|
Edited on Mon Jul-25-05 04:16 PM by nashuaadvocate
(from October 1, 2003):
MR. McCLELLAN: ...I think there are certain assumptions you're still making in your remarks. The Department of Justice is looking into this to determine what you're saying about the potential leak of classified information concerning an undercover CIA agent. And there have been some news reports that I saw back to that period, some that have been cited recently, talking about how some of this information may have been well-known within the D.C. community.
Q Fair enough. But when did the President know it?
...
Q ...If you get a chance, if you could establish for us when it came to the President's (attention)?
MR. McCLELLAN: Terry, that was back in July and I just don't know. I looked into it and I just don't know.
...
MR. McCLELLAN: The President has directed the White House to cooperate fully, that message was sent as soon as he learned of the investigation. He made it clear to White House Counsel, and White House Counsel made it clear to senior staff the other day -- that was the President -- at the President's direction.
...
MR. McCLELLAN: Again, this is -- the issue here -- what is the issue here? Did someone leak classified information? Is that the issue?
...
Q ...In going back through your records and anyone else you've come in contact with, have you come upon any documents that are covered by the "relevance" that either mention the Ambassador, mention his wife and her role at the CIA?
MR. McCLELLAN: Are you asking if I, personally, have?
Q Yes, if you've come across anything in your email or anything that's come across --
MR. McCLELLAN: I was traveling most of yesterday, so -- got back about 10:00 p.m. last night.
Q Did anyone come to you and say they found -- here's this document that came through their email?
MR. McCLELLAN: Come to me? Well, first of all, if they have questions, the Counsel's Office is ready to answer the questions. If they have information related to the investigation, we made it very clear that we want that information reported to the Department of Justice...
...
MR. McCLELLAN: The President is focused on getting to the bottom of this....
...
MR. McCLELLAN: That's what I know. What I just told you is what I know. I don't know beyond that. But I know that the White House staff was not contacted (by Gonzales when he heard from the DOJ). It went to Counsel's Office and I think Counsel, appropriately so, would inform the Chief of Staff at that point.
**********
So let me get this straight: someone leaked in the Bush Administration and the head of that Administration, the President, never personally called in all his goons to figure out who; and when the President's spokesman tried to find out--presumably, from the President--when the President learned of the leak, Scott says he doesn't know and can't find out?
And Scott essentially says Rove specifically was told to cooperate by Gonzales back in July, and failed to? Is ANYONE in the media going back and reading what McClellan actually SAID?
My favorite is McClellan's insistence--in context, his question is a statement--that "the issue here" is whether someone leaked confidential information, period. He didn't say a) will they be convicted, he didn't say b) the issue is Joe Wilson's credibility, as the RNC is saying. So why isn't he being confronted with EACH and EVERY thing he's said in the past by the White House Press Corps, and forced to either confirm, deny, or evade it?
And if the White House was doing document review, as McClellan says, did NO ONE come up with the State Department memo and turn it over, as Scott promised they would if they found any document bearing Wilson or his wife's name?
Finally, it seems that Scott is certifying that Gonzales told no one else besides Card about the DOJ preservation request--how does he (Card) know this? Who did he ask? Is this a lie, too?
**********
(from September 29, 2003):
Q All right. Let me just follow up. You said this morning, "The President knows" that Karl Rove wasn't involved. How does he know that?
...
Q But, Scott, it gets to the question if you know, if the President knows that Karl Rove was not involved, then maybe you can tell us more about what the President specifically is doing to get to the bottom of this, or what has he ordered to be done within the White House to get to the bottom of this?
MR. McCLELLAN: The President wants anyone, anyone who has information relating to this to report that information to the appropriate agency, the Department of Justice. That's what the President wants, and I've been very clear about that.
...
MR. McCLELLAN: There has been absolutely nothing brought to our attention to suggest any White House involvement.
...
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, we have nothing beyond those media reports to suggest there is White House involvement.
...
MR. McCLELLAN: You need to keep in mind that there has been no specific information, there has been no information that has come to our attention to suggest White House involvement, beyond what has been reported in the newspapers.
...
MR. McCLELLAN: ...there has not been any information beyond what we've seen in just anonymous media reporting to suggest that there was White House involvement.
...
MR. McCLELLAN: Hold on, let me finish. There's been no information brought to our attention to suggest that there was White House involvement, beyond what we've seen in the media reports. And those are anonymous media reports, at that.
...
Q You're challenging anyone who has information about this to step forward and contact the Department of Justice?
MR. McCLELLAN: Absolutely. And if there's a senior administration official -- I saw quoted in one article -- that senior administration official, if they have specific information, they should go provide it to the Department of Justice, absolutely...
...
Q You said that the President knows that Karl Rove was not involved, and you specifically have spoken to Karl Rove and gotten those assurances. By those statements, you've implied that the President has not talked to Karl Rove specifically about this.
MR. McCLELLAN: No, I said that --
Q Is that a correct inference, or did we --
MR. McCLELLAN: I've already answered this question, when Terry asked it earlier, and I said that it's not my habit to get into conversations the President has with staff or with advisors. I'm not going to get into those conversations.
Q So he has --
MR. McCLELLAN: I've made it clear that it simply is not true, and I'm speaking on behalf of the White House when I say that.
...
MR. McCLELLAN: ...there has been no information that's come to our attention, or been brought to our attention, beyond what we've seen in the media reports.
...
MR. McCLELLAN: ...Again, I've said that nothing has been brought to our attention....
...
MR. McCLELLAN: I've made it very clear--there's no specific information being brought to our attention to suggest White House involvement.
...
MR. McCLELLAN: ...there's no specific information, or there's no information, period, that has been brought to our attention beyond what is in the media reports.
...
MR. McCLELLAN: ...I have not seen any information, beyond what is in the media reports, to suggest White House involvement.
...
MR. McCLELLAN: ...Again, there has been no information brought to our attention, beyond what is in the media reports, to suggest White House involvement.
...
MR. McCLELLAN: I've made it clear that there's been nothing, absolutely nothing, brought to our attention to suggest any White House involvement, and that includes the Vice President's office, as well. When I'm talking about the White House, I'm talking about the Vice President's office as well.
...
Q Scott, just a couple quick clarifications. Weeks ago, when you were first asked whether Mr. Rove had the conversation with Robert Novak that produced the column, you dismissed it as ridiculous. And I wanted just to make sure, at that time, had you talked to Karl?
MR. McCLELLAN: I've made it very clear, from the beginning, that it is totally ridiculous. I've known Karl for a long time, and I didn't even need to go ask Karl, because I know the kind of person that he is, and he is someone that is committed to the highest standards of conduct.
...
MR. McCLELLAN: I have spoken with Karl about this matter and I've already addressed it.
...
Q I have one other follow up. Can you say for the record whether Mr. Rove possessed the information about Mr. Wilson's wife, but merely did not talk to anybody about it? Do you know whether for a fact he knew --
MR. McCLELLAN: I don't know whether or not -- I mean, I'm sure he probably saw the same media reports everybody else in this room has.
Q When you talked to Mr. Rove, did you discuss, did you ever have this information, could you have talked to him?
MR. McCLELLAN: We're going down a lot of different roads here. I've made it very clear that he was not involved, that there's no truth to the suggestion that he was.
Q Well, I'm trying to ask how --
MR. McCLELLAN: And, again, I said I didn't -- it is not something I needed to ask him, but I like to, like you do, verify things and make sure that it is completely accurate. But I knew that Karl would not be involved in something like this.
Q And that conversation that you had with Karl was this weekend? Or when was it?
MR. McCLELLAN: I'm sorry? No, I've had conversations with him previously. I'm going to leave it at that.
...
MR. McCLELLAN: ...The fact is that we don't have any information beyond what we've seen in the media reports to suggest White House involvement.
...
Q Scott, the statement you gave about why there shouldn't be a special prosecutor was almost word for word what the Clinton people said in 1994 about why there shouldn't be a special prosecutor in Whitewater. Why should it stand now if it didn't stand then?
MR. McCLELLAN: Ken, I just reject that comparison.
Q You can reject it, but it is the same issue. Why is --
MR. McCLELLAN: Do you have specific information to suggest White House involvement?
Q No, but why --
MR. McCLELLAN: Do you have any information to suggest White House involvement?
Q My issue -- the issue is the credibility --
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, bring it to my attention if you have information. But there's no information we have beyond the media reports to suggest White House involvement.
**********
WHAT THE F*CK? McClellan told the press two years ago that the President had spoken to Rove about the leak? If this is true, Rove lied to the President and the White House Press Secretary has already admitted it.
And if Rove didn't answer the President's call to go to the DOJ, why wasn't he fired for disobeying a direct command?
And if the White House had no more information than anyone else, doesn't that further confirm that Rove lied to Bush?
And does that last quote have Scott admitting he never spoke to Rove about this after the Novak column came out? Or did he? He waffles! He says, "I didn't need to talk to him..." "I *imagine* he saw the same media reports..." "I spoke to him *previously*..." What the hell is all that waffling about?
And JESUS! How many times did he repeat, in effect, that Rove never told anyone in the White House anything about he had done, and/or Libby tell anyone about what Libby had done? Twenty times?
**********
(from September 29, 2003):
MR. McCLELLAN: Of course, we always cooperate with the Department of Justice in matters like this. And you could expect we would in this matter, as well.
Q Like phone records and that sort of thing?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I'm not aware of any requests that have been made. I mean, we can go down a whole list, but as far as I know, at this moment no request has been made. And I've checked on that.
**********
WHAT? After two and a half months Ashcroft still hadn't asked the White House to actually turn over (rather than just preserve) any PHONE RECORDS?
**********
Post additional stunners to this thread if you like: I think we need to alert the media to these specific comments, as they're relevant to the reporting the media is doing TODAY!
S.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(514 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
