CLARKE'S COLLAPSE

New York Post ^ | 3/25/04 | RICH LOWRY

[mwl1]

When Clarke and his defenders (like Chris Dodd this morning) assert that he was only peddling the Administration line in 2002, the response should be that if he disagreed with the policy or its implementation, anyone with integrity would have resigned and/or blown the whistle.

Shoot down his credibility further on this front - no integrity then, or no integrity now: which is it?

[petercooper]

Larry King lobbed Clarke softball questions last night and Chuck Hagel (R) France, was on, and he was not refuting a damn thing the lying sob said.

[OldFriend]

Thanks for that information. FREEPERS are making a difference.

Wish I had known that when he finished speaking, I would have been able to email or call the station and let them know we KNOW!

[OldFriend]

I agree on the Tenet matter. But Mineta was a new hire by Bush to prove he was going to be bi-partisan. Big mistake but that is in hindsight. Normally that department would not be critical to the survival of our nation.

[OldFriend]

That's the talking point. Clarke is a republican.

[Ben Hecks]

"I have a feeling that someone has bought off or intimidated Clarke. It is Scott Ritter all over again."

Ritter, Blix, Kay and now Clarke. All went over to the dark side. I'd like to know why.

[NYCVirago]

Richard A. Clarke's attacks on the Bush administration may help boost his book sales, but they are "not a full or fair assessment of the views I know he held," according to Arizona Republican Sen. Jon Kyl.

At least there's one Arizona Republican Senator who knows what's going on. The other one is too exhausted from playing footsie with Kerry to say anything.

[NYCVirago]

I agree. Clarke's testimony was certainly crafted to give the impression that he's a registered Republican. However, that's not what he said. What he said was that when he went to vote in the Virginia primary, he asked for a Republican ballot. As I heard that, it struck me as an odd wording, unnecessarily precise if all he wanted to do was say he was a Republican. At that moment, I could hear the sound of tap shoes on the head of a pin. Virginia does not require voters to declare party membership.

Interesting! So, he may very well have asked for a Republican ballot to vote for McCain. But, as you point out, that's not the same as being a registered Republican. And as we all know, tons of Democrats voted for McCain in states with open primaries.

[js1138]

Ritter, Blix, Kay and now Clarke. All went over to the dark side. I'd like to know why.

Ritter was paid by Saddam. The WMD thing is a mystery. Several hig ranking people knew the situation on the ground in Iraq, but Saddam wouldn't allow inspectors, even though he had rid himself of any easily found WMDs. My guess is the weapons were sold to Libya, Syria, or North Korea, and lots of people were getting rich from U.N. money.

Clarke has always been a democrat. His donations are public record.

[EDINVA]

in Virginia we don't register by party. On primary day any registered voter can go to the polls and ask for either a Republican or (if there's a D primary the same day) a Democrat ballot.

[NYCVirago]

in Virginia we don't register by party. On primary day any registered voter can go to the polls and ask for either a Republican or (if there's a D primary the same day) a Democrat ballot.

So, the media claiming that Clarke is a "registered Republican" is a lie, then. Am I understanding that correctly?

[linn37]

If he committed perjury when will he be charged?

[Enduring Freedom]

Clarke's contradictions are now a matter of public record.

Condi and Co. have the real facts, and should act quickly.

Even the commission members were stunned by his reversal on facts delivered in secret hearings before the same panel!

[NYCVirago]

If he committed perjury when will he be charged?

I think it will be right after Sidney Blumenthal is charged for lying to the Senate during impeachment -- which is to say, never.

[Yaelle]

People, what does any of this matter, if the average American is hearing in every other (nonconservative) medium that Clarke is great, brings some common sense into the hearings, a Republican that is not afraid to say the truth, and all the other stuff I have been hearing on TV and radio for the last 24?

[Enduring Freedom]

Here's an update on the Clarke perjury issue:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1105176/posts?page=10

[Lancey Howard]

BUMP

[Eroteme]

IMHO, Clarke and his political advisors accurately anticipated that the media would morph his asking "for a republican ballot" to mean he was a lifelong registered republican. His wording was not an extemporaneous response --it was contained in a prepared statement he had at the ready to pull out at an opportune time.

This gives us a great deal of insight into Mr. Clarke, and the advance planning that's gone into crafting the smallest details of his administration hit. This has McAuliffe written all over it.

[hobson]

O'Reilly had Wright Salisbury, a "peaceful" 9-11 family member, on his show last night who said Clarke admitted the comments from 2002 were a lie. It happened at the end of the segment and O'Reilly said something like "Well, he should have told us that from the beginning instead of us having to find it out". So much for the "no spin zone".

Grrrrrrrrrrrrr!

[piasa]

They used the same talking point with ambassador Wilson in the Niger thing... of course, he was definitely no Republican.

Capitol Hill Blue also used it in their reports sourced to the mythical T J Wilkinson- also an alleged part of the Niger thing. The claim was the reporter met him at an event held for a Republican politician out west, and that various unnamed officials verified he was a 'well-known' pubbie.