Tell-All Books Bad - Until I Write One
July 28, 2016 at 4:25 p.m.
By Gary [email protected]
He's the ex-Bush press secretary who came out with the tell-all book this week that said all manner of ill stuff about W.
Basically, he accuses Bush of spreading pro-war propaganda. Here's an excerpt from an Associated Press story about the book, which, although it doesn't come out until Monday, is No. 1 on Amazon.com's best-seller list.
McClellan, who had worked for Bush since he was Texas governor, said his initial misgivings about a rush to war were offset by his affection for the president and respect for his foreign policy team. It was easy to believe Bush, he said, because the president wasn't consciously trying to inflate the threat of Iraq unleashing weapons of mass destruction.
'He came to convince himself of that,' McClellan said of Bush.
In hindsight, McClellan says he came to view the war as a mistake by a president and advisers swept up in a grand plan of seeding democracy in the Middle East by overturning Saddam Hussein's regime. McClellan says Bush and his aides became so wrapped up in pushing the argument for war that they ignored intelligence that didn't fit the picture.
McClellan said he grew 'increasingly dismayed and disillusioned' during his final year as White House press secretary, and pinpointed the unfolding of the CIA leak case - and what it revealed about Bush's role in releasing classified information about Iraq to the press - as his tipping point. McClellan was elevated to press secretary in July 2003 and left the White House in April 2006."
Frankly, it's not like anything he wrote was shocking.
It's not like, "Oh my god! There was no WMD in Iraq!" Or, "The intelligence was manipulated? Are you kidding me?"
So the whole tell-all thing really isn't what I found interesting.
What raised my eyebrows was some of the things McClellen has said in the past about tell-all books, and what some people in the news business are saying about the news business during the run-up to the war.
Seems before he wrote his own best-selling tell-all, he held people who wrote tell-alls at rather low regard.
You may remember ex-treasury secretary Paul O'Neill's book, "The Price of Loyalty: George W. Bush, the White House, and the Education of Paul O'Neill."
Here's what McClellen had to say about that book:
"It appears to be more about trying to justify personal views and opinions than it does about looking at the results that we are achieving on behalf of the American people."
On Richard Clarke's "Against All Enemies: Inside America's War on Terror":
"Well, why, all of a sudden, if he had all these grave concerns, did he not raise these sooner? This is one-and-a-half years after he left the administration. And now, all of a sudden, he's raising these grave concerns that he claims he had. And I think you have to look at some of the facts. One, he is bringing this up in the heat of a presidential campaign. He has written a book and he certainly wants to go out there and promote that book. ... If you look back at his past comments and his past actions, they contradict his current rhetoric. I talked to you all a little bit about that earlier today. Go back and look at exactly what he has said in the past and compare that with what he is saying today."
Hmm.
Should we ask McClellen why he waited so long to come forward if he had all these grave concerns? Should we go back and compare all the glowing stuff he said about W from the podium with what he's saying now?
I don't blame the guy for cashing in, but let's be honest about it and say he's cashing in. Let's not make this some argument about ethics or morals or taking the high ground.
Even more fascinating is what Jessica Yellin, now a CNN correspondent, told CNN's Anderson Cooper Wednesday night.
She started out by saying that she agreed with McClellen when he said in the book that White House reporters "dropped the ball" in their pre-war reporting.
But then she went much further than that, telling Cooper that news executives - she worked at MSNBC at the time - urged her to avoid any hard-hitting reporting on the Bush administration.
"The press corps was under enormous pressure from corporate executives, frankly, to make sure that this was a war presented in a way that was consistent with the patriotic fever in the nation and the president's high approval ratings," Yellin said.
"And my own experience at the White House was that the higher the president's approval ratings, the more pressure I had from news executives - and I was not at this network at the time - but the more pressure I had from news executives to put on positive stories about the president, I think over time ..."
Cooper shoots back:
"You had pressure from news executives to put on positive stories about the president?"
"Not in that exact ... They wouldn't say it in that way, but they would edit my pieces. They would push me in different directions. They would turn down stories that were more critical, and try to put on pieces that were more positive. Yes, that was my experience."
So, apparently, there was a propaganda conspiracy in the White House and the members White House Press Corps - paragons of journalistic integrity that they are - were complicit.
Isn't it comforting to know when the government lies to us we can count on the national press to cover it up?[[In-content Ad]]
He's the ex-Bush press secretary who came out with the tell-all book this week that said all manner of ill stuff about W.
Basically, he accuses Bush of spreading pro-war propaganda. Here's an excerpt from an Associated Press story about the book, which, although it doesn't come out until Monday, is No. 1 on Amazon.com's best-seller list.
McClellan, who had worked for Bush since he was Texas governor, said his initial misgivings about a rush to war were offset by his affection for the president and respect for his foreign policy team. It was easy to believe Bush, he said, because the president wasn't consciously trying to inflate the threat of Iraq unleashing weapons of mass destruction.
'He came to convince himself of that,' McClellan said of Bush.
In hindsight, McClellan says he came to view the war as a mistake by a president and advisers swept up in a grand plan of seeding democracy in the Middle East by overturning Saddam Hussein's regime. McClellan says Bush and his aides became so wrapped up in pushing the argument for war that they ignored intelligence that didn't fit the picture.
McClellan said he grew 'increasingly dismayed and disillusioned' during his final year as White House press secretary, and pinpointed the unfolding of the CIA leak case - and what it revealed about Bush's role in releasing classified information about Iraq to the press - as his tipping point. McClellan was elevated to press secretary in July 2003 and left the White House in April 2006."
Frankly, it's not like anything he wrote was shocking.
It's not like, "Oh my god! There was no WMD in Iraq!" Or, "The intelligence was manipulated? Are you kidding me?"
So the whole tell-all thing really isn't what I found interesting.
What raised my eyebrows was some of the things McClellen has said in the past about tell-all books, and what some people in the news business are saying about the news business during the run-up to the war.
Seems before he wrote his own best-selling tell-all, he held people who wrote tell-alls at rather low regard.
You may remember ex-treasury secretary Paul O'Neill's book, "The Price of Loyalty: George W. Bush, the White House, and the Education of Paul O'Neill."
Here's what McClellen had to say about that book:
"It appears to be more about trying to justify personal views and opinions than it does about looking at the results that we are achieving on behalf of the American people."
On Richard Clarke's "Against All Enemies: Inside America's War on Terror":
"Well, why, all of a sudden, if he had all these grave concerns, did he not raise these sooner? This is one-and-a-half years after he left the administration. And now, all of a sudden, he's raising these grave concerns that he claims he had. And I think you have to look at some of the facts. One, he is bringing this up in the heat of a presidential campaign. He has written a book and he certainly wants to go out there and promote that book. ... If you look back at his past comments and his past actions, they contradict his current rhetoric. I talked to you all a little bit about that earlier today. Go back and look at exactly what he has said in the past and compare that with what he is saying today."
Hmm.
Should we ask McClellen why he waited so long to come forward if he had all these grave concerns? Should we go back and compare all the glowing stuff he said about W from the podium with what he's saying now?
I don't blame the guy for cashing in, but let's be honest about it and say he's cashing in. Let's not make this some argument about ethics or morals or taking the high ground.
Even more fascinating is what Jessica Yellin, now a CNN correspondent, told CNN's Anderson Cooper Wednesday night.
She started out by saying that she agreed with McClellen when he said in the book that White House reporters "dropped the ball" in their pre-war reporting.
But then she went much further than that, telling Cooper that news executives - she worked at MSNBC at the time - urged her to avoid any hard-hitting reporting on the Bush administration.
"The press corps was under enormous pressure from corporate executives, frankly, to make sure that this was a war presented in a way that was consistent with the patriotic fever in the nation and the president's high approval ratings," Yellin said.
"And my own experience at the White House was that the higher the president's approval ratings, the more pressure I had from news executives - and I was not at this network at the time - but the more pressure I had from news executives to put on positive stories about the president, I think over time ..."
Cooper shoots back:
"You had pressure from news executives to put on positive stories about the president?"
"Not in that exact ... They wouldn't say it in that way, but they would edit my pieces. They would push me in different directions. They would turn down stories that were more critical, and try to put on pieces that were more positive. Yes, that was my experience."
So, apparently, there was a propaganda conspiracy in the White House and the members White House Press Corps - paragons of journalistic integrity that they are - were complicit.
Isn't it comforting to know when the government lies to us we can count on the national press to cover it up?[[In-content Ad]]
Have a news tip? Email [email protected] or Call/Text 360-922-3092