Olbermann Touts Truce—Then Proposes Impeachment

Change font size:  A |  A

Of all the people to call for a "truce" on excessive partisanship . . .

Interviewing Scott McClellan tonight, Keith Olbermann sanctimoniously suggested that a "truce" on rough political tactics "would be nice." But speaking with John Dean just minutes later, the Countdown host—he who has repeatedly called President Bush a liar and a fascist—reverted to form and regretted that it might be too late to impeach him.

SCOTT MCCLELLAN: [The 1988] election was very much a turning-point election. I think that George Bush, George Bush 41, George Herbert Walker Bush, is a decent individual, and a man who really believes in civility, but he, his advisors around him, knew the only way they could win was to bring down his opponent and go fully negative, and paint Michael Dukakis completely to the left. A guy who had painted himself—who had a record of trying to work to the center in a lot of ways [Ed: ?].

And, um, that legacy continues to this day, and Senator McCain says that he's going to speak out against that and not let that happen. I think that would be good for the country if that is the case. But there are certainly plenty of groups on the Republican side that are going to go forward with that kind of strategy. [Unlike groups on the Dem side. You know, like the kind-and-gentle one that ran the dragging-murder ad against W in 2000.]

KEITH OLBERMANN: Yeah. Truce would be nice.

View video here.

But then, speaking with John Dean just moments later . . .

OLBERMANN: Is there anything to do with this information [from McClellan's book] other to add to the historical record? We've got the Plame outing, Bush's commutation of the Libby sentence, Bush's involvement in the leak. Do the acts constitute obstruction of justice or grounds for an investigation? Because impeachment would be the logical follow-up here, but obviously the clock for impeachment is running down, if it hasn't run down already.

Some truce.