NEW YORK, May 29, 2008
McClellan: I'm "Intrigued" By Obama
Ex-WH Press Secretary Tells CBS News Obama's Message Is Like Bush's In 2000
-
Play CBS Video
Video
Eye To Eye: McClellan
Former White House press secretary Scott McClellan speaks to Katie Couric about his explosive new book.
-
Video
McClellan On The Defensive
After the release of his inflammatory book "What Happened," former White House press secretary Scott McClellan talks with Katie Couric about his allegations against the Bush administration.
-
Photo
Former White House press secretary Scott McClellan talks to CBS News anchor Katie Couric Thursday, May 29, 2008 (CBS)
-
Interactive
Bush Presidency
The president's agenda, plus facts, figures, major events and key personalities.
Couric: Do you support John McCain?
McClellan: I haven't made a decision yet. I have a lot of respect and admiration for Sen. McCain. He is certainly someone who has governed from the center, and that's where I come from; I am pretty much a centrist who believes in working together to solve problems and get things done and putting the country ahead of partisan politics. I also am intrigued by Sen. Obama's message (smiles). It's a message that is very similar to the one Gov. Bush ran on in 2000, and won on, promising to bring bi-partisanship and honesty and integrity to Washington.
Couric: So you could see yourself actually voting for Barack Obama?
McClellan: I just said I haven't made a decision, but I do think, you know, McCain talked about ending the permanent campaign recently, Sen. Obama talks about changing the way Washington works. They better have a specific plan for doing that if they're gonna actually be the president of the United States, because it is difficult to do.
Couric: While you were press secretary, you were famous for denying access to reporters who asked tough questions. And now you're criticizing the press for not being tough enough. So isn't that the height of hypocrisy.
McClellan: Well in the buildup to the war, and … in the national press corps as a whole, there could have been more done to ask the tough questions. What happened, this is again, how the press becomes complicit enablers in this permanent campaign culture by focusing on the march to war rather than the necessity of war, that's where the emphasis and focus was and I think the emphasis and focus should have been more on finding out the truth. And, you know, I talk a lot about that in the book.
Katie Couric: Weren't you the ultimate complicit enabler, though? I asked a tough question before the Iraq War and you personally called an executive at NBC News and you threatened to deny access to us.
McClellan: I did?
Couric: Yes, you did, once the war began.
McClellan: Me personally? I don't, I don't remember that.
Couric: But did you strong-arm people into not questioning the administration?
McClellan: My style usually wasn't that way.
Couric: Well, it was you who made the call.
McClellan: I just, I just don't remember that. That may be but I certainly don't remember that incident. In terms of my style of working with reporters, it was usually straightforward when we were dealing with each other; I think I had that reputation with White House reporters. I just don't recall that specific incident.
Couric: Scott, the New York Times editorial page today said your book belongs in the genre of "I knew it was a terrible mistake, but I didn't mention it until I got a book contract." Why didn't you come forward with these criticisms earlier?
McClellan: Well, first of all, I think when you're inside the White House bubble, some of the larger truths can sometimes be obscured. You are working for someone that you have a lot of affection for, you're working 24/7, and sometimes it's hard to step back from what's going on and reflect upon it.
Couric: Do you feel any sense of guilt that the Iraq war, which you helped sell to the American people, has resulted in the loss of life for thousands of American soldiers?
McClellan: Well, I … do want to make sure that we learn from what happened and that we don't repeat the mistake of rushing into war again, unprepared. I do believe now, looking back and reflecting and knowing what I know now … a lot of which we didn't know at the time, that this was a war of choice. The intelligence was what it was but we took that intelligence, and then portrayed is it. And packaged it in a way to make it sound more grave and more urgent and more ominous than it was.
Couric: While you were press secretary, you were famous for denying access to reporters who asked tough questions. And now you're criticizing the press for not being tough enough. So isn't that the height of hypocrisy?
McClellan: In the build-up to the war. And it's the national press corps as a whole, that there could have been more done to ask the tough questions. What happened is, again, how the press becomes complicit enablers in this permanent campaign culture by focusing on the march to war rather than the necessity to war. That's where the emphasis and focus was when I think the emphasis and focus should have been more on finding out the truth.
Couric: Did you ever challenge the message you were being instructed to deliver or did you simply swallow it whole?
McClellan: Katrina is another example where I talk about how I advocated the president not do the fly-over which became - the policy was the more problematic issue there - but I thought it made the president look too detached from what was happening on the ground when people were still being rescued off of rooftops.
Couric: And yet the response was appropriate.
McClellan: There were times I would bring things up, but in the end, when the decision was made, my job was to go out there and advocate for the president, someone I still have great personal affection for.
Couric: In the run-up to the Iraq war, as you know, the administration linked Iraq to 9/11, to the point where the majority of the American people believed there was, in fact, a connection, even though none actually existed. Did the White House intentionally promote the notion of this connection in order to bolster support for the war?
McClellan: I don't think so. I think there was an impression left because of the connections we were making to al Qaeda in terms of Iraq, that there are contacts there. The vice president as he tended to do, got a little more out front than others …
Couric: He did make that suggestion.
McClellan: Yes, he did, but the president always avoided that, and I believe my predecessor, as well as … me, always avoided making that connection as well.
Couric: Why did the vice president do so?
McClellan: You know, I don't know. He is ... someone who … sometimes does things his own way, and i think that this president probably too often has shown him too much …
Couric: On your last day the president said this about you, let's take a listen.
(From video of President Bush speaking): One of these days he and I are going to be rocking in chairs in Texas talking about the good old days.
Couric: Can you envision that ever happening now?
McClellan: I don't want plan on it at this point.
Couric: Do you feel as if you're biting the hand that fed you? Do you feel any sense of disloyalty writing this?
McClellan: I don't look at it that way. There's a loyalty much higher than my loyalty to my past public service and that's a loyalty to understand the truth and the loyalty to the way I was raised, the values I was raised upon. I was raised in a political family that believed very deeply in public service and the importance of speaking up and making a positive difference. Hopefully I've done that with this book
Couric: Scott McClellan. Scott, thanks very much.
McClellan: Thanks, Katie.
© MMVIII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Video and Galleries from CBS Evening News
-
Video
Robert McNamara's Life
-
Video
Lucky Fans Win Jackson Tickets
-
Video
Serial Killer Hunt Continues
- Latest in CBS Evening News
- How the Famous and Flawed Captivate Us
- Michael Jackson's Costly Memorial
- Jackson Probe Hones In on Doctors, Drugs
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- next
See all 185 Comments"FLIP FLOP"
Totally uncredible, and not trustworthy- WHY?
First he said : " This is true "
Then he said "I didn''t mean it," Then he said:
" They made me said it" Geesh. what a joke.
1. Is Iran stronger or weaker since Bush%u2019s invasions of Iraq?
2. Has Osama bin Laden been killed or captured since Bush%u2019s invasion of Iraq?
3. Are we paying more for gas now or before Bush%u2019s invasion of Iraq?
4. Is our economy better of now or before Bush%u2019s invasion of Iraq?
5. Is the White Houses creditability better now or before Bush%u2019s invasion of Iraq?
6. Is the budget deficit higher now or before Bush%u2019s invasion of Iraq?
7. Is the Middle East more peaceful now or before Bush%u2019s invasion of Iraq?
8. Do we have more American Solders dead or before Bush%u2019s invasion of Iraq?
This WAR has cost us so much; it is unbelievable that damage that Bush administration has done to this nation. The saddest thing about this WAR most of the American cannot comprehend what has happen during the last seven years of this administration. Further, McCain wants to go down the same road! Go figure!
"FLIP FLOP"
Totally uncredible, and not trustworthy- WHY?
First he said : " This is true "
Then he said "I didn''t mean it," Then he said:
" They made me say it" Geesh. what a joke.
HE DOESN''''T EVEN KNOW " WHAT HAPPENED" LOL
HEY SAMSHW- WHEN YOU COME UP WITH A PERFECT PRESIDENT, LET US ALL KNOW. IN THE MEANWHILE - DO YOU FEEL SAFER NOW THAN YOU DID IMMEDIATELY AFTER 9/11?
I DO.
1. Is Iran stronger or weaker since Bush%u2019s invasions of Iraq?
2. Has Osama bin Laden been killed or captured since Bush%u2019s invasion of Iraq?
3. Are we paying more for gas now or before Bush%u2019s invasion of Iraq?
4. Is our economy better of now or before Bush%u2019s invasion of Iraq?
5. Is the White Houses creditability better now or before Bush%u2019s invasion of Iraq?
6. Is the budget deficit higher now or before Bush%u2019s invasion of Iraq?
7. Is the Middle East more peaceful now or before Bush%u2019s invasion of Iraq?
8. Do we have more American Solders dead or before Bush%u2019s invasion of Iraq?
This WAR has cost us so much; it is unbelievable that damage that Bush administration has done to this nation. The saddest thing about this WAR most of the American cannot comprehend what has happen during the last seven years of this administration. Further, McCain wants to go down the same road! Go figure!
The deal involves a cast of influential characters, including the king of Jordan%u2019s brother-in-law, who is suing Harry Sargeant III, a top Florida-based fundraiser for Sen. John McCain%u2019s presidential bid.
Al-Saleh alleges in the lawsuit that after he arranged the deal, he was cut out in a scheme meant to defraud him. He claims that he and Sargeant and the third partner, Mustafa Abu-Naba%u2019a, a Jordanian businessman, had invested in IOTC Jordan in 2004. But, he says, Sargeant and Abu-Naba%u2019a committed fraud by forming another company called IOTC USA in Florida without informing him and by channeling the Pentagon contracts through that firm. Al-Saleh is suing Sargeant, Abu Naba%u2019a and the company for $13 million as his share of the profit from the 2005 contract, plus an unspecified amount of profit from the 2007 contract.
I DO.
The president was leaving an event in North Carolina, McClellan recalled, and as they walked to Air Force One a reporter yelled out a question: Had the president, who had repeatedly condemned the selective release of secret intelligence information, enabled Scooter Libby to leak classified information to The New York Times to bolster the administration''s arguments for war?
McClellan took the question to the president, telling Bush: "He''s saying you yourself were the one that authorized the leaking of this information."
"And he said, ''Yeah, I did.'' And I was kind of taken aback," McClellan said.
"For me I came to the decision that at that point I needed to look for a way to move on, because it had undermined, I think, a lot of what we had said."
The president was leaving an event in North Carolina, McClellan recalled, and as they walked to Air Force One a reporter yelled out a question: Had the president, who had repeatedly condemned the selective release of secret intelligence information, enabled Scooter Libby to leak classified information to The New York Times to bolster the administration''''s arguments for war?
McClellan took the question to the president, telling Bush: "He''''s saying you yourself were the one that authorized the leaking of this information."
"And he said, ''''Yeah, I did.'''' And I was kind of taken aback," McClellan said.
"For me I came to the decision that at that point I needed to look for a way to move on, because it had undermined, I think, a lot of what we had said."
Posted by smashwl7 at 06:28 PM : May 29, 2008
That''s true. Some people have the false idea that once Bush is out of office all of the pushing for his arrest and prosecution will suddenly go away. It won''t. He''s not automatically "safe at home" when his term expires. Just like the war criminals of the Nazi regime he''ll be hunted for the rest of his pathetic life and someday he''ll end up in prison.
I DO.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by jack3213 at 06:32 PM : May 29, 2008
+ report abuse
Well of course you do... those of us who know you know you have been selling Bush''s LIES and Garbage on here from day one. The ENEMY you poor simple minded Loser has completely rebuilt in a Safe Haven created by your fuhrer. IF you feel safer it''s because you long ago sold you mind and soul to the "Party" and aren''t looking at anything objectively! Now stand and let Shooter Cheney and the SS know you''re being a good little Nazi!! Sieg Heil Bush
Americans are finally waking up and seeing that obama is brainless, clueless, spineless, and incompetent; just like they did for bush and the iraq war, the msm (with the complicity and assistance of the DNC) is attempting to ram obama down our throats (unvetted and filled with lies and deception); IT WON''T WORK THIS TIME BECAUSE WE ARE HIP TO THE CON!
"FLIP FLOP"
Totally uncredible, and not trustworthy- WHY?
First he said : " This is true "
Then he said "I didn''''t mean it," Then he said:
" They made me say it" Geesh. what a joke.
HE DOESN''''''''T EVEN KNOW " WHAT HAPPENED" LOL
HEY SAMSHW- WHEN YOU COME UP WITH A PERFECT PRESIDENT, LET US ALL KNOW. IN THE MEANWHILE - DO YOU FEEL SAFER NOW THAN YOU DID IMMEDIATELY AFTER 9/11?
I DO.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by jack3213 at 06:28 PM : May 29, 2008
+ report abuse
WHY didn''t you answer the man''s questions!! THEY most certainly are relivant!!
Posted by smashwl7 at 06:28 PM : May 29, 2008
What war crimes? We are in a war. What treason are you talking about? War is war.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by likeitis5050 at 06:59 PM : May 29, 2008
+ report abuse
So what are you saying you pathetic BOOTLICKER??? Because the Reich put out this talking point that YOU are repeating we shouldn''t believe his account? God where do you slime dogs come from??? Sieg Heil Bush
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by feminator1 at 07:02 PM : May 29, 2008
+ report abuse
LOL Right! Spoken like a true Bootlicker! WHEN you LIE to the American People to start a WAR that NEVER had to be and was based on PURE FRAUD, I''d say that pretty much qualifies as TREASON swastika breath. Now wipe the boot polish off your chin and sing it out so the Fuhrer KNOWS you''re out here doing his bidding!! SIEG HEIL BUSH! How these low life creatures can live with themselves, especially when our TROOPS are killing themselves in record numbers is beyond me!
LOL Right! Spoken like a true Bootlicker! WHEN you LIE to the American People to start a WAR that NEVER had to be and was based on PURE FRAUD, I''''d say that pretty much qualifies as TREASON swastika breath. Now wipe the boot polish off your chin and sing it out so the Fuhrer KNOWS you''''re out here doing his bidding!! SIEG HEIL BUSH! How these low life creatures can live with themselves, especially when our TROOPS are killing themselves in record numbers is beyond me!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by MCVet at 07:05 PM : May 29, 2008
Now wait just a *** second here, it''s not Bush''s fault he received faulty intelligence from the CIA. Blame the CIA, not Bush.
Also, Saddam Hussein was a mad man and a threat to Israel. So we got rid of 1 dictator, so what?
Also, Saddam Hussein was a mad man and a threat to Israel. So we got rid of 1 dictator, so what?
Posted by feminator1 at 07:10 PM : May 29, 2008
Bush did NOT get bad intelligence! He cherry picked out the intelligence that supported his goal to invade Iraq and ignored the rest! And who cares if Saddam was a mad man? He was no threat to us or our interests! This was and is a war of invasion, conquest, occupation and theft and nothing else!
The president was leaving an event in North Carolina, McClellan recalled, and as they walked to Air Force One a reporter yelled out a question: Had the president, who had repeatedly condemned the selective release of secret intelligence information, enabled Scooter Libby to leak classified information to The New York Times to bolster the administration''''''''s arguments for war?
McClellan took the question to the president, telling Bush: "He''''''''s saying you yourself were the one that authorized the leaking of this information."
"And he said, ''''''''Yeah, I did.'''''''' And I was kind of taken aback," McClellan said.
"For me I came to the decision that at that point I needed to look for a way to move on, because it had undermined, I think, a lot of what we had said."
McCain voted to send 4000 Americans to there death!
A little-unnoticed civil lawsuit in Florida is shining a light on an unusual but hugely profitable Pentagon contract to ship millions of gallons of aviation fuel to U.S. bases in Iraq through the kingdom of Jordan.
The deal involves a cast of influential characters, including the king of Jordan%u2019s brother-in-law, who is suing Harry Sargeant III, a top Florida-based fundraiser for Sen. John McCain%u2019s presidential bid.
Al-Saleh alleges in the lawsuit that after he arranged the deal, he was cut out in a scheme meant to defraud him. He claims that he and Sargeant and the third partner, Mustafa Abu-Naba%u2019a, a Jordanian businessman, had invested in IOTC Jordan in 2004. But, he says, Sargeant and Abu-Naba%u2019a committed fraud by forming another company called IOTC USA in Florida without informing him and by channeling the Pentagon contracts through that firm. Al-Saleh is suing Sargeant, Abu Naba%u2019a and the company for $13 million as his share of the profit from the 2005 contract, plus an unspecified amount of profit from the 2007 contract.
If we impeach we can likely indict and save ourselves from bombing Iran, and clean house so that those who were involved are no longer involved with our government. Maybe if they are declared war criminals we can void all their appointments including those to the Supreme Court.
How did this fool ever get a job?
**************************************
Barack Obama is NOTHING like Bush, and this is probably the biggest insult against Obama to date. Plus, I don''t know why any news outlet is even talking to Scott McClellan. I view him as a traitor to our country for coming out and lying to the American people when he should have been telling the truth, or he should have quit. He is just a scum bag deciding to cash in on his despicable actions while being Bush''s lie facilitator. Anyone that knew Bush was lying to get us into Iraq and didn''t say anything, and abetted with those lies, is a traitor.
What he did do is lie to Congress in order to obtain the war powers reserved to the Congress under Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution. The Congress has the right (and I would say the obligation) to hold hearings in the House Judiciary Committee to determine whether the President deliberately misrepresented the gravity of the threat in order to obtain those powers. If the House votes articles of impeachment on that basis, there will be a trial before the Senate and the Senate will decide whether or not to remove him from office.
Since the Republican Congress did exactly what I just described to Bill Clinton for lying to a grand-jury about his conduct with Ms. Lewinski, I think a strong case can now be made that the Congress has an obligation to treat the conduct of President Bush with at least the same level of severity, and thereby protect the intent of the founding fathers with respect to war powers. If enough voters make that reasonable demand of their Representatives (not your Senator), McLellan''s book may provide the necessary impetus to enable that to happen. I certainly hope it does.
Oh, please accept my apology for Rev. White, my apology for Father Pfleger, my apology for talking to the Canadians about NAFTA, my apology for this, my apology for that.
Dude........Obama is as fake as Oprah. Wake Up.
This country is TIRED of 2 party system. Middle Class Americans need REAL representation.
If anyone has the ability to start a NEW Labor party, it would be the CLINTONS.
I will VOTE for her if her name is on the Ballot in NOV, or else I will vote for McCain.
I guess there is First time for everything.
Hillary ''08!!!
Impeachment is not the same as removal from office. It is only an indictment. However, by sending articles of impeachment to the Senate, the House requires the Senate to hold a trial, and make a determination whether the President is guilty of "bribery, treason, or high-crimes and misdemeanors".
Whether or not President Bush is actually removed from office, I feel very strongly that his abuse of his authority in a number of areas do rise to the level of high-crimes and misdemeanors, and that it is essential that the House take action, if only to protect this key example of the checks and balances built into our Constitution. This would also provide a means for the American people to make a statement to the world as to what we as a nation stand for, in opposition to the egregious misconduct of our current President.
That, I think would be a fitting way to call an end to this long national nightmare, regardless of who is chosen to succeed President Bush.
But in fact, this war was on a pretext of ''pre-emptive'' strike against non-existent WMDs that Plame''s husband knew could not exist without the yellow-cake. That is no different from what the Japanese did to Pearl Harbor. That was a pre-emptive strike. And that makes Iraq treason.
Plus it got Bush out of trying to find the bin Laudin guy who led the 9-11 attack.
That smells even more in the light of the revelations of Bush''s need for a place in history as his motivation to get us into a war.
Pelosi won a majority in the House on the platform of no impeachment.
There is a candidate in SF running against Pelosi on that one issue.
What you need to say to your Congresspeople, dear folks, is, please remove Pelosi as Speaker, so that a person whose word is not tied up on a promise not to impeach, may lead the Congress to do the duty it is now bound and obligated to do. Kuchinich would be ideal.
His bill of impeachment is tabled, by Pelosi''s order.
Then when the impeachment is over, Pelosi can run the House, again.
Let her have her honor and keep her word. She needs to step down now, and allow the Constitution to be restored.
neither will restore the Constitution. Both are manipulating sectors of the public for votes, rather than defending the Constitution.
Ron Paul and B Obama are both ready to restore your rights, to be charged with a crime, to see evidence, and have a speedy trial. Not McCain and not Clinton.
Once again you win the Daily Tortured Logical Stretch Award-Congratulations...again!!!
What''s the Labor Party platform on NAFTA? Is that still evolving?
If so, then Obama is already forming the coalition needed to legislate real change.
Regarding McClellan though, can you honestly imagine a White House that communicates openly and honestly and in a non-adversarial way? Can you?
I can, and it''s one of many reasons why I''ll vote for Obama in November.
You can bank on that.
A man who can stick to his value is good guy.
If so, then Obama is already forming the coalition needed to legislate real change.
Regarding McClellan though, can you honestly imagine a White House that communicates openly and honestly and in a non-adversarial way? Can you?
I can, and it''''s one of many reasons why I''''ll vote for Obama in November.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by GreatDriveW at 09:53 PM : May 29, 2008
Oh, so OBAMA gets to claim responsibility for this lying shill getting a several million dollar book deal! Now this is hilarious, pardon the pun!
Haven''t you noticed, this country is just not quite united at the moment, mainly BECAUSE of Obama and his racist intimidation game!
neither will restore the Constitution. Both are manipulating sectors of the public for votes, rather than defending the Constitution.
Ron Paul and B Obama are both ready to restore your rights, to be charged with a crime, to see evidence, and have a speedy trial. Not McCain and not Clinton.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by obbcbs at 09:31 PM : May 29, 2008
+ report abuse
This deserves reposting. Hillary is a Bilderberger, and member of "The Family", a Religious Group that believes the Ruling Elite have Divine Right to Rule over the "Little People".......NWO, NAU, Israel First,
are all part of Clinton''s beliefs. She refuses to opoligize for Iraq, because she AGREES with the Illegal Invasion and Occupation for Profit.
Bill and Poppy hang together now like old Pals.....
Shrillary = McSameold = Shrub = Neocon Fascist Rule
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- next
See all 185 Comments