{"id":6240,"date":"2006-01-03T15:36:16","date_gmt":"2006-01-03T20:36:16","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com\/?p=6240"},"modified":"2006-01-03T15:36:16","modified_gmt":"2006-01-03T20:36:16","slug":"he-could-tell-us-but-then-hed-have-to-kill-us","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/he-could-tell-us-but-then-hed-have-to-kill-us\/","title":{"rendered":"He could tell us, but then he&#8217;d have to kill us"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>I hate to criticize Scott McClellan two posts in a row &#8212; oh, who am I kidding &#8212; but there was another exchange in <a href=\"http:\/\/www.whitehouse.gov\/news\/releases\/2006\/01\/20060103-1.html\">today&#8217;s briefing<\/a> that&#8217;s important. Indeed, it gave us a hint as to how the White House will deal with questions surrounding Bush&#8217;s warrantless-search program whenever queries get uncomfortable.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Q: A number of members of Congress do not agree that the President has the authority to do what he did in that case.<\/p>\n<p>McClellan: Well, previous administrations have cited similar authority.<\/p>\n<p>Q: And they want to have hearings, and those hearings are supported by many on both sides, including the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, because they don&#8217;t believe that this is within the scope of the President&#8217;s authority.<\/p>\n<p>McClellan: And what&#8217;s your question?<\/p>\n<p>Q: And my question is, does the White House take this into account, will it try to talk to them, will it participate in the hearings?<\/p>\n<p>McClellan: Like I said, and the President has said we&#8217;ve briefed members of Congress on more than a dozen occasions.<\/p>\n<p>Q: But that&#8217;s not what they&#8217;re talking about.<\/p>\n<p>McClellan: And in terms of discussions about this, the President talked about this at his end-of-the-year news conference. We shouldn&#8217;t be talking about intelligence activities, particularly in a time of war, in a public way. This is a highly classified authorization &#8212;<\/p>\n<p>Q: Not anymore. I mean, it&#8217;s public now.<\/p>\n<p>McClellan: No, it still is. It still is highly classified. The President has talked in a very limited way about the nature of this authorization and what it&#8217;s designed to do, and how it&#8217;s limited.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>There&#8217;s ample mendacity here &#8212; Bush&#8217;s recent predecessors <a href=\"http:\/\/thinkprogress.org\/2005\/12\/20\/drudge-fact-check\/\">did not<\/a> cite a similar authority, the congressional &#8220;briefings&#8221; McClellan cited <a href=\"http:\/\/www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com\/archives\/6131.html\">were a joke<\/a>, etc. &#8212; but it&#8217;s that last point that&#8217;s particularly interesting. When the questions started getting a little more pointed, and McClellan didn&#8217;t want to repeat the exact same talking points for the umpteenth time, he rolled out the &#8220;we shouldn&#8217;t be talking about intelligence activities&#8221; talking point. Nevermind that he&#8217;d just spent 15 minutes talking about these intelligence activities; there&#8217;s a war going on and that would be irresponsible.<\/p>\n<p>That&#8217;s actually pretty clever. Someone has questions about the program? The White House will answer them, unless they&#8217;re too hard, in which case the program is &#8220;still highly classified.&#8221; What a convenient and selectively applied principle.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>I hate to criticize Scott McClellan two posts in a row &#8212; oh, who am I kidding &#8212; but there was another exchange in today&#8217;s briefing that&#8217;s important. Indeed, it gave us a hint as to how the White House will deal with questions surrounding Bush&#8217;s warrantless-search program whenever queries get uncomfortable. Q: A number [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[617],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-6240","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-general"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6240","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6240"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6240\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6240"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6240"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6240"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}