Dan Bartlett Explains

Curious as to why Chimpy’s come-to-Jeebus meeting with Iraqi PM Nouri al Maliki was cancelled today?Dan Bartlett is here to set you straight.

You see, Maliki already had a two-way with King Abdullah, and Abdullah already had a two-way with Chimpy, so there is no need for Chimpy, Abdullah and Maliki to have a three-way. Got it?

MR. BARTLETT: The President is going to have a bilateral and dinner with the King of Jordan. Since the King of Jordan and Prime Minister Maliki had a bilateral themselves, earlier today, everybody believed that negated the purpose for the three of them to meet tonight, together, in a trilateral setting. So the plan, according to — since they had such a good, productive bilateral discussion, was just for the President to deal with bilateral issues and other issues with the King this evening in a dinner setting, and then the meetings set for tomorrow will still take place as scheduled.

Well that explains everything quite clearly.

Q So the dinner is off, the three-way.


Q Well if Maliki — he was never going to the dinner anyway, right? It was just supposed to be a meeting.

MR. BARTLETT: There was going to be a trilateral meeting, and then the dinner with the King. Now, since they already had a bilateral themselves, the King of Jordan and the Prime Minister, everybody felt, well, there’s no reason for them to do a trilateral meeting beforehand, because matters had been discussed.

Q So the scheduled trilateral is scrapped.


Q But the dinner — all three of them are still going to be at the dinner?


Q Okay so Maliki is not doing anything?

MR. BARTLETT: The President will see Prime Minister Maliki in the morning.

Rest assured this has nothing to do with the memo leaked to the NYTimes today by a “senior administration official” [cough – Cheney – cough] authored by NSA Steve Hadley that said Maliki doesn’t know his ass from his elbow.

Q No connection to the memo, whatsoever?


The traveling press corps is confused, to say the least.

Q The King and the Prime Minister had a meeting, but the Prime Minister hasn’t seen the President since he got here, and the President changed his schedule to come here for this meeting.

MR. BARTLETT: The President requested the meeting. This was the President requesting the meeting with the Prime Minister. And the substantive meetings on Iraq — look, they were not going to be doing a full detail discussion in a trilateral setting about Iraq and the future of Iraq and the strategy anyway, that just wouldn’t be appropriate. So it was going to be more of a social meeting anyways. But the fact that they had already had a good meeting together, felt like it negated the purpose to doing so. And the President and Prime Minister Maliki will have a very robust and lengthy dialogue tomorrow morning.


Q Is there going to be a readout afterwards?

MR. BARTLETT: Tomorrow?

Q No, tonight.

MR. BARTLETT: There’s not a meeting tonight.

Q There’s not a readout for us?

MR. BARTLETT: For the King of Jordan?

Q Has it changed because Maliki is not part of the meeting?

MR. BARTLETT: I’ll need to check on that, whether you want a readout of the bilateral conversation between the King and the President?

Q Originally we were told it would be a readout by Elliot Abrams afterwards, but then it was a three-way meeting.

MR. BARTLETT: We’ll look into it, we’ll look into the need for that.

Q They’re having a two-way meeting now, and then they’re having dinner.

MR. BARTLETT: Correct.

Q Two events.

MR. BARTLETT: Both with just the President and the King, and their respective staffs.

Q Are they just meeting right now, just between the President and the King, or are there other people?

MR. BARTLETT: Secretary Rice and Steve Hadley are the two representatives from the United States government, and then two representatives to the King are there. And then the dinner will be a little bit — a few more people will be added to that dinner.

Q Are you going to dinner?

MR. BARTLETT: I didn’t make the cut.

Heckuva job, Chimpy!

6 thoughts on “Dan Bartlett Explains

  1. It was probably Abdullah’s doing: “You’ve had enough stress the last few weeks, Maliki – I can handle the buffoon tonight. Get some rest and deal with that asshole in the morning.”
    Either that, or someone realized the problem of Chimpy having to follow a complex conversation between two educated adults.

  2. Question #1:
    “Maliki already had a two-way with King Hussein, and Hussein already had a two-way with Chimpy, so there is no need for Chimpy, Hussein and Maliki to have a three-way. Got it?”
    You wouldn’t be implying that the Arab world is so disgusted with the chimpster that they’re treating him as the buffoon, are you?
    Question #2:
    About the leaked memo – obviously it implies that Iraq hasn’t done well and therefore we need to stay the course.
    But as this is the result of 6 years of the golden chimp/Shrub’s Midas touch in an easy win that will result in them throwing flowers at us (with repeated news blurbs to tell us how good we’re doing):
    Wouldn’t it also mean that the chimperor has no clothes (when you’re a chimp you don’t need any)? Someone is out of touch with reality and has been so for 6 years? Someone’s plan was failed from day #1?
    I warned you they were stupid questions.

  3. Could somebody please declare a moratorium on three-way and chimpster in the same sentence? Ms. Brain meet Mr. Bleach.

  4. “… the three-way…”
    Thanks, Mr. Bartlett. I’ll never get that picture out of my brain. Thanks a goddamn lot.

Comments are closed.