Monday, March 29, 2004
The Dogs Certainly Are Organized
201k would like to draw your attention to a matter that seems to have escaped the notice of those whose job it is to notice.
Many media outlets have reported that the supposedly contradictory 2002 "background briefing" given by former White House head of counter-terrorism Richard Clarke was leaked to the press by the White House. Some have mentioned that it was leaked specifically to Fox News, while a few have gone on to note that it then made its way into the hands of a Republican member of the 9/11 commission, former Governor James R. Thompson.
But none that we have seen found reason to point out the extraordinary fact that Thompson had this document before Clarke testified. Think about what that means.
It means that the White House -- which had vetted Clarke's book and therefor knew what he was going to say -- formulated a plan to question his credibility by contrasting it with his remarks at the 2002 "background briefing", leaked those remarks to Fox News, which then faxed a copy to a Republican member of the supposedly independent 9/11 commission, who had it, and the phony credibility argument, ready to hold up for the cameras by the time Clarke was sworn in.
Which, by the way, he made sure to hold up with his fingers covering the Fox News logo. Go back and look at the video.
What the heck is going on here?
The White House, a major news organization, and a member of the independent commission all working together, in advance, to discredit a witness before his crucial testimony regarding the most lethal attack ever visited upon the United States?
201k suggests that the media needs to look into exactly what steps that classified document took to get from the White House to James Thompson.
Many media outlets have reported that the supposedly contradictory 2002 "background briefing" given by former White House head of counter-terrorism Richard Clarke was leaked to the press by the White House. Some have mentioned that it was leaked specifically to Fox News, while a few have gone on to note that it then made its way into the hands of a Republican member of the 9/11 commission, former Governor James R. Thompson.
But none that we have seen found reason to point out the extraordinary fact that Thompson had this document before Clarke testified. Think about what that means.
It means that the White House -- which had vetted Clarke's book and therefor knew what he was going to say -- formulated a plan to question his credibility by contrasting it with his remarks at the 2002 "background briefing", leaked those remarks to Fox News, which then faxed a copy to a Republican member of the supposedly independent 9/11 commission, who had it, and the phony credibility argument, ready to hold up for the cameras by the time Clarke was sworn in.
Which, by the way, he made sure to hold up with his fingers covering the Fox News logo. Go back and look at the video.
What the heck is going on here?
The White House, a major news organization, and a member of the independent commission all working together, in advance, to discredit a witness before his crucial testimony regarding the most lethal attack ever visited upon the United States?
201k suggests that the media needs to look into exactly what steps that classified document took to get from the White House to James Thompson.
