Trent Duffy: Scott McClellan lied
posted at 9:00 am on June 2, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
Trent Duffy explodes in anger on the pages of the Washington Post today in response to his former boss, Scott McClellan, and his memoir of his time in the White House. Duffy claims that McClellan lied to him repeatedly about the nature of the book before its publication, and that McClellan lies in the book about McClellan’s state of mind in the White House. It serves as yet another indicator that McClellan juiced his book considerably for profit:
· Was it the truth or a lie when you told me, during a series of personal discussions in your West Wing office in late 2005 and early 2006 (at the apex of what you now call your period of “disillusionment” and “dismay”), that you were happy in your job and proud to serve President Bush and that you had no intention of leaving soon? What about in April 2006, when rumors swirled about a change at the podium, and you again told me you wanted to stay?
· Was it the truth or a lie when you told me around Christmas that the excerpts released by your publisher were being “taken out of context” and that your book wasn’t going to be a hatchet job?
· Was it the truth or a lie when you assured your former deputies that you wanted our “full participation” in the book?
· Was it the truth or a lie when, after countless briefings, you complained that the White House press corps was too tough, unfair, over the top and didn’t get it? ….
When the first “teaser” excerpts of your book hit the press in December, my phone lighted up with calls from reporters. Before responding, I called you; you said the publisher had taken liberties, you didn’t mean to attack the president and to point reporters to your 2006 interview with Larry King as your genuine take on things. You told me that your book was still about the poisonous partisan atmosphere in Washington and didn’t breathe a hint about Iraq or Hurricane Katrina. This was long after you were outside the White House bubble, amigo.
You also assured me, when we’ve talked the past two years, that you wanted your deputies to review the book and share our thoughts. Thinking you actually meant what you said, I reached out to you two months ago to take you up on your offer. Radio silence. Why didn’t you keep your promise to me and the other professionals who gave years of their lives working for you?
Why? The reasons appear obvious. McClellan and his publisher didn’t want any negative buzz about the book leaking out before publication. If former staffers had the opportunity to review the work as McClellan initially promised, the book would have been savaged before anyone could have promoted it for its anti-Bush value.
Unlike the pushback from people like Dan Bartlett, Trent Duffy has no reason to carry the White House water. He left the Bush administration’s press office before McClellan did. If anyone could corroborate McClellan’s story, it would be Duffy. His anger and shock at the book gives a strong indication that McClellan lied to everyone, possibly even the publisher.
Robert Novak doesn’t even think McClellan wrote the book:
In Scott McClellan’s purported tell-all memoir of his trials as President Bush’s press secretary, he virtually ignores Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage’s role leaking to me Valerie Plame’s identity as a CIA employee. That fits the partisan Democratic version of the Plame affair, in keeping with the overall tenor of the book, “What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washington’s Culture of Deception.” ….
In claiming he was misled about the Plame affair, McClellan mentions Armitage only twice. Armitage being the leaker undermines the Democratic theory, now accepted by McClellan, that Bush, Vice President Cheney and political adviser Karl Rove aimed to delegitimize Wilson as a war critic. The way that McClellan handles the leak leads former colleagues to suggest he could not have written this book by himself.
On Page 173, McClellan first mentions my Plame leak, but he does not identify Armitage as the leaker until Page 306 of the 323-page book — and then only in passing. Armitage, who was antiwar and anti-Cheney, does not fit the conspiracy theory that McClellan now buys into. When, after two years, Armitage publicly admitted that he was my source, the life went out of Wilson’s campaign. In “What Happened,” McClellan dwells on Rove’s alleged deceptions as if the real leaker were still unknown.
Eli Lake reviews What Happened for the New York Sun, and finds it dull and unexceptional:
“What Happened” offers no bombshells, and no genuine disclosures. It is a 368-page banality. And the man whose reputation suffers the most from its publication is Mr. McClellan himself, who comes off like another famous American victim of Stockholm Syndrome, Patty Hearst.
In this case, Mr. McClellan’s adopted political vocabulary is drawn from the left-wing base of the Democratic party and the journalists who took them seriously between 2003 and 2004. Like them, Mr. McClellan clings to the delusion that the White House’s handling of Joe Wilson’s allegations was a violation of public trust as destructive as Watergate. Mr. McClellan here adopts the lexicon of the activist left, referring at times to the White House’s “war on” Mr. Wilson, without ever quite disclosing the most important fact of the saga, that Mr. Wilson’s account of the episode was deeply misleading.
In light of what is now known about the entire Wilson affair — that Mr. Wilson was recommended for the trip to Niger by his wife, that his debriefing to the CIA on Saddam’s pursuit of uranium was less categorical than he would later claim, and that it was the deputy secretary of state, Richard Armitage, who first leaked Ms. Plame’s name, not Karl Rove — it is strange that the former press secretary still considers Mr. Wilson the victim and his old boss his tormenter.
Lake finishes with a good point about McClellan and his role in the Bush administration. Instead of opting for talent and intelligence, this administration has tended to value loyalty. That leaves them open for easy betrayal by people like McClellan, who lack the intelligence and talent to keep from being manipulated. That’s the biggest indictment of What Happened.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
II’ve got to stop reading about this wormy, lying, backstabbing little puke lest my blood pressure reach critical mass . . . but I probably won’t.
rplat on June 2, 2008 at 9:07 AM
Scott McC has now writen a new book, how to destroy yourself in 400 pages
EricPWJohnson on June 2, 2008 at 9:08 AM
Bill-O, please handle this matter correctly* this evening. For ONCE, quit worrying the left won’t think you’re “fair and balanced”.
*meaning by 8 CST the weasel should be in tears. Rush could do it. So could Bob Dole.
Marcus on June 2, 2008 at 9:13 AM
The left sure got more out of the Wilson thing than they deserved. Any sane person would look at the facts and write the whole thing off. You have to wonder how much Soros (indirectly of course) is paying Scott for the “hit job”.
duff65 on June 2, 2008 at 9:14 AM
Tingle Alert.
Scotty the turncoat will be continuing his “Screw the President” tour on MSDNC tonight, appearing on Hardball.
fogw on June 2, 2008 at 9:17 AM
Scott McClellan=Patty Hearst.
Right on!
jgapinoy on June 2, 2008 at 9:18 AM
His 15 minutes are up.
Have a nice life, worm.
JammieWearingFool on June 2, 2008 at 9:20 AM
Financial disclosure,please, Mr. McClellan.
drjohn on June 2, 2008 at 9:24 AM
I don’t know what to make of Scott McClellan, all I can say is I wish he had an easy-to-write last name.
I hate names with a double “C.”
You have to type one big and one small, like “McCain.”
Not only it’s a pain in the butt, but look: it has three “Ls”
For God’s sake, why the hell you put three “Ls” in your goddamn name?
Now if I screw up with the “C,” I’m not going to get away with the “L.”
And I’ll curse the hell out of him and his mama, bang my desk and spill the coffee on my keyboard.
Indy Conservative on June 2, 2008 at 9:25 AM
Ow.
Jaibones on June 2, 2008 at 9:25 AM
There is the question was he recruited to write this Book?
EricPWJohnson on June 2, 2008 at 9:26 AM
Hot Air should adopt FARK tags and put a big OBVIOUS one on this story. The publisher of the book has a big Soros man-crush, no wonder the book got “juiced.” That and no one would buy a book about a Bushie talking about how boring it was in the Bush white house admin.
Neo on June 2, 2008 at 9:27 AM
Well, in his defense (even slugs deserve representation, I guess) Rove and Libby appeared to lie (dissemble? distort?) to him about their involvement in the Plame matter. That is, both had conversations with reporters (Libby with Miller and Rove with Cooper and Novak) where they either mentioned Plame’s name in some way or buttressed reporter’s knowledge of her (”I heard that too” Rove said to Novak about her).
Apparently, they didn’t mention these to McClellan. I think both Rove and Libby behaved terribly irresponsibly here. Was it malicious? Or sloppy? Don’t know.
But as Novak points out, for McClellan not to mention that the entire matter originated from Wilson’s false charges and, more important, Armitage’s accidental leak is to provide a grossly inaccurate and distorted account of the matter.
The persons engaging in a propaganda campaign here are McClellan and whoever has been manipulating his empty skull with this misinformation.
SteveMG on June 2, 2008 at 9:30 AM
What a numbnut. He fully deserves the round of tomatoes being thrown at him to get him offstage.
Dubn8tr on June 2, 2008 at 9:30 AM
The publisher made one other change…they left off the question mark after What Happened.
James on June 2, 2008 at 9:35 AM
I’m not surprised by all of this. McClellan always looked like a mousy little b**** even when he was considered a loyalist.
slug on June 2, 2008 at 9:39 AM
He didn’t write it. He was paid for the use of his name.
Rod on June 2, 2008 at 9:46 AM
and, frankly, of President Bush.
JiangxiDad on June 2, 2008 at 9:47 AM
I guess we really should trust out gut more. I never, EVER felt comfortable when McClellan was behind the podium. Fleischer seemed cool and on top of things. McClellan looked like a pudgy little guy in so far over his head that his ears were popping. What a friggin little coward.
Sugar Land on June 2, 2008 at 9:48 AM
Ghost-written books are creepy to me, but oh so common. Why is that a major indictment of McClellan?
JiangxiDad on June 2, 2008 at 9:48 AM
I withhold my opinion until Olby tells me what i should think about this new revelation of this primary historical document.
/end sarc
ConservativeLawStudent on June 2, 2008 at 9:48 AM
A primary historical document, claims the pretend news anchor Keith Olbermann, that has no footnotes, no documentation and no specific instances where the author saw or heard of propaganda being made.
A decent high school student knows that such material cannot be used as a primary source for anything.
SteveMG on June 2, 2008 at 9:53 AM
So was THAT post written for everyone on the thread? Or should we ignore that one too? Just let us know what you want, dude; we’re flexible. :)
inviolet on June 2, 2008 at 9:53 AM
Novak’s on the right track. After the publisher rejected his 2007 draft, McClellan agreed to have it juiced, just to sell it.
petefrt on June 2, 2008 at 9:54 AM
Hope McClellan enjoys all that money he’s making from this book of his. As for his credibility, that’s pretty much shot to hell.
pilamaye on June 2, 2008 at 9:55 AM
Indy Conservative on June 2, 2008 at 9:25 AM
Cracking me up Indy…
Keemo on June 2, 2008 at 10:12 AM
The Bush really is a moron. He kept most of the Clinton operatives in power because he valued “loyalty”? /boggle
Lehosh on June 2, 2008 at 10:12 AM
That’s gonna leave a mark.
WisCon on June 2, 2008 at 10:13 AM
these reviews make Peggy Noonan look like an even bigger fool, or useful idiot..
jp on June 2, 2008 at 10:18 AM
thought the same thing. ah well, every dog has his/her day.
JiangxiDad on June 2, 2008 at 10:34 AM
Their attempt to sway the ‘08 election is in vain. McClellan didn’t even get a tad of sympathy at DailyKos where he’s referenced as either rat pie or rat quiche. No one liked McClellan outside of Bush’s circle ever liked McClellan, and no one likes him now. He’s a born loser, and the world hates a loser. McClellan’s Affekt is his own demise. He is UNIVERSALLY persona non grata.
As for over-reliance upon the trust factor based upon “loyalty”, doesn’t McCain fall into a worse category than Bush? The McCain campaign is being (ill) advised by those who have NO LOYALTY either to McCain or the GOP, but strictly to their own independent profit.
maverick muse on June 2, 2008 at 10:36 AM
Why would anyone pay any attention to a book containing the old and already proven false (via several investigations and tons of documents and adjudication) allegations about Valarie Plame?
1. Plame was not, by any stretch of the imagination, a superspy.
2. Plame’s husband was (and is) a shameless political opportunist who lied about facts which were inconvenient to him.
3. Armitage was responsible for any “leak,” and his disclosures predated any and all other disclosures from anyone in the white house.
All of this is well-documented. So Scott McClelland exposes himself as someone who can’t observe facts and get the story straight: the very reason he was fired.
landlines on June 2, 2008 at 10:37 AM
Congress stimied into strict gridlock under Bill Clinton. During those years, Statesman and Texas Democrat Bob Bullock facilitated some great work accomplished through the Texas legislature, work that George Bush took credit for accomplishing in his first POTUS campaign. Bullock was gracious, and lived his life loving and protecting his Texas with great leadership, providing the home that GW will return to. Carolyn Keeton, on the other hand, was just a user and abuser. Her claim to fame was as State Auditor, as she was a good comptroller of financial records. THAT is where she would have remained to serve Texas well IF she loved Texas more than she loves herself. Scotty is just illicit spawn, given a chance to be a real MENSCH, and proving himself NOT. Scott McClellan dreamt to be our contemporary Richard Rich; but he hasn’t the balls to even rise to the occasion of being a true villain. He is just diddlysquat, sh*t off the ol’ block.
This too has passed.
maverick muse on June 2, 2008 at 10:49 AM
these reviews make Peggy Noonan look like an even bigger fool, or useful idiot..
jp on June 2, 2008 at 10:18 AM
Had the same discussion at the dinner table a few nights back. What happens to people when they spend too much time in DC?
Keemo on June 2, 2008 at 10:50 AM
Wouldn’t be the first time…nor the last.
right2bright on June 2, 2008 at 10:51 AM
He is just diddlysquat, sh*t off the ol’ block.
As a career plumber, you’re talking my kinda language mav. Good stuff!
Keemo on June 2, 2008 at 10:54 AM
Anyone wondering how McClellan could do this without thinking through the consequences has got to look at what both his mother and father have done in Texas, with dad writing a book implicating LBJ in JFK’s death 40 years after the fact, while mom managed to stab both political parties in the back, switching from Democrat to Republican when she realized that was the only way by the mid-1990s to win statewide office, and then siding with Democrats in the Texas Legislature against Rick Perry, before leaving the GOP for independent status when her 2006 primary challenge failed.
So in Scott’s world, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with switching sides or stabbing your former friends in the back, if it can either earn you a few more $$$ or a higher political position. What he didn’t realize is when you get to the presidential level, doing things like that puts you and your claims in a much brighter spotlight than those sort of stunts do in Austin, Texas.
jon1979 on June 2, 2008 at 11:12 AM
Novak’s column should be at the top of the news today. CNN should air Novak’s column and then apologize to its viewing audience for all the lies it has told for the past week with McClellan’s book. Finally, heads should roll at CNN and at other corrupt cable news outlets.
Travis1 on June 2, 2008 at 11:38 AM
Is there any doubt that this cowardly dullard let hate mongerers manipulate his words to attack the object of their obssessive hate? The hate of the left has become so intense that Obama can’t disavow his connection to it. He is a product of this enviroinment. Nothing more…nothing less.
volsense on June 2, 2008 at 12:05 PM
Robert Novak is a national treasure.
rockmom on June 2, 2008 at 1:14 PM
Gee, where have HA readers read that days ago?
TheBigOldDog on June 2, 2008 at 1:17 PM
I’m shocked that Duffy said that Scottie lied! My heart is broken…NOT.
A reviewer said: “It is a 368-page banality.” Well, the book fits the man.
Christine on June 2, 2008 at 1:41 PM
Ultimately, the buck for hiring this schmuck in the first place must stop at The President, Vice-President and Karl Rove…the top three dudes in the organization: Vito, Genco and Santino.
If one of those three ever harbored any qualms about Little Mac being grotesquely unqualified for the job of WHPS, they never did anything about it.
It is the responsibility of the President himself to make sure that all the people he or his advisors want in high places are of good character & professionally qualified to do the job.
Little Mac posssesed neither the character nor the qualifications to fill such an important post, and should never have been appointed in the first place. Even a casually observant GOP loyalist could see that from the minute he stepped into the Blue Room for his first solo briefing.
I’d sooner have Techno-Viking as WHPS than Little Mac.
Mike D. on June 2, 2008 at 2:17 PM
Exactly right, Mike D. The guy was like road-kill from Day One. What kind of leadership leaves road-kill to represent them to the White House Press Corps., day after month after year?
Loyalty,cronyism, fill in the blank. It’s part of the feckless something about all things Bush. It is unfathomable. You could say McClellan was the one back-stabbed and too clueless to fall the whole time he was there. The book was a pathetic payback attempt for years of humiliation. The cluelessness was his own fault.There is something very wrong with this whole bunch. Bush Derangement Syndrome on the left is a symptom of this Rorschach administration. The left senses something and gets it wrong as usual. At least the right can catalog the betrayals, both of themselves and of the nation. My prayers are for the country and the soldiers.
Feedie on June 2, 2008 at 2:45 PM
Scotty isn’t the only guy doin’ show and tell, these days.
Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez recounts in his recent book, “Wiser in Battle: A Soldier’s Story”. How President Bush gave a “confused pep talk” during a videoconference with his security and general staff.
Does that sound like a frat boy before a flag tag football game or a CIC?
J_Gocht on June 2, 2008 at 5:12 PM
Why are we getting our collective political panties all in a bunch over this book? Everyone knows DemoTARDS can’t read. So aside from the 8-12 people who watch the “Tingle and ‘Douche Show” on MSDNC, none of them will know anything about what was in
Scott McClellan’sGeorge Soros’ book.NightmareOnKStreet on June 2, 2008 at 7:30 PM
Sorry, it was not my intention to make fun of the “m” guy. I was so nervous, it took me an hour to clean the spilled coffee from my keyboard and the spit from my monitor.
Indy Conservative on June 2, 2008 at 8:23 PM
Dude? Me?
May God forgive you.
Indy Conservative on June 2, 2008 at 8:25 PM