Truth vs. loyalty
If you live in the United States and are somewhat aware of political goings-on, you probably heard about the new book from former Bush administration White House press secretary, Scott McClellan, which offers up a scathing account of those in power during the run-up to the invasion of Iraq.
According to the site I link to above, this is what the book is all about (emphasis mine):
- McClellan charges that Bush relied on “propaganda” to sell the war.
- He says the White House press corps was too easy on the administration during the run-up to the war.
- He admits that some of his own assertions from the briefing room podium turned out to be “badly misguided.”
- The longtime Bush loyalist also suggests that two top aides held a secret West Wing meeting to get their story straight about the CIA leak case at a time when federal prosecutors were after them — and McClellan was continuing to defend them despite mounting evidence they had not given him all the facts.
- McClellan asserts that the aides — Karl Rove, the president’s senior adviser, and I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, the vice president’s chief of staff — “had at best misled” him about their role in the disclosure of former CIA operative Valerie Plame’s identity.
This is the tip of the iceberg. You can read more about the details of the book just about anywhere … this story is all over the internet. I don’t want to go into all that here.
What is rather interesting and very telling to watch, however, is the response from Bush-Cheney apologists. Predictably, they are absolutely fuming with anger and falling over themselves to comment on the story. But, the comments are essentially about McClellan’s disloyalty – labeling him somewhere on a scale from ‘disgruntled’ to ‘traitor’. This deserves a double-take … it’s not that what he is saying isn’t true … they are angry that he is revealing truths they don’t want revealed. Did everybody get that? McClellan is a traitor, not a liar. Let us not forget that as this unfolds.
Sure, McClellan should’ve come clean when all this was happening … no doubt … but, better late than never I suppose.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
As a Jersey boy, I seem to recall these sorts of allegations being circulated any time a mafioso got nailed in a RICO case.
Stool pigeons ain’t got no respect.
Of course, they were testifying in a court of law, not cashing in on their former misdeeds…
I have a hard time seeing this as cashing in. True, he should have come clean when it mattered, but considering the amount of cash available as a campaign strategist/spokesdude for the RNC or any high profile Republican candidate, positions McClellan would have definitely been in line for, I doubt the earnings from a non-fiction book are relatively going to make him much money. He isn’t doing enough to win favor with the lefties, and has completely burned every bridge once open to him on the right.
Is it possible he is simply trying to publicly disassociate himself from this administration … because he truly thinks it was wrong?
If he was looking for public dissociation/ sympathy, you’d expect him to do something like donate proceeds to veterans groups.
Like this?
Standard tactic – question the loyalty of the messenger and create enough noise around that that (they hope) the actual facts get drowned out.