Posted on 10/03/2006 8:43:27 AM PDT by MNJohnnie
So it is starting to look more and more like Bob Woodward, in his following of Kitty Kelly's footsteps, also decided to simply made up large portion of his current book.
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2006/10/1/151 303.shtml?s=lh
Andy Card Denies Woodward Claim
Ronald Kessler Monday, Oct. 2, 2006
Former White House Chief of Staff Andrew H. "Andy" Card Jr. has denied Bob Woodward's claim that he and first lady Laura Bush tried to get Donald Rumsfeld fired as defense secretary.
Card told NewsMax that the assertion in Woodward's book "State of Denial" that he thought Rumsfeld should have been the one to leave the administration instead of himself was also "not true." Card left as chief of staff in April.
According to an excerpt to be published in the Washington Post on Sunday, "State of Denial" says, "He [Card] was leaving. And the man most responsible for the postwar troubles, the one who should have gone, Rumsfeld, was staying."
But Card told NewsMax, "I never felt that someone should have left ‘instead' of me." Card said any implication that he was bitter about leaving was also "not true at all."
News accounts about the Woodward book led with Andy Card trying to oust Rumsfeld with the support of Laura Bush. But White House spokesman Tony Snow quoted Laura Bush's office as saying Woodward's claim relating to her was "flatly not true." In addition, Card told the Associated Press that Laura Bush never encouraged an effort to oust Rumsfeld.
"Mrs. Bush and I never discussed it," Card said.
Only two major news outlets ran Laura Bush's denial — the Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post.
In his book, Woodward wrote that Card urged Bush to replace Rumsfeld with former Secretary of State James Baker following the 2004 election. According to the book, Bush decided not to do so after Vice President Dick Cheney and chief political adviser Karl Rove convinced him it would be seen as an expression of doubt about the direction of the war and expose Bush to criticism.
Woodward claimed that Card, with the backing of first lady Laura Bush, tried a second time to persuade Bush to fire Rumsfeld around Thanksgiving 2005. But according to Woodward, the president again refused to replace him.
But according to Card, he never pushed for Rumsfeld's resignation. He said he kept a list of potential Cabinet and staff changes for Bush to consider after the 2004 election, as he did after other important dates.
"To say that it was a campaign or an orchestrated effort would be wrong,"' Card said. "But were there times that we talked about potential changes in the Cabinet? Yes. Did they center around Rumsfeld? Not necessarily. They were in a broader context."
Tony Snow, besieged by questions about it at his daily briefing, said the book was similar to others critical of the war effort and that much of it was less than meets the eye.
"In a lot of ways, the books are like cotton candy. They kind of melt on contact,'" he said.
In a story that ran July 31, Card told NewsMax that his own resignation arose after he had been thinking for some time that "the president needed something that would allow external observers to see that he had new momentum." Card said he already had a lot of changes in the works, but nobody would have seen them as change.
"So it was time for new personalities to help give definition to the word change," Card said. "I first went to the president more than a month and a half before I left. I said, ‘You know, I think it's probably time to think about it.'"
"Nah!" the president replied at Camp David. "I'm not going to do anything."
Card suggested he give it some thought.
"We talked a handful of other times about it, and finally it was the right time," Card said.
Politics aside, if it was an adult posing as a kid, wouldn't it still be a crime? Foley thought it was a kid.
Normally, I agree with you...I've pointed out that there are SO many other things to talk about, like the trouble with North Korea happening now and soon...not to mention other issues which are more directly relevant to our well being. HOWEVER...I defend Rush in engaging in today's colloquy re: Mark Foley, because the drive by media ARE trying to suppress our vote, and our spirits (and for ME, have succeeded). Rush does "buck ME up"...and I wouldn't be surprised if he does the same for others as well...sometime's it's necessary after listening to Laura and Novak, and O'Reilly and the WA Times...etc. etc. ad nauseum...
By the way, why do you discount the possible effect of the Washington Times' Human Resources guy's arrest (9/28/06 -- Internet solicitation of a minor) on the absurd editorial against Hastert?
Excuse my sentence construction........... I am way, way too tired.
Question... how would they know Foley was having non-sex during a vote? That could only come from...
Funny how Ross is all over Hastert now... just move along, nevermind no sources or proof... or even how you came to get this info.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/05/federal_officia.html
From information volunteered by at least two former Hatch staffers, and as reported in the Washington Post and other media, he documents in question were inadvertently disclosed and obtained off an unsecured shared network accessible to both Democrat and Republican Judiciary Committee staff. The disclosure of these and other documents was caused by the negligence of the Leahy technology staff. They inadvertently allowed access to files of both Republican and Democrat staff that had joined the Committee after the Jeffords switch. In short, there was no breaking and entering. Staffers were entitled to access their own desktop computers and the committee network on which the documents were inadvertently disclosed. The documents were disclosed through the window labeled "My Network Places."
As former White House counsel C. Boyden Gray concluded in the Wall Street Journal on December 23, 2003: "The Democrats designed a faulty "shared network" where files could be accessed freely by staffers of either party; if you had material you wanted kept completely confidential, you were advised to store it on your own hard drive. No one exceeds their authority when they log on and access files on their own computer's desktop. Democrats, in other words, were the ones who disclosed their own documents, which were in fact entirely unrestricted."
Were the Democrats aware of the glitch and did they take steps to repair it? Yes they were informed, and no they did not repair it.
If they had access to these servers .. all they would have to do is match up the timeline with what the page told them .. pull it up and leak it to a liberal
should I put my tin foil hat on now .. or wait?
What am I, chopped liver? LOL
I don't really know. You just asked my opinion and I said that I didn't think so. Who knows?!
That's it .. thanks for finding it
Yeah... sorta like Schumer's girl working for CREW (who had the IMs), who gave them to Ross?
Good point.
ok
Sorry...... I'm very tired as I said before.
And by the way .......... here's hoping that all these Sean Hannity 'G.M. Giveaway Cars' come with free Vanity plates.
;-)
lol...NO! You are Star Poster on Free Republic!! (smile)
I'll drop you a note later...promise....lol
In the future try listening to the show and finding out what is really being discussed rather then mindlessly posting faudlent hysteric attacks just because you don't like the host.
You are not 'leaking' stuff are you?
That about the servers happened back in 2004/03
Had to do with the Judges and a memo
My daughter has a friend whose husband was "caught" by the police pretending to be a 13 year old girl in a chat room...
When he went to meet "her", and the police were there...he said to the police..."I thought she was 18!"...
LOL...First of all, that is not true, since the "girl" said she was 13...second of all...he is MARRIED..so, saying he thought she was 18...was NOT a good excuse.
BTW...he has NOT be jailed...has NOT had his trial yet..and he has NOT been told to stay away from children, even his own!!!
What good does it do to catch them...if they aren't punished??? grrrrrrrrrr
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.