Montreal man linked to Clark controversy - Presidential candidate claims pressure

The Star ^ | 9/18/03

[AHerald]

Just came across an even more interesting quote from your man Clark when he was quesioned about this subject by Sean Hannity on H&C two weeks after the Meet the Press interview.

It's painfully clear from the transcript that Clark not only doesn't refute the claims about the White House pressuring others to make an Iraq 9/11 link, he reinforces the idea with a claim that he can't reveal his "sources."

From Wesley Clark and Terry McAuliffe -From the August 25, 2003 issue of The Weekly Standard

Referring to the Russert transcript ..., Hannity said of the call, "I think you owe it to the American people to tell us who."

Clark replied, "It came from many different sources, Sean."

HANNITY: "Who? Who?"

CLARK : "And I personally got a call from a fellow in Canada who is part of a Middle Eastern think tank who gets inside intelligence information. He called me on 9/11."

HANNITY: "That's not the answer. Who in the White House?"

CLARK: "I'm not going to go into those sources."

Clark had the opportunity to clarify the record and clearly state the he had no personal knowledge that the White House was trying to pressure others into making a bogus Iraq 9/11 link and he intentionally chose not to do so. Why?

Face it, GoOrdnance, Clark is a liar and a manipulator.

[Peach]

GREAT Catch! Clark would have certainly cleared up the matter when on Hannity. He was given every opportunity.

His letter to the NYT then says he has become "aware" that people think he has said the White House called him on 9/11 to pressure him. He said in his own letter that was not true.

Nailed. Double nailed.

[PhiKapMom]

That's really funny because I heard when originally asked he didn't have an answer -- now he has a hard commitment.

[alnick]

So please explain how it is possible that Clark "felt pressure from the White House."

It's the same phenomenon as FBI agents feeling pressure to lie about Iraq intelligence because the vice president spent some time in their building or CNN feeling pressured to self censor somehow by Fox News.

[PhiKapMom]

Great idea -- the more graphics/pictures on Clark the better because that is what sticks in people's minds since he is the Clinton candidate!

[alnick]

But again, Clark has claimed that the call came from a member of a mid-east think tank who was based in Canada.

Look, even the member of the mid-east think tank who was based in Canada said that Clark said that it was the White House that contacted him, as you can see from the quote below:

"I don't know why I would be confused with the White House. I don't even have white paint on my house," he added. "I saw those comments he made and I just chuckled."

[Peach]

Just saw a new article on FR an hour or so ago - now he says he'll bow out of a paid engagement and attend next week's debate.

[Peach]

I sent her the pictures; they will be very effective.

[PhiKapMom]

Thanks for the info! I might just watch that debate! Doubt if I can last through the whole debate without wearing out my mute button though!

[montag813]

You expect yourself to be taken seriously after statements like this?

Nice cute answer which ingores the rest of my comments to which you have no response.

The fact is that Clark was called "The Supreme Being" (not out of admiration) by his subordinates. He has thrown tantrums when other officers have not cleared a path for him at social events. There are specific officers who have been quoted by name on this. You know this. But you choose to ignore it, as you chose to totally ignore my revealing your arguments as specious and full of strawmen (for example, as Clark being worth of respect just from having served and being wounded, which is nonsense because Hitler himself served and was wounded in WWI).

[solo gringo]

Mr Clark said he did not have sex with that Begin-Sadat Centre.I was just lieing around and needed to look important

[okie01]

Clearly, Clark is Hillary's stalking horse. Most speculation (mine amongst it), has been that he will eventually end up as the Veep on a ticket headed by Hillary. Or, perhaps, Hillary will play Veep to his candidacy -- so that she might innoculate the voters against her scandals, in preparation for a serious run in 2008.

There is a "third way".

Concerning the voters that he intends to appeal to, Clark has done the "strong defense"/"moderate domestic" straddle. PLUS, he has specifically targeted "those silent voters, the ones that came out to vote for Ross Perot."(!!!)

Pregnant pause...

Could it be that, after exhuming the corpse of the Reform Party and its body of disaffected and alienated conservatives, Clark might bolt the primaries with an "independent, third party" campaign? And, in the process, reprise the Perot role in the 1992 Bush-Clinton-Perot election -- thereby electing yet another Clinton?

It worked once before...

And, more than anybody, Clark reminds me of Perot -- "the reluctant nutcase warrior from beyond the pale"...

[arasina]

The phraseology seems very, very careful. And after yesterday's announcement, we know that not only is Clark capable of sticking to careful phraseology, but he also has been studying at the feet of the masters of word splitting.

I call it DEMOSEMANTICS. Definition is whatever they want it to be. :o)

[Ann Archy]

YIKES!!! you might be onto something!!

[arasina]

Wesley has the hot-off-the-press Hillary rulebook for running/not running/running/not running/running for president.

And X42 is always happy to provide the spiral of sticky thread.

[hermes509]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/965068/posts

We've already covered this Weekly Standard article almost a month ago. It was useless then and its useless now. It doesn't hold up. If you like to use lies to smear the man then go ahead. George Will fell into this trap too in one of his Wash Post articles. He even claimed there wasn't a middle East think tank in Canada.

You can make anyone look bad by taking quotes out of context. I blame Hannity, after watching the show and seeing how he handled it, for dropping the ball when he had a chance to pin the general into a corner. And the Weekly Standard put Hannity's words out of context in that article too. These guys are just sloppy and take away our credibility.

[arasina]

We've already covered this Weekly Standard article almost a month ago.

hermes509
Since Aug 16, 2003

Then who's the WE('ve) that's already covered this about a month ago, Mr. Frenchname?

[wizardoz]

Geez, this Clark guy's just a nut.