9/11 Commissioner Lehman Rips Clarke Over Book Deal

NewsMax.com ^ | 3/24/04 | Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff

[kattracks]

9/11 Commission member, former Navy Secretary John Lehman ripped ex-terrorism czar Richard Clarke Wednesday afternoon for cashing in on this week's public hearings into America's worst disaster by using the forum to peddle his book.

"When you and I first served together [in the Reagan administration] I had been a fan of yours," Lehman began when his turn to question Clarke came. "When you agreed to spend this much time with us, as you say, 15 hours, I was very hopeful."

Of Clarke's private testimony before the Commission, Lehman said, "I thought you let the chips fall where they may . . . Certainly the greater weight of [your criticism of the U.S. war on terrorism] fell during the Clinton years."

The 'Selling' of Clarke's Commission Appearance

Then the former Navy Secretary unloaded on Clarke with both barrels.

"But now we have the book," Lehman noted. "I've published books before and I must must say that I am green with envy at the promotion department of your publisher."

Continued Lehman: "I never got [Commission member] Jim Thompson to stand before 50 photographers reading your book. And I certainly never got '60 Minutes' to coordinate the showing of its interview with you with 15 network news broadcasts, the selling of the movie rights and your appearance here today."

Clarke has 'Credibility Problem'

Lehman said that when he started to read press accounts of Clarke's book, "I said to myself, this can't be the same Dick Clarke that testified before us, because all of the promotional material and all of the spin in the networks was that this is a roundly, devastating attack - this book - on President Bush.

"That's not what I heard in the [private Commission] interviews.

"And I hope you're going to tell me, as you apologize to all the families for all of us who were involved in national security, that this tremendous difference - and not just in nuance but in the stories you choose to tell - is really the result of your editors and your promoters rather than your studied judgment."

Lehman then blasted:

[Your book] is so different from the whole thrust of your testimony to us. And similarly, when you add to it, the inconsistencies between what your promoters are putting out and what you yourself said as late as [last] August 5, you've got a real credibility problem."

Lehman concluded:

"Because of my real, genuine, longtime admiration for you, I hope you'll resolve that credibility problem because I'd hate to see you become totally shoved to one side during the presidential campaign as an active partisan selling a book."

[RightOnTheLeftCoast]

Delicious.

That'll leave a mark!

[jwalsh07]

"did he just call Clarke a liar"?

Sure enough.

[KQQL]

This guy is a joke:

WASHINGTON (AP) - The government's former top counterterrorism adviser testified Wednesday that the Clinton administration had "no higher priority" than combatting terrorists while the Bush administration made it "an important issue but not an urgent issue."

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040324/D81GUQ7G0.html

[GretchenEE]

fyi - a really great hit by the former Navy Sec'y on Clarke.

[madison46]

Newsmax, bless them, doesn't reach the ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, Wash Post crowd. Wash Post treats clarke, not as a dishonest creatin he is, but someone who can cause a debate.

Just look at headline...Clinton took threat serious, Bush did not.

I wouldn't shed a tear if he, Clarke, took a bullet for this crap.

[Old Sarge]

Are they supposed to sit silently while a liar maligns them? Since when is that some kind of rule.

Since 1993, when William the Impeached came to power. Conservatives have no right to speak.

It's much the same as an abused spouse. He has to stand there and silently take it, while she is legally free to malign him with impunity, knowing full well that no judge in the state will side with him.

[Old Sarge]

Lehman's a CONSERVATIVE? Someone tell me that Leghman is NOT a consrvative. No Conservative is allowed to say such things in a public forum, it's against the laws of society.

[Old Sarge]

I see bumper stickers ALL OVER that post!!!

[Enduring Freedom]

Smash!

[SuziQ]

"Because of my real, genuine, longtime admiration for you, I hope you'll resolve that credibility problem because I'd hate to see you become totally shoved to one side during the presidential campaign as an active partisan selling a book."

It sure needed to be said!!

[XHogPilot]

Another HOMERUN! Kattracks, if you were playing major league baseball, I suspect you'd be a record holder by now.

[satchmodog9]

bttt

[cajungirl]

The same people think the Pentagon paper release was an act of patriotism. And the very same people take the word of a disgruntled, demoted bureaucrat over the President and the cabinet. These people will do anything to gain power. They truly are ppsychopathic to the core.

[StarFan]

Thanks for the actual transcript. Tried to summarize to my husband the 'velvet hammer' he used to discredit him today and now realize what a poor job I did. It was a sight to behold.

[JasonC]

Here is their "great counter" - give the republicans the vote of those who can read, and just try to win the votes of those who can't. They simply are saying, it was mean and partisan to assert that Clark is contradicting himself. Fact free, meta. Not a word about "no plan was left by the outgoing administration" or "Bush changed the objective to rapid elimination of AQ 5 months before 9-11" - facts nobody disputes. It is just mean to recall such facts because they make Clark look bad. That is the entire "counter". They think we can't fricking read.

[visitor]

did you notice that the whole room went silent for a period of time, I kept expecting someone to comment on Clarke's closing remark and I have not seen it mentioned on FoxNews. it's almost like Clarke said something he should not have said??? was he trying to justify the contents of his book?? ...rto

[madison10]

Clarke is certifiable and truth will prevail in all of this. Keep the faith.

I cannnot. I don't own a TV station to counter the liberal media machine...which is what it would take. What does one do with seething anger against the mainstream media?

[Graymatter]

Why can't we have hearings on Kerry's assassin buddies? And headlines of "KERRY KNEW" for a change?

[the Real fifi]

Work as hard as you can for Bush's reelection.

[js1138]

His accusation of "book motivations" must be seen in the light of Lehman's voluminous authorship

The problem for Clarke is not just the differences between the book and the 2002 press briefing.

It is between his sworn testimony today and his sworn testimony in previous hearings. At least two people have noted problems, and the night is young.