Skip to comments.9/11 commission member charges Viacom, Kerry campaign "mugged" them
Posted on 07/22/2004 2:08:12 PM PDT by Marfoe
9-11 COMMISSION MEMBER CHARGES: MEDIA OBSTRUCTION; WE WERE MUGGED BY VIACOM'
Clarke book rollout... 'We were hijacked by a combination of Viacom and the Kerry campaign in the handling of Clarke's testimony'... Developing...
Yeah...but they should have spoke up about it more at the time. They let it all happen.
Always look at what they say - GOP leaked to distract from 9/11 report - then you will know what they did and are trying to cover up!
Clarke's book? Bob Kerrey held it up for the cameras like a salesman. Reminded me of a game show hostess holding up a box of Rice-a-Roni.
Okay, spell it out for me....What is going on here.
It looks like they kept their silence so as not to look divided. My hunch is that the Kerry campaign and Viacom wanted to boost sales of Clarke's book, for differing reasons of course. The Clarke testimony was played up, leaked, whatever for these purposes, not for the work of the 9/11 commission.
In other words, as we always suspected, until Condi set things straight, the 9/11 commission was being used at Viacom and Kerry's will.
Was Clarke's original, closed-doors testimony before the commission ever released?
But Bob's promotion of Dick's book lacked the subtlety of a game show sponsor spiel. ;-)
July 22, 2004, 5:12 p.m.
A 9/11 commissioner unloads on Richard Clarke and his jihad against Bush.
It is a day of 9/11 Commission unanimity, but one commissioner, looking back at its public work, is remembering the partisan past. "We were mugged by Viacom," Republican commissioner John Lehman says, referring to the owner of the publisher of Richard Clarke's book, Against All Enemies, and the owner of CBS, which broadcast a long, loving segment devoted to Clarke just prior to the release of his book.
"I think we were mugged by Viacom," Lehman told NRO in a phone interview on Thursday afternoon. "Because they changed the release date of the book and geared up 60 Minutes to launch his book to time them with his testimony and they edited his book to take out all of the criticisms of Clinton from his [original private] testimony. Because they wanted to make it a jihad against Bush."
Lehman says that Clarke's original testimony included "a searing indictment of some Clinton officials and Clinton policies." That was the Clarke, evenhanded in his criticisms of both the Bush and Clinton administrations, who Lehman and other Republican commissioners expected to show up at the public hearings. It was a surprise "that he would come out against Bush that way." Republicans were taken aback: "It caught us flat-footed, but not the Democrats."
more at link above
Interesting.................and they want us to trust this report? This one statement discredits the whole thing.
Interesting. So what were the RATS using to blackmail Clarke??????
So, Clark's book is edited to exonerate Clinton, and the National Archives are "edited" by Sandy Berger to ....
How naive was Lehman? As far as I am concerned, that excuse just does not stand.
May I say that honorable people expect others to be honorable. It's the rats that expect the worst possible behaviour because it's the way they operate.
And of course, Mr. Lehman, you decided that the only way to right that wrong was to denigrate the FDNY, comparing the firefighters that gave their lives to save others on 9/11/01 to a bunch of "Boy Scouts", to the whoops and cheers of approval from the Kerry-funded Jersey Girls.
Blah-blah-blah, Lehman - go peddle it somewhere else. You shit in the bed - don't expect me to feel sorry for you because you just discovered it stinks.
Everyone needs to know that the candidate put politics before the national security. Before the innocent lives of Americans.
This is as egregious as what Berger has done.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.