Source: Editor & Publisher (http://www.editorandpublisher.com)
Link: http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003675070&imw=Y
Title: "Update: Scott McClellan in Upcoming Book Ties Bush to CIA Leak Case—Dodd Calls for Probe", by E&P Staff
Date: November 20, 2007

Ouch. Former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan has apparently rolled on his bosses:

To no one's surprise in a world where top White House aides with any president eventually write a book about it, former Press Secretary Scott McClellan will be coming out with his volume in April. It's called "What Happened" and its publisher, Public Affairs, at its Web site now carries this brief excerpt -- which set off a media firestorm on Tuesday ....

.... "The most powerful leader in the world had called upon me to speak on his behalf and help restore credibility he lost amid the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. So I stood at the White house briefing room podium in front of the glare of the klieg lights for the better part of two weeks and publicly exonerated two of the senior-most aides in the White House: Karl Rove and Scooter Libby.

"There was one problem. It was not true.

"I had unknowingly passed along false information. And five of the highest ranking officials in the administration were involved in my doing so: Rove, Libby, the vice President, the President's chief of staff, and the president himself."

(Editor & Publisher (http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003675070&imw=Y))

The White House response is apparently that it isn't clear what McClellan means. In the meantime, the former Press Secretary declined interview requests today, and Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT), a presidential candidate, has called for Attorney General Mukasey to open an investigation into the "disturbing" allegation that Bush "knowingly instructed his chief spokesman to mislead the American people", and characterized the accusation as describing a "fundamental betrayal of the public trust".

Valerie Plame, of course, is "outraged", and called the revelation "important support for our civil suit against those who violated our national security and maliciously destroyed my career."

Ouch, indeed. I didn't see this one coming.

mmm
the mother of all "tell alls"
gotta be
the man was in a unique position.

Money is involved.

Isn't that the usual probative indicator?

Just sayin'.

The money certainly explains why the publisher chose this excerpt. McClellan? Maybe, but that just gets messy. What kind of people does the White House hire? If this is utterly false, will the White House pursue a complaint? If not, does that mean they're trying to hide something (e.g. a third version of truth) that possibly speaks even worse?

This could be, in political terms, a proper f@cking disaster.

Mukasey is in a tough spot right now. If I was him, yes, I would open the investigation. But the one thing it can't do is lead nowhere. McClellan can't get away with libel, and the administration can't get away with lying about something like this. If there is a middle ground, it will be interesting to see what they come up with.

(So we tanned his hide when he lied, Clyde, and that's him there on the shed.)