[GOPrincess]

I've been wondering too, why did Clarke think he could get away with such contradictory tales?

All I can think is he was counting on the mainstream media and the Dems to spin and cover for him as much as possible, and he hasn't been too disappointed thus far.

Given the seriousness of the conflicts, however, I don't know if he can avoid perjury problems long-term. The media will probably still spin that as the mean old Republicans "smearing" Clarke...

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

See Bill Press article and John Huang2's comments here:

Let us all now praise Richard Clarke (CLARKE KNEW! Not.)

Will need to go to the WorldNetDaily link for the complete comments from Bill Press.

________________________________________________________________________________

It starts this way:

________________________________________________________________________

Bring all your kids and pets inside. Close the drapes. Lock the doors. The Bush attack dogs are on the run again.

George Bush turns them loose every time someone dares stand up and tell the truth about the administration. He sicced them on financial adviser Larry Lindsay for telling the true cost of the war in Iraq; on government actuary Richard Foster for telling the true cost of the Medicare bill; and on CIA operative Valerie Plame, when her husband, Ambassador Joseph Wilson, told the truth about yellowcake from Niger.

Now the Bush attack dogs are out to destroy Bush's own former counterterrorism czar, Richard Clarke, who – in testimony before the 9-11 Commission and in his new book, "Against All Enemies" – dares tell the truth about Bush's failure to take terrorist threats seriously prior to Sept. 11.