PutImpeachment Back On The Table
Q Dana, I wanted to ask you, I know you don’t want to go line-by-line with the whole book thing, the Scott McClellan book — but I’m thinking you may want to address this because there’s something out there. Not having the benefit of having the book in front of me, there’s an allegation apparently made by Scott in the book that a reporter shouted a question to the President, on a trip that Scott had been with him on, just as they were getting on Air Force One, and it was Valerie Plame-related. Basically, it prompted Scott to ask the President directly, “Were you the one who authorized the leaking of Valerie Plame’s name?” And the President apparently told Scott, “Yes, I was.”
MS. PERINO: I don’t know. Obviously I wasn’t there and — obviously I don’t know the context. I think the — it’s hard for me to say. I don’t have the book in front of me either and I don’t know.
But what I do know is that what we have said before, which is defending the President’s decision to go to war is something that we have done repeatedly, and the suggestion that the President had sent Joe Wilson to Africa was false. And so I don’t know if that was what it was in regards to or not, so I’m — I don’t know.
Q But I mean, if that’s an allegation that’s out there, that the President is supposedly responsible for the leaking of Valerie Plame’s name, is that something you want to —
MS. PERINO: I don’t think that’s what Scott says in the book and I think that everyone should go back and look at it a little bit more carefully. I don’t think that’s what he says.
Q Can you comment more generally about whether the President has ever authorized the leaking of classified information?
MS. PERINO: I’m not aware of that, no. And I also know that President Bush would never ask anyone to knowingly go out and lie. But do we defend the President’s record vigorously? Yes, you bet we do. And I think — parts of the book that suggest that there was propaganda or — you know, I just don’t know how substantiated that is in the book. I would ask to — you know, where, when, how, specifically? What are you talking about, were there charts, were there et cetera that you thought were lies? And I don’t think that he’s saying that either. So I just question the accounts.
Dana Don’t Know!
Q On the two congressional fundraisers on this trip, was it the White House’s decision or the candidate’s decisions for them to be closed? Do you know?
MS. PERINO: I don’t know.
Dana Calls The Governor of New York An “Activist Judge”
Q Do you have anything on the Governor of New York’s decision to recognize gay marriages from other states?
MS. PERINO: I saw a brief report about it. I don’t know a lot about the decision. I think that I would go back to that the President believes that we should try to make this decision based on a nationwide agreement for the what the definition of a marriage should be, and that activist judges and different states trying to impose something of that importance on the rest of the nation is to be looked at skeptically.
Q Is there any particular concern, though, about the legal implications of states beginning to recognize other states’ rights, in other words?
MS. PERINO: Yes, I’m sure that there is, but again I briefly saw the reports and I would refer you — let me see if I can get something from the Justice Department — I’m sure there’s going to be a lot of people who analyze the legal ramifications of it. I think the President’s point is that judges shouldn’t be making these decisions; the people should be making these decisions.
Thanks again for this Holden. You know what pisses me off? That Dana would be able to use the “That’s not EXACTLY what the President said” line because of sloppy question asking.
1) Have the book in front of you.
2) Use the exact quote.
3) Keep pushing for a real answer.
4) Profit!
But of course that would mean that they are doing their job, but they can’t be expected to do that because they are waiting for President Clinton or Obama to really get on the ball.
Why waste your energy on a lame duck President?
And notice how Dana eludes the question. The question wasn’t whether George W. Bush personally sent Joseph Wilson to Africa. That’s not the issue, that was never the issue. The issue was, and the question was, whether George W. Bush chose to reveal Valerie Plame’s covert identity, in violation of the law, to punish her husband for undermining his rationale for the war.
Dana doesn’t answer that. She pretends that that wasn’t the question. But it was.
Oh, and on another note, it’s pretty rich for Dana Perino, of all people, to criticize someone else for not being specific with times and dates and details when her most common response to a fact-specific question is either to tell the reporter to ask someone else or to answer that she doesn’t know the answer.
Is this Dana Perino, or Nathan Thurm?
MS. PERINO: I don’t know. Obviously I wasn’t there and — obviously I don’t know the context. I think the — it’s hard for me to say. I don’t have the book in front of me either and I don’t know… And so I don’t know if that was what it was in regards to or not, so I’m — I don’t know…I don’t think that’s what he says. …I’m not aware of that, no. …And I think — parts of the book that suggest that there was propaganda or — you know, I just don’t know how substantiated that is in the book. I would ask to — you know, where, when, how, specifically? What are you talking about, were there charts, were there et cetera that you thought were lies? And I don’t think that he’s saying that either. So I just question the accounts.