First, notice that Fox released an 'on background' press briefing. Talking to some folks I know in Gov't- they are pretty horrified that Fox did this. These briefings are done with reporters as a courtesy to dissimenate background and contextual information, kind of a '101' for a press pool that circulates between very diverse topics throughout their career, and typically are not considered strictly on record. Its rare for these things to be released. The person providing the information is nearly always operating with very strict marchoing orders about what to say and how to make it sound. Look into it.

That Fox has politicized this process has opened a really nasty door. Its not as bad as identifying anonympous sources, but its pretty dirty.

Second, the timing for the release of the book was largely up to the review process that everyone has to submit to who leaves Gov't and writes a book. Clarke points out thta this process extended months beyond the 'typical' period- which may be because of the O'Neil 'screw up' in the process, or it may very well be because the admin was timing it so that partisan congressmen could play foot-soldier against Clarke. or who knows, maybe somebodys cat died and they had a few bad weeks.

Third: Its difficult to make this 'partisan attack dog' arument that you are trying to make because:

1. He took a huge 'mea culpa' in the book and in his testimony (listening to it now), he blames himself in just as much measure a he blames Bush
2. He openly attacks the Clinton period in where he thinks they may have failed
3. He is a registered republican, appointed by Reagan and served under two subsequent republican admins
4. He really is one of the top experts in america on terrorism
5. He is getting a lot of on-the-record and off-the-record confirmation from other sources
6. So far, he seems to be standing up excellently in his examination by the comitte.