A former White House press secretary has said the US president was involved in misinforming the public over the leaking of a CIA agent's identity.
In an excerpt from his book, Scott McClellan says George W Bush helped mislead the public over the role in the affair of two White House aides.

The CIA agent, Valerie Plame, says her identity was leaked because her diplomat husband opposed the Iraq war.

The White House said Mr Bush would not ask anyone to pass false information.

Lawsuit

Mr McClellan's book is not scheduled for publication until April and the excerpt released was brief.

It refers to a White House press conference he attended in 2003.

At the conference, Mr McClellan told journalists that the two aides Karl Rove and Lewis "Scooter" Libby were "not involved" in leaking Ms Plame's identity.

The excerpt reads: "There was one problem. It was not true.

"I had unknowingly passed along false information. And five of the highest ranking officials in the administration were involved in my doing so: Rove, Libby, the vice-president, the president's chief of staff, and the president himself."

Mr McClellan, who served as press secretary from 2003 to 2006, and his publisher later clarified the excerpt.

Peter Osnos of Public Affairs Books said Mr McClellan was not suggesting Mr Bush deliberately lied.

"He told him something that wasn't true, but the president didn't know it wasn't true," Mr Osnos said. "The president told him what he thought to be the case."

Libby, Vice-President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff, is the only person charged over the affair. He was sentenced to 30 months in jail for obstructing an inquiry into the leaking of the identity.

However, Mr Bush intervened in July to prevent Libby from serving a prison term.

Ms Plame said Mr McClellan's excerpt was "shocking" and that she believed Mr McClellan had been "sent out to lie to the press corps".

Current White House press secretary Dana Perino said: "The president has not and would not ask his spokespeople to pass on false information."
BBC NEWS | Americas | Bush 'involved' in CIA leak case

I will be so glad when this scum-bag administration is out of office. I'll admit--i'm pretty much watching the dem contestants, but even the frontrunner repubs couln't eff things up nearly as bad as they are now.

Still and all--I'm going to vote my conscience. (which means Dem)

Let people breathe, the planet not suffocate, and fugging get rid of fossil fuels!!!!! How stupid are we ALL? The Carter administration taught us that and he was elected in '76!!!

We as gluttonous consumers have brought it upon ourselves.

Rid of fossil fuels = no war in the middle east--well at least a lot of the war...

__________________

It ended up being false...

What happened was typical in today's news outlets...They took a quote, read into it, changed the context, and created their own interpretation...

Ended up being a whole lotta nothin'...

Publisher: McClellan doesn't believe Bush lied

It's stuff like this that makes the myth like "Bush lied" continue to grow...Just throwing crap on the wall praying for something to stick...and when it doesn't, just tell everybody it did anyway...

__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd

Whether he deliberately lied or just spouted off his mouth without knowing the facts (gee--when has THAT ever happened with this president?) he's still a dumbass that will go down as one of the absolute worst presidents in US history.

__________________

Seriously? Bush vowed to get to the bottom of who leaked her name and hold them accountable. To date who has he held accountable? That was indeed a lie.

__________________
Wine is fine, but whisky's quicker....--Ozzy

As is typical in many of these threads, the subject starts out saying one thing, responses come along which misrepresent the point.

Interestingly enough, the original article I quoted stated, quite explicitly: "Peter Osnos of Public Affairs Books said Mr McClellan was not suggesting Mr Bush deliberately lied."

NOWHERE in the article I quoted does it say Bush "lied".
Stated false info? Yes.
And that is a PROVEN fact.

But then we get "this" response...

And what "it" supposedly ended up being "false"?
Nothing that was actually stated in this thread.


And what was ACTUALLY STATED which is false?
Never mind. I don't expect a response...


Nobody said "Bush lied".
But once again, somebody has responded with a strawman to ignore the bigger issue.

Bush's administration had a hand in this, and BUSH WAS CLUELESS.
So some people can complain that "Bush didn't lie" in order to overlook the bigger issue. Bush has CORRUPTION IN HIS CAMP and is IGNORANT cause he cannot even run the people that work closest to him...

That direct enough for you?

Excuse me for making an attempt to look at where you were going with this, but YOU did not supply any commentary...making us readers try to figure out your thoughts...

So what did I do?...I simply went by what I already know about the story...

And here's what I know...

News outlets have already made the claim that "Bush lied" publicly pertaining to this story...

Here's just one example...

McClellan: Bush lied about Valerie Plame - MSN Video
Watch the video...It mentions someone lying every few seconds...including the president multiple times...

So forgive me if that wasn't the angle you were going for, but since there was no personal thoughts in your post, I'm relegated to figure it out on my own...

__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd

Redd--Maybe he didn't want to throw "thoughts" out there. Maybe he just wanted to put out a story and see what peeps had to say. We can all have an opinion without seeing where someone else is "coming from" first...

Why are you forming your opinions on what you perceive others to be thinking? You're smarter than that... Independent thinking...!!!

And sorry if if it looks like I am in any way putting words in someone eles's mouth. I am not.

This is my opinion solely.

__________________

I understand totally...

But look at it from my perspective...

All through the week I've seen story after story on this being spun into a "Bush lied" statement...

And then I see the same story as a thread on the forum with no commentary....What was I to think?...

Defensive kneejerk reaction?...I can accept that...

But when you see the same accusations over and over and over again, than all I ask for is understanding when the wolf actually shows up in town after hearing "wolf" being cried from the rooftops for the last few years...

__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd

I didn't see what commentary was needed.
When the article says that Bush didn't lie, do I need to parrot that so people won't assume I believe he was lying?

But now that I have stated my position, and you still haven't commented on it, allow me to repeat...

Bush was clueless as to what people were doing underneath him.
He either didn't ask, which I qualify as incompetent, or he did ask and they lied to him, and then he provided no penalty, which I also qualify as incompetent.

It boils down quite simply.
Either Bush knew what he was having repeated was inaccurate => lie. (I don't believe this option)
Or Bush did not know that what he was repeating was inaccurate. And considering the corruption was within his own house, that's pretty damn scary.

So while Bush may have not lied, the alternative is hardly flattering...