Perhaps if someone has a few minutes to spare, they could obtain a copy of the book, choose several prominent story lines from within it (say, Iraq as one), and then compare McClellan’s comments as an insider to several Doper threads created at the time as the actual event(s) to see how far off we were. I mean, we are truly outsiders, but are really that far off when collective, intelligent minds debate in the open?
Now Rep. Robert Wexler (D-FL) wants McClellan to testify before the House Judiciary Committee.
Oh, and, yes, I am a lawyer.
I was expecting that. Iiiit’s SHOWTIME! Let’s see if we can get some Watergatey hearings in time for the elections.
Scotty will be on Keith Olbermann tonight (8pmEST/5pmPST)
An oath? Didn’t he take one of those January 20, 2001?
They didn’t think Michael Brown was over his head and not intelligent enough for the job. Until he was over his head and not intelligent enough for the job, that is.
Well that does it. There is NO WAY that I am voting for that lying so and so again.
Not to tell the truth, he didn’t.
Conspiracy to obstruct justice isn’t against the law any more?
I wonder: for some Republicans–who were intelligent enough to recognize the Bush II administration as being the incompetent disaster that it is–it seems it might have been more acceptable to them to vote for Bush anyway and repudiate their vote later than to allow a Democrat to win. GOP loyalty > good of the county.
The irony being that Dubya has been so bad that the Republican party might be harmed for years.
(I’m not accusing Plynck of being a Republican; his comment just provoked that thought.)
Who cares about Dubya? He’s toast. I want Rove, he can still do harm to the country by running other election scams. I want Rove in a jail cell. With a big, hairy guy who thinks he has “purty lips.”
Good for you! Stand up for what you believe in!
And what would that imply?*
*Sorry to keep bugging you with legal queries. I just find all of these legal shenanigans unreal.
Cisco, as you can see by his own response, he is indeed a lawyer. And I have no compunction in saying that he’s my favorite one on the SDMB.
I accept PayPal, BG. 
Legally, it implies only that the Judiciary Committee is on a fishing expedition to sniff out possible shenanigans; that is all perfectly legitimate, but it is indeterminate (and IMO unlikely) that they will find evidence of any prosecutable crime in this regard.
Politically, it’s a way to keep the current Admin’s foreign-policy track record in the public eye during an election season when that can only hurt Pub candidates’ chances; which is, again, perfectly legitimate.
I mean, they had their chance, and prosecutors have to play politics like anybody else. Not having indicted Rove for the Plame Affair back in 2006, it would look silly to do so now.
Sometimes justice needs to put on its silly hat.
The White House attack machine is all over this, of course, calling him a ‘disgruntled employee’, etc. Hopefully, they’ll go too far and he can sue them for slander/libel. On “Today” today, he rebutted the ‘disgruntled’ charge and said instead that he was disillusioned and disappointed, particularly when Bush told him he had directed that information be leaked to the press. But he says he still has affection for the prick, so he apparently didn’t learn from the experience.
Be patient, he’s obviously a slow learner.
Well, he was with W since the Texas days, they were friends for a long time, and McClellan seems to buy the explanation that, WRT Iraq, W was more self-deluded than malicious.
Insanity defense?