too funny. Unfortunately, since they utterly control the media, their spin is likely what will get aired.

Qwinn

[Freedom2specul8]

Will do, and thanks!

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Ellen Ratner is defending him on the Linda Vester show on Fox. BAWAAAAWWWBBB###@@@@$$$

The audience is booing her!

[MEG33]

On Fox the author with bangs praised Clarke ,saying he had him fact check his book.When asked why Clarke's assessment of the Bush admin changed,he said possibly because Clarke thought we should have finished off Bin Ladin and did not consider Iraq part of the war on terror.

A man who worked with him said he knocked heads probably once too many times,skirted the rules and people started treating him like the boy who cried wolf.


Clarke should be talking what's bugging him,not changing what he previously saidIMHO