Anyone watching closely notice a change in the past

[Az]

In response to the accusation that he timed the release of his book Clarke pointed out that the WH had his book tied up for the last 3 months. They knew it was coming. They had to have been shoring up the defenses during the time they had. Did any of our more attentive DUers notice a change in their stance about 3 months ago?

[TNDemo]

1. I was wondering if that was why

Dennis Hastert was lobbying hard to have the 9/11 commission hearings completed as soon as possible - so that they could be done before the book came out. He ended up not getting his way but I have wondered why the white house did not delay clearing the book any longer.

[blm]

2. That's about the time they leaked word they were stepping up search

for Bin Laden. I assumed it was because they saw they would be facing Kerry in November and Kerry had a team filled with intel guys who knew Bush's failures.

I also noted a while back when the video of the Al Qaeda camp was leaked that it was because of Clarke's book coming out. Bush wanted to define Clinton as the problem before the criticism was turned on him.

[Az]

3. Kick for the researchers

:kick:
If we see how they shifted we can spot what else they are covering.

[SayitAintSo]

4. Good catch .... I think you have a very valid point....

The media have noted repeatedly how unusual it is for a sitting president to get this aggresive this early in a campaign.

[sweetheart]

5. Breaking ranks

Bush has nightmares about hundreds of white house employees suddenly
awakening to jesus christ and "truth"... that these people would
expose him and his gang for their crimes.

Its down to police psychology now, how to get a gang of criminals
who won't rat each other out, to crack. Hit them with a blizzard
of allegations, and watch them swat at them like mosquitos.

Methinks their con-game is breaking up.