It's not news.

That is a significant summary in the opening portion of a post by three McClatchy bloggers writing about Scott McClellan's book that seems to have generated lots of discussion and no new information. They do a great job of setting the record straight. Read it here.

It is so refreshing to see good reporting. Too bad folks were not paying attention to this crowd back when they were reporting the truth amid all the propaganda.

Sigh.

Oh, and Scotty... you and the horse you rode in on.

Tool.

UPDATE:
Glenn Greenwald has a few words on the subject also. Concluding yesterday's post:

Maybe Rutten should ask them how they did it since, according to Rutten, that was impossible. Speak to sources inside and outside the Government disputing the administration's claims. Give a platform to experts warning of the dangers of the invasion. Trumpet the multiple discrepancies between the administration's claims and what was available in the public record. Isn't this excruciatingly obvious? The Washington Post's Dan Froomkin adds more evidence here regarding the profound media failures.

How did Woodward and Bernstein uncover what the Nixon criminals did since they kept it secret? It must have been impossible! How did Dana Priest uncover the CIA Black Sites in Eastern Europe without being able to go there and visit them? How did Jim Risen and Eric Lichtblau find out that the Bush administration was eavesdropping on Americans without the warrants required by law? It's called "reporting": the process of finding out, through investigation, that which the Government seeks to conceal. Why does that need to be explained to the "media critic" of The Los Angeles Times? If he doesn't understand that, what does he understand?

[Emphasis mine]

--the BB