Just for the schadenfreude-liciousness of it all...

Add me to the growing list of those who are having great difficulty understanding McClellan's motives. I spent two years as a White House reporter, much of it during McClellan's reign. At no time did Scott ever indicate, either publicly or privately, he had the misgivings he expressed in this book.

What I hear about the book does not sound like the Scott McClellan I knew for two years. I can say without fear of contradiction, that I knew Scott better than any other White House correspondent or Washington reporter.

In my book, "The Great Media War: A Battlefield Report" I discussed McClellan's handling of the White House press operation. At every turn, I gave Scott the benefit of the doubt for the devastating communication failures that plagued the Bush administration. It now appears that Scott did not deserve such allowances. By his own admission, McClellan either perpetrated a fraud behind the podium or has done so with this book. Whichever the case, Scott McClellan's credibility is zero.

If anyone knows about having zero credibility, it's Jeff Gannon.

Meanwhile, Bush's eCampaign Re-election Director: "McClellan savaged for saying what everyone knows to be true"