The transformation of Richard Clarke (Novak)

Chicago Sun-Times ^ | March 29, 2004 | Robert Novak

[cyncooper]

I thought this a fairly balanced article by Novak but his analysis is a bit flawed.

He says Clarke felt pushed aside by the new administratin so turned, but he never voted for Bush so I'm not sure he was awaiting a Republican administration where he expected to prosper. On the other hand, Novak correctly points out that Clarke's past statements, including the Miniter book, were critical of Clinton and laudatory of Bush.

Also he presents the Clarke line describing Rice as "disengaged" as if it had a factual basis, when emails have been produced from Rice informing Clarke he was missing meetings at which his attendance was requested. I just don't think the documentation supports that portrayal of Condi Rice.

I would like to see more mention of the concerns raised by Christopher Shays going back to 2000 and that he brought to Rice's attention immediately upon the inauguration of President Bush.

One reason I was curious to read Novak's take is there has been some speculation on FR that Clarke may have been involved in the Wilson/Plame affair so may have been one of Novak's sources. I don't see any hints of that here, (darn it).

[kellynla]

Bottom line: Clarke has about as much credibility as a sceen door on a submarine.
Time to put the Clarke Bar to bed.
His 15 minutes of fame are up. Cyaaaaaaa
Semper Fi,
Kelly

[kellynla]

sceen door = screen door
LOL

[EternalHope]

Why is everyone looking for personal slights, hurt feelings, or some complicated psychological weakness as the reason Clarke turned?

The most likely reasons for treason are:
1. Money. (Certainly plenty of that here, and there could easily be more than we know.)
2. Blackmail. (If Clarke has skeletons, the Clintons would certainly know about 'em.)
3. All of the above.

[Diogenesis]

Why would you? Traitor Novak and effective-traitor Clarke BOTH work for Kerry and the DNC.

[lilylangtree]

A posting last week indicated Clarke for the past decade contributed to the demoncRATS. People don't willingly shell out money for political candidates unless there's something to be gained. Considering that Clarke NEVER support Pubby candidates is indeed telling in and of itself.

[elli1]

Also he presents the Clarke line describing Rice as "disengaged" as if it had a factual basis...

I'm not sure that this is what Novak is trying to say. I think he means that Clarke & Rice didn't have the same working relationship that Clarke had w/ Sandy Berger. The sentence is somewhat ambiguous--my first take was the same as yours.

[CedarDave]

What is the name of the newspaper or magazine that is the source for the cartoon?

[lilylangtree]

Toon is good. Keep in mind that under the Clintoonian Administration, more countries were bombed than in any other president coinciding with an outbreak of Bubba's sex scandals. Bubba ordered bombing of the following countries: Somalia (1993), Haiti (1994), Bosnia (1995), Afghanistan (1998), Sudan (1998), Iraq (1998) and Yugoslavia (1999)--an average of a country per year except election years 1996 and 2000.

[cyncooper]

I agree he was saying that and that is why I said I wished there'd be more mention of the Shays letter to Rice. It seems obvious to me that influenced the relationship.

Also the memos where Rice requested Clarke start attending meetings he was missing go to it being a two-way street and not a matter of a disengaged Rice not holding meetings or not wanting to deal with an issue she was in fact very much dealing with.

So I do think by leaving out those aspects, Novak's analysis is flawed in that area.

[malia]

You referred to 'the Shays letter to Rice' whats that all about?

[cwb]

"He even interprets U.S. intervention in Bosnia as having ''defeated al-Qaida,'' adding that Clinton ''had seen earlier than anyone that terrorism would be the major new threat facing America.'"

Wow...and now we learn that the war in Bosnia was also about Al Qaeda? I wonder how he felt about Clinton's war in Kosovo since the KLA was on his own State Department's terrorist list, with evidence of collusion between them and Al Qaeda. Hell, the London newspapers were warning Clinton all along that Iranian Mulsims were funneling weapons into Bosnia to use in that battle...and yet he did nothing to prevent it.

I don't want to get into another debate about who's right or wrong in the Balkan conflict, but the fact is, the Balkans are the last front in protecting Europe's "soft underbelly" from Muslim expansion. Our intervention in this region has only made that expansion more likely, as the Balkans are now a breeding ground for Islamofascists. The fact that Clarke sees the opposite is evidence he doesn't know what he's talking about.

[elli1]

Here's a cut & paste that refers to the Shays letter: -----------------------------------------------------------

In a letter to the 9/11 commission on Wednesday, Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.) told panel members that ''Clarke was part of the problem before Sept. 11 because he took too narrow a view of the terrorism threat.''

Shays said that before the Sept. 11 terror attacks, a House panel held twenty hearings and two formal briefings on terrorism -- and Richard Clarke ''was of little help in our oversight.''

''When he briefed the subcommittee, his answers were both evasive and derisive,'' Shays said in his March 24, 2004 letter.

Shays noted that ''no truly national strategy to combat terrorism was ever produced during Mr. Clarke's tenure.''

Shays also released a copy of a letter he wrote to Clarke on July 5, 2000, telling Clarke that Shays' subcommittee found the information Clarke had given them ''less than useful,'' and asking him to answer additional questions.

And Shays released a January 22, 2001 letter he wrote to National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, complaining that Clarke had not answered the subcommittee's questions. ''During a briefing to this Subcommittee, Mr. Clarke stated that there is no need for a national strategy,'' Shays wrote to Rice.

''This Subcommittee, and others, disagree with Mr. Clarke's assessment that U.S. government agencies do not require a planning and preparation document to respond to terrorist attacks,'' Shays wrote.

[EllaMinnow]

Interesting analysis by Novak, but he's only skimming the surface.

I've read it 3 times over looking specifically for anything to lead one way or the other about the likelihood of Clarke being the source of the Plame leak to Novak...but it's as clear as mud.

[Gorjus]

Why is everyone looking for personal slights, [or] hurt feelings, ... as the reason Clarke turned?

Most likely because that's the high-probability reason. The man is an ego-driven bureacrat who was shunted aside. He'd hit back regardless of money or blackmail. It's not a 'complicated psychological weakness' - or at least, it's not complicated.

[cyncooper]

Christopher Shays wrote a letter to the 9/11 Commission in advance of Clarke's testimony.

He also copied them letters. One was directly to Clarke dated 2000 more or less chastising him for his appearance before Shays' committee that summer.

The other letter was to Condoleezza Rice dated January 22, 2001 (two days after GWB inaugurated) apprising her of his concerns re: Clarke.

He also enclosed a list of all the meetings his committee had held.

Pdf file takes a minute to open so be patient:

http://www.cnsnews.com/pdf/2004/911commissionLetter.pdf

[elli1]

I had to go digging to find the Shays info. Wow. You are 100% correct.

[cyncooper]

See link at 17 (as I cautioned, takes a while to load) for more.

[MoralSense]

b