Ari Fleischer Biography
Ari Fleischer is an American media consultant and political aide and he served as a White House Press Secretary for President George W. Bush from January 2001 to July 2003. He was born on October 13th, 1960 in Pound Ridge, New York, USA.
He is the son of Martha and Alan A. Fleischer. He attended Fox Lane High School in Bedford, New York in 1978. He then went to Middlebury College in Vermont in 1982. Today, he works as a media consultant for the NFL, College Football Playoff, and other sports organizations and players through his company, Ari Fleischer Communications.
Ari Fleischer Age
He was born on October 13th, 1960 in Pound Ridge, New York, USA. He is 58 years old as of 2018.
Rebecca Davis Ari Fleischer | Ari Fleischer Wife | Where Does Ari Fleischer Live | Ari Fleischer Family
He married Rebecca Elizabeth Davis in November 2002. Rebecca was an employee in the Office of Management and Budget. They got married in an interfaith ceremony. Rabbi Harold S. White officiated the ceremony, with the participation of Rev. Michael J. Kelley, a Roman Catholic priest. The couple lives in New York with their child, Sarah Elizabeth Fleischer.Ari Fleischer
Ari Fleischer Net Worth
He has an estimated net worth of $ 5 million.
Ari Fleischer Fox News
He serves as a contributor for both Fox News Channel and Fox Business Network. He is based in New York and he joined Fox in July 2017. He offers political analysis for both Fox News and Fox Business daytime and primetime programming.
Ari Fleischer Communications | Ari Fleischer Sports Communications
Ari Fleischer Communications and Ari Fleischer Sports Communications offer media management, strategies, advice, and training. From the Oval Office to the corner office and from the front office to the field, they have the experience to help anyone handle the bad news and take advantage of the good news.
Ari Fleischer Email
The email address is; firstname.lastname@example.org
Ari Fleischer Taking Heat
For two and a half years, Ari Fleischer served as the official liaison between the White House and members of the press, acting as the voice of President George W. Bush and his administration, and was one of the President’s most trusted advisers.
In this riveting account, Fleischer goes behind the scenes as he recalls his experiences in the West Wing and his encounters with the White House press corps. He took the heat, fielded the questions, and brought the President’s message into living rooms around the world.
In Taking Heat, Fleischer, for the first time, gives his perspective on:
- The 2000 election, from the recounts to the transitionto power
- September 11, 2001, its aftermath, and the anthrax scare
- The pressure-filled buildup to the war in Iraq
- The White House press corps, who they are, and how they report the news
- The factors that led to his decision to leave Washington.
Taking Heat is an introspective and analytical exploration of the early Bush administration.
Title Taking Heat: The President, the Press, and My Years in the White House
Author Ari Fleischer
Edition large print
Publisher HarperCollins, 2005
ISBN 0060759437, 9780060759438
Length 688 pages
Ari Fleischer Twitter
Hope Hicks resignation ‘unsurprising’: Ari Fleischer
Ari Fleischer NEWS
Fleischer feeling forgetful following fiasco
Ari Fleischer, the former press secretary from the Bush/Cheney White House, maintains a regrettably high-profile role as a Republican critic of President Obama. Today on Twitter, Fleischer turned his attention to Iraq.
“Regardless of what anyone thinks of going into Iraq in 2002, it’s a tragedy that the successes of the 2007 surge have been lost & abandoned.”
We should note at the outset that the U.S. invasion of Iraq began in 2003, not 2002, and when we’re talking about catastrophic wars of choice, we should at least try to get some of these basic details right.
That said, let’s not dwell on this. Maybe Fleischer just forgot. Or maybe it was a typo. Perhaps he’s referring to the fact that Bush/Cheney decided in 2002 to launch the unnecessary war under false pretenses, even if “shock and awe” didn’t actually begin until 2003.
More interesting is the reminder from Jason Linkins that in 2011, when President Obama announced that all U.S. troops are departing Iraq, Fleisher, a longtime war proponent, endorsed the Democratic administration’s decision.
Obama’s decision on Iraq was the “right one,” Fleisher said at the time (in a tweet that’s still online). The “Iraq war is over,” he said. “It’s time.”
One wonders if Fleisher has also forgotten everything he told the nation about the merits of this war back when it was his job to speak for the president.
And while we’re at it, we should probably also take a moment to talk about the surge.
For a variety of Republicans, including John McCain, the surge policy – vastly increasing the U.S. troop presence in Iraq in early 2007 – was a grand success. In fact, for many of these same Republicans, the surge was so glorious, those who endorsed it should be celebrated as geniuses – no matter how badly they screwed up every other aspect of the debate.
Indeed, these same Republicans tend to argue that critics of the surge are obviously idiots with no credibility – even if they were right about the entire conflict from before the invasion was even launched.
That said, is there a kernel of truth to the rhetorical line about the surge? The answer is a little tricky.
The truth is, security conditions in Iraq did improve after the surge policy was implemented, but what proponents of the idea tend to forget is that there were other factors unfolding in Iraq at that time, including the Sunni Awakening, which pre-dated the surge policy, and the ceasefire announced by Shiite militia leader Muqtada al-Sadr, which contributed to the decline in violence.
For many on the right, the debate is effectively a bumper sticker: “Surge = Success.” That’s an overly simplified way to look at what actually happened.
Indeed, the ostensible political benefit of the reduction in violence was supposed to be “breathing room” for officials to reach a more stable, long-term solution to Iraq’s sectarian conflicts. That Iraqi leaders never seized that opportunity is a tragedy, but that’s obviously not the fault of U.S. leaders.
Fareed Zakaria’s column on Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki rings true.
The prime minister and his ruling party have behaved like thugs, excluding the Sunnis from power, using the army, police forces and militias to terrorize their opponents. The insurgency the Maliki government faces today was utterly predictable because, in fact, it happened before. From 2003 onward, Iraq faced a Sunni insurgency that was finally tamped down by Gen. David Petraeus, who said explicitly at the time that the core element of his strategy was political, bringing Sunni tribes and militias into the fold. The surge’s success, he often noted, bought time for a real power-sharing deal in Iraq that would bring the Sunnis into the structure of the government.
A senior official closely involved with Iraq in the Bush administration told me, “Not only did Maliki not try to do broad power-sharing, he reneged on all the deals that had been made, stopped paying the Sunni tribes and militias, and started persecuting key Sunni officials.”