Without an American at the table, that is going to be a very unusual dynamic.

The reason to be skeptical, though, is that there is such weak leadership on all three corners of the triangle.

He did try to stay out of this. He thought what Clinton, Bill Clinton, did at the end of his administration, trying to get a peace deal right at the end, was a very bad thing.

I think it is important that -- and the president deserves credit for actually getting the peace talks started again. They have been paralyzed for seven years.

I think he owes it to the president, and the vice president, as well as to the public, and to the Wilsons, to clarify long before his book comes out.

But he certainly heavily suggests that the president was complicit, that the president was somehow an enabler in him going before the press corps and lying about the non-involvement of Libby and Rove.

McClellan is not saying or suggesting that the president sent him out to lie, but he certainly heavily suggests that the president was complicit, that the president was somehow an enabler in him going before the press corps and lying about…

I think one of the things that is at the foundation of his campaign is, when you live over in other countries for a while and have come from the kind of diverse background he does, you do get an instinctive understanding for other people's…

I tell you, that's -- that is starting to expose a vulnerability on Mrs. Clinton's part that she cannot let open up very much more.

I think that's right, John. And I'm surprised she's taking the bait on this. She's increasingly getting into these one-on-one arguments with Senator Obama. And she's elevating him as -- and making this a two-person race. I don't think…

This is not what her campaign is mainly about is stopping Obama. Her campaign should be about some larger vision of what America is about.

She's vulnerable, she's not inevitable, she can be stopped. She'll be stopped in Iowa.