February 10, 2006

Bush offers plot details as criticism, flopsweat increases
White House spokesfascist Scott McClellan later told reporters that the timing of the speech was unrelated to the surveillance matter. Bush had delivered the speech "to highlight today the strong international cooperation in the war on terrorism," he said. "I would discourage you from suggesting otherwise."

Q: Can I ask you a question about the timing of the speech today? Why now, given the ongoing discussion that is taking place about tactics in fighting the war on terror, why did the President seek to disclose the details today, specifically?

McCLELLAN: The President has been having an ongoing discussion with the American people about the war on terrorism. It's about protecting the American people. 9/11. Terra.

Q: But is it just a coincidence? You had February 6th circled on the calendar for the hearings, the NSA hearings. Is it just a pure coincidence that this comes out today?

McCLELLAN: Well, you're talking about the -- let me mention, the terrorist surveillance program is a vital program, and it's been a very valuable tool. I'm not going to get into discussing any of the tools that may have been used when it comes to disrupting this plot. We provided you some additional information about this plot. But the purpose of this speech is the way I stated it. And I would discourage you from suggesting otherwise.

[Quick break for a bitchslapping by hero/patriot Helen Thomas regarding Iraq]

Q: A couple things, Scott -- thanks. Since the President said that there were 10 plots that have been thwarted, have there been additional plots that the White House is prepared to acknowledge have been thwarted?

McCLELLAN: I don't have any additional beyond what he has said today. Maybe after the next poll...

Q: On the subject of information-sharing, the Mayor of Los Angeles today is complaining that he got no notification at all that the President planned to disclose this information about an alleged attack plot on his city. In fact, he said, "I'm amazed the President would make this announcement on national television and not inform us of the details through appropriate channels." Insofar as you said earlier that the White House is always looking for ways to inform the American people and keep them up to speed, why disclose the details of a plot that's now four years old?

McCLELLAN: Blah! Blah blah blah blah blah. It's no accident that we haven't been hit again since September 11th. But we know that there is a determined enemy that continues to want to strike us. And we've got to continue working 24/7, using every tool in our arsenal, to disrupt the plots, to prevent attacks, and to bring the terrorists to justice. That's what we are doing.

Q: Scott, was it the President's intention today to draw a link in the public's mind between the NSA program and the bombing plots --

McCLELLAN: No. In fact, I addressed that earlier. Now, does anyone have any questions about angry she-beast Hillary Clinton?

Q: So he would have -- in talking about how the speech was in preparation for some time, he would have brought this up regardless of the fact that the hearings were today and --

McCLELLAN: I would discourage you from thinking it was some other purpose than the way I described it. It's part of our discussion with the American people about what is the number one priority, which is protecting them from attacks and prevailing in the war on terrorism.

Q: One other question. It's still the belief of the White House that, as Karl Rove stated a few weeks ago, that this issue works well politically for Republicans, that the NSA program, the more it's discussed, the more it helps Republicans?

McCLELLAN: Stop it.

Q: Scott, I apologize if I'm still confused, but I wonder if you could tell us a bit more specifically what has changed since October, when we were told that discussing details of this plot was inappropriate, and today? What has actually changed since October in that regard?

McCLELLAN: 9/11, dammit!!!!!!! Why isn't this working???

Q: So sources and methods would have been compromised in October, but not today?

McCLELLAN: Well, Peter, we're always looking for ways to provide the American people with more information and that's what I said to you earlier -- maybe you didn't quite hear all that -- but we're always looking to keep the American people informed about the threats we face and provide them better context and better understanding of what we are doing to confront those threats. So that's what this was about, and so that's something we're always looking at.

Q: But that wasn't actually the question. The question was, would sources and methods have been compromised in October, but wouldn't be today?

McCLELLAN: Well, the intelligence community said that it was okay to talk about the information that we provided you today and the President spoke about. So like I said, there is ongoing efforts that we look at to provide the information to the American people, and this was --

Q:
It was not okay in October to talk about that level of detail?

McCLELLAN: I didn't say that. What I said was that they said that it was okay now to talk further about this specific plot.

Q: Would it have been okay in October, but you chose not to?

McCLELLAN: I don't know how many times you're going to keep asking the same question.

Q: As soon as I get an answer.

McCLELLAN: I think I've answered the question.

Q: You think wrong, pudgy white man. Can you say when you started trying to get it declassified so you could talk about it?

McCLELLAN: Well, when we were talking about doing this speech, we were looking for a specific plot that we could talk about in more detail?

Q: So two weeks ago?

McCLELLAN: Well, the speech has been in the works, as I say, for at least three weeks.

Q: So three weeks ago you decided you wanted to try and declassify this particular --

McCLELLAN: Martha, I can't tell you the specific time. But, again, two things -- one, we're always looking to keep the American people informed and provide them additional information like this...

Q: But you say you don't want to give a specific date, but is it fair to stay that you started looking at this when you started looking at giving this speech?

McCLELLAN: Hillary! 9/11! Terra!

Q: Scott, I wanted to just ask a follow-up about the LA plot. Is there something missing from this story, a practical application, a few facts? Because if you want to commandeer a plane and fly it into a tower, if you used shoe bombs, wouldn't you blow off the cockpit? Or is there something missing from this story?

McCLELLAN: I don't know what you're referring to about missing. I mean, I think we provided you a detailed briefing earlier today about the plot. I'm not sure what you're suggesting it.

Q: Think about it, if you're wearing shoe bombs, you either blow off your feet or you blow off the front of the airplane.

McCLELLAN: I hate you guys. :: sob ::

No comments: