You can read the details here. I see no need to repeat them, and nothing is very surprising. Basically, McClellan admits he was an unwitting part of several manipulations and coverups, and of course he didn't know a thing about any of it, not a single, intsy thing. He was just there as a mere mouthpiece who went in front of the press and repeated what he was told like a good little puppet.

Do you want to vomit yet?

Men like McClellan are -- and always have been -- the enablers of misguided and dishonest leaders. They sacrificed the basic principle of human interaction -- honestly -- in order to be close to the center of power, to look important, to be someone.

Maybe to sell a few book afterwards.

Now he wants our sympathy. But if McClellan really wanted to be useful, really want to be an honest man, he could have came out in the middle of it all and told the truth. Sure, he'd lose his job. There are more important things in this world than jobs. If you haven't lost one on principle, you haven't really lived.

Now we're supposed to believe Scott McClellan, like he's some big hero for disclosing the "truth" years later when he's perfectly safe. Thus does corruption, dishonesty, and arrogance propagate through the centuries. It is sad. Like the day when war ends because all men refuse to fight them, corruption will end when all men refuse to cover it up.

Before they publish.

Source: By Quark Soup http://davidappell.blogspot.com/

In another report from Bizzblogger Rove Responds to McClellan's Allegations

Karl Rove appeared on Hannity & Colmes tonight and was asked about Scott McClellan's allegations in his upcoming new book regarding the Bush Administration and Karl Rove on a number of issues.

Rove was asked about the allegation that he and Scooter Libby had a private meeting after meeting with Bush and McClellan's suggestion that it seemed "suspicious" (related to the Plame affair) because they never met privately. Rove said that it was totally false, as he met with Libby "all the time." Rove said it was "definitely not" about the Plame affair because his lawyer specifically told him never to discuss any information with anyone else in the White House. (And reminded us that it has long since been revealed that it was Dick Armitage who accidentally "leaked" the information to Bob Novak.)

On McClellan's suggestion that the Bush Administration was "in denial" for a week following Hurricane Katrina, Karl Rove said that he doesn't think McClellan was in any of the meetings, which took huge amounts of time in the immediate aftermath. Further, Rove pointed to these examples of how "out of the loop" McClellan was on certain issues.

I am not sure what to make of McClellan's accusations except that he's trying to sell his book and probably needed at least some red meat to sell it. I was always wholly unimpressed with McClellan's performance and thought that he did President Bush a terrible injustice with his inarticulate ways of talking to the press. (I often wondered how someone so seemingly inept at speaking could ever become press secretary, but that's another story.) Tony Snow was a huge asset to President Bush to which McClellan simply couldn't compare.

Perhaps McClellan was annoyed that he was removed from his post to be replaced by Tony Snow, perhaps he's trying to make some money, or perhaps he simply wants to be well-liked by the liberal media crowd in Washington, DC, where he lives. Of course, the media will seize on these comments and discuss them ad nauseum, while completely ignoring Douglas Feith's War and Decision that had a very different point about the Iraq War and the facts surrounding the lead-up to it.

Source: By Bizblogger http://bizblogger.blogspot.com/