UPDATE: Hatch ‘Clarifies’ False Remark By Pretending He Said Something True
UPDATE: Hatch ‘Clarifies’ False Remark By Pretending He Said Something True
Yesterday we highlighted a claim by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) — reported only in a small Utah newspaper — that “nobody with brains” denies that Saddam Hussein “was supporting al Qaeda.”
As ThinkProgress noted, this is patently false. Both the 9/11 Commission and the Senate Intelligence Committee (of which Hatch is a member) found no collaborative relationship between the two.
Today the Salt Lake Tribune reports that Hatch has “clarified” his remarks:
On Tuesday, Hatch said he may have misspoken at the event, and he was speaking of conditions in post-Hussein Iraq and the terrorist network led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.
“Saddam clearly had a long history of supporting terrorists, but I was not talking about any formal link between Saddam and al-Qaida before the war,” Hatch said in a statement.
“Instead, I pointed out that the current insurgency in Iraq includes al-Qaida, under the leadership of al-Zarqawi, along with former elements of Saddam’s regime.”
Actually, it couldn’t be clearer from Hatch’s original statement what he was talking about, and it had nothing to do with “the current insurgency” or al-Zarqawi:
And, more importantly, we’ve stopped a mass murderer in Saddam Hussein. Nobody denies that he was supporting al-Qaeda. Well, I shouldn’t say nobody. Nobody with brains.
In other words, Hatch’s “clarification” is really just another deception.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Fantastic.
February 22nd, 2006 at 3:06 pmI cry for you, current Americans.
February 22nd, 2006 at 3:08 pmSo fix a lie with a lie.
R2K
February 22nd, 2006 at 3:08 pmWhat’s wrong with you all?
February 22nd, 2006 at 3:08 pmThe Founding Fathers are calling.
They want their country back.
February 22nd, 2006 at 3:09 pmLOL > Orrin Hatch is just trying to wiggle out of his stupid statement! Hatch is brainless for spewing stupidity!
February 22nd, 2006 at 3:15 pmIn other words, Hatch doesn’t know what he’s talking about. That’s clear.
February 22nd, 2006 at 3:18 pmHatch ignored the facts here because they were inconvenient… Bush should be very proud of him…
February 22nd, 2006 at 3:19 pm“Wow, I can see Orrin’s face from here”.
-Orrin Hatches Colon
February 22nd, 2006 at 3:22 pmAnd this is the head of the Senate Intelligence Committee. Somehow, claiming that he meant something completely different from what he originally said isn’t much reassurance. But hey, we stopped Saddam. Who was a mass murderer. And only killed 30,000 civilians in the process. I think I’m going to go lie down now.
February 22nd, 2006 at 3:24 pmThe grass is blue and sky is green in Bushlandia.
February 22nd, 2006 at 3:34 pmLet’s see. Unless he misquoted himself, must be another of those “misstatements” that I am constantly hearing about. We don’t need a war on a metaphor, or a noun, we need a war on misstatements.
February 22nd, 2006 at 3:38 pmWhat a stupid idiot. But again he is a senator from UT, the state where people pretend to be humans.
February 22nd, 2006 at 3:38 pmHatch distinguishes himself regularly as a person who misspeaks on a regular basis. Consult the neocon dictionary for this one.
“Misspeak = got caught in a lie. As in: Bush misspoke about the reasons we went to war in Iraq.”
February 22nd, 2006 at 3:49 pmwhat do you expect from a Mo(r)on who believe in the crap that Mormons believe in? he’s an idiot and a christonazi
February 22nd, 2006 at 3:52 pmUntil and unless the Main Stream Media is forced, shamed or in some way coerced into printing the truth regarding this goper administration, the only thing that all of the progressives – liberals – non gopers have is to continue to bitch to themselves as is what is going on above.
February 22nd, 2006 at 3:53 pmSorry but dems be the facts folks. So, if anyone is interested in the one this that I think might just slap these bastards awake is the following— THE STREETS!!!!
Yup- it is down to that. I guess that this old man is going to have to shuck the sleep socks and put on the shit-kickers once again and see ya all in DC. Post the protests and count me in.
billjpa@aol.com
it just stupifies me that people elect evil people like this to office
February 22nd, 2006 at 3:53 pmOne more classic example of the instant fact checking done by this and other blogs. Here sir, you just drooled this spew you might want to wipe your chin. I think dandy O needs to loosen his tie just a bit.
February 22nd, 2006 at 3:55 pm#15 Don’t be bashing the Mormons. I know they haven’t actually done much for liquor sales, but I’ll take all the federal income taxes they pay.
February 22nd, 2006 at 3:59 pmIs that Jello I see dribbling down Hatch’s Chin ?
February 22nd, 2006 at 3:59 pmHatch tailored the remark to his audience/constituency. Honestly, Utah is what one of under 6 states? that still have positive Bush approval ratings.
#19
I was once Mormon (reverted back to Catholicism – had major problems with their teachings during middle school/high school years) and there really is no point bashing them. It should be noted, however, that the church does play a role in the political sphere – they do ‘education’ sessions near election time with all the men. Same with women in Relief Society too.
And yes, they do pay federal income taxes.
If you want to understand the CONTROL issue in the religion you need look no farther than your tax return.
When paying your tithe you are required to bring your income tax return. And yes, you pay ten percent on your gross, not net, earnings:)
Oh, you ought to hear one of the ‘ideal wife’ lessons. It went something like this ’see this piece of gum (he had been chewing it)? It’s used up and has no flavor. If I asked you if you wanted my used gum, would you want it? It’s like women – you don’t want the used version’
That was one I got a laugh at.
Anyway, I just don’t like Hatch. It has nothing to do with his religion.
February 22nd, 2006 at 4:11 pmSomeone should pull old Orin aside and tell him, after you have inserted your head in your rectum, pushing it further in does not make it pop out the top again.
February 22nd, 2006 at 4:12 pm#19
as to the liquor sales they still insist on you becoming a ‘member’ of a ‘club/bar’ in order to purchase liquor. I paid around 100 during a vacation to get in. Sort of annoying.
The other fun thing to do in Salt Lake City is when you’re at a restraunt ask what alcohol they serve (pick a family place). Ask them loudly. You seriously get stared at by all the other tables. Yah, I settled on Diet Coke. That place wouldn’t serve caffeinated beverages.
February 22nd, 2006 at 4:13 pmWhen in Salt Lake go to Port-O-Call.
Its on the corner of 400th South and West Temple Street.
Its a great 3 story bar with pool tables, big screens, live entertainment and an open sky bar on the 3rd floor.
The tap beer of course is 3.2 but stronger beverages are plentiful. All liquour is served as well as stronger imported beers.
Just find someone walking in and ask them to sponser you, because it like all good bars in Utah are private clubs.
But that rule is laxly enforced.
February 22nd, 2006 at 4:18 pmIn fact, most clubs you can find a sponser. The locals are always glad to do it.
February 22nd, 2006 at 4:19 pmNow of course you won’t see Orrin there.
He’s too busy at Church or in the Temple telling himself what a good Mormon leader he is for bringing the sword of God to the unbelievers and the mongrols.
February 22nd, 2006 at 4:20 pmBut I digress.
The real story is of course the common accepted perception in the right wing inner circles that Iraq was associated with 911, and we are just doing what God wanted us to do.
Who knows, maybe we are. But if we are, then Gods a real son-of-a-bitch.
February 22nd, 2006 at 4:22 pmNew day, new reality. I can’t seem to make it work at my house, but these righties are really good at it.
February 22nd, 2006 at 4:28 pmOnce more Orin Hatch exposes his lack of brains! He must have picked up an old “Talking Points Memo” before everyone in the world knows Saddam did not have ties to Al Qaeda, nor Osama bin Laden. He hated them! Orin Hatch needs to see his local shrink and see what’s wrong with his brain!
February 22nd, 2006 at 4:33 pmHatch blasts ‘phony’ issues
http://www.cnn.com/US/9607/30/clinton.terrorism/
February 22nd, 2006 at 4:36 pmWhat he really meant was some captured Iraqis claimed there was no link, then our interregators beat their brains out.
The ones who told us there was a link, they were allowed to keep their brains.
February 22nd, 2006 at 4:37 pmAmazing. Even when they “clarify” the lie, they lie to do it. This much should be obvious by now – Al Qaeda has absolutely nothing to do with the cluster fuck we got ourselves into in Iraq. Labeling the Iraqi freedom fighters as insurgents or as terrorists does not make them so and we will learn that too just as we learnt that elections alone do not create a democracy.
Blaming the mess in Iraq on someone else is nothing more than wishful thinking. I could be wrong though. Maybe it’s Clinton’s fault. I’ll talk to Sean Hannity and get back to you on that one.
February 22nd, 2006 at 4:44 pmBusted.
February 22nd, 2006 at 4:46 pmThe Clinton Admin found a link. Then proceeded to bomb al shifa, afghanistan and iraq.
William Cohen’s statement to the 911 Commission,
“Concurrently, the U.S. intelligence community obtained physical evidence from outside the al-Shifa facility in Sudan that supported long-standing concerns regarding its potential role in Sudanese chemical weapon efforts that could be exploited by al Qaeda.
The al-Shifa facility had been under surveillance for some time because of a variety of intelligence reports, including HUMINT reports identifying it as a WMD-related facility, indirect links between the facility and Bin Laden and the Iraqi chemical weapons program, and extraordinary security – including surface-to-air missiles – used to protect it during its construction. The direct physical evidence from the scene obtained at that time convinced the U.S. intelligence community that their suspicions were correct about the facility’s chemical weapons role and that there was a risk of chemical agents getting into the hands of al Qaeda, whose interest in obtaining such weapons was clear.
With actionable intelligence in hand, President Clinton made the decision to attack the al Qaeda leadership conference with the intent to kill as many participants as possible.”
February 22nd, 2006 at 4:49 pmWhat is it with Republicans — they just can’t say “I was wrong.” They have to equivocate, and say our ears heard wrong, or their words were misspoken, or misunderstood.
February 22nd, 2006 at 5:03 pmA truly lame, pathetic, and utterly ineffectual attempt on Hatch’s part to make a save…the most laughable part is that it glosses over the fact that the primary reason why we’re having trouble with Zarqawi et al. at present is precisely because of all the malarkey which the neoconservatives trumped up about Hussein’s supposed ties to al-Qaeda and 9-11 in order to justify attacking Iraq!! At least some of what’s currently happening in Iraq is entirely our own fault — our own intelligence community has said under no uncertain terms that our efforts to decrease the spread of terrorism have ironically had the opposite effect.
February 22nd, 2006 at 5:04 pmUh, bluestocking…we attacked al Qaeda and Iraq for those ties in 1998. Before Bush was president.
February 22nd, 2006 at 5:11 pm#34 indirect links between the facility and Bin Laden and the Iraqi chemical weapons program
Remember there are only six degrees of seperation from kevin bacon, tenous links are not hard to form but that is not the same as saying Saddam had direct connections to 9-11, however since you want to believe it go ahead but don’t cry like condi when the world is not as you think it is and have no clue.
February 22nd, 2006 at 5:11 pm“not the same as saying Saddam had direct connections to 9-11″
February 22nd, 2006 at 5:14 pmHatch didn’t say that, did he?
All them Dune Coon Sand Nigras are in bed with each other. We all know it!(except UAE, of course)”
-Hatch
February 22nd, 2006 at 5:15 pm39- He said Saddam supported Al Qaeda, which is simply not true.
The al Shifaa allegations were disputed at the time of the strike, most vocally by Republicans, and have never been completely confirmed or denied.
February 22nd, 2006 at 5:32 pmYesterday we highlighted a claim by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) — reported only in a small Utah newspaper — that “nobody with brains†denies that Saddam Hussein “was supporting al Qaeda.â€
As ThinkProgress noted, this is patently false. Both the 9/11 Commission and the Senate Intelligence Committee (of which Hatch is a member) found no collaborative relationship between the two.
It may be patently true. I think we should check out these so-called “brains” of theirs. How do we know they actually have a brain? Have we seen it? No. So as far as we can say it’s only a rumor that these people actually possess a brain. I’d like to see for myself if you don’t mind.
February 22nd, 2006 at 5:33 pmIf your “supporting somebody” which means money material weapons training, then Hatch is wrong………… but if supporting means the same as I do for the NY Yankee baseball team 700 miles away from Yankee stadium then maybe hatch was right, but in that case then our list of supporters is gonna get kinda long and we are gonna need a bigger army(care to sign up?) and a lot more money in the treasury(higher taxes), which kind of supporting did he say and which kind did he insinuate…..
February 22nd, 2006 at 5:37 pm41,
Clinton said he had actionable intelligence. Hatch was one of those Republicans who supported Clinton’s bombing because of those ties.
p.s. Don’t bother linking wikipedia.
February 22nd, 2006 at 5:40 pm#34, a report I read about the subject seems to indicate that the Iraq-Al Qaeda connection in Sudan was fanciful at best. Your quoted report seems to indicate the same: “…evidence from the scene obtained at that time convinced the U.S. intelligence community that their suspicions were correct about the facility’s chemical weapons role and that there was a risk of chemical agents getting into the hands of al Qaeda…“.
The report I read said the same thing: “….The Iraqis have extensive WMD research experience and they are alleged to have chemical weapons stockpiles in Sudan. If bin Laden is in fact receiving their assistance, the “weaponization†of CBW by his network is only a matter of time.â€
As we can see, no proof of any connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda beyond what we imagined in our fear-filled worst case scenario. Every other report indicates that the exact opposite was really the case. The fanatically religious Bin Laden hated Saddam’s secular regime and hated the fact that Saddam had close ties with his arch enemy, America and the Iran/Iraq war fought with America on the Iraqi side did not help matters. If Bin Laden has/had managed to get his WMDs, Saddam’s Iraq was the very last place he could have got them from.
February 22nd, 2006 at 5:50 pmI think “Red and Kurley Pube” is freakin hilarious.
February 22nd, 2006 at 5:52 pm#44
Republicans support it if it involves bombing. Can you give me a link or citation of any Republican officials in the last 30 years that were against any type of bombing?
February 22nd, 2006 at 5:54 pmAccording to pube I’m a member of the yankees (I wish), but so does pube.
February 22nd, 2006 at 5:57 pmTruth,
February 22nd, 2006 at 6:00 pmsee Wag the Dog.
44- Since when does anything any Clinton said carry any weight with wingers?
P.S. Don’t bother telling me whom I can link to. Oh that’s right, wingers don’t like facts that contradict their preferred storyline. My bad.
February 22nd, 2006 at 6:01 pmI’m independent, but not asleep in the 90’s. Your bad.
February 22nd, 2006 at 6:03 pmHatch never admits to making weird statements > he always when confronted claims he said or meant something else! The citizens of Utah need to realize that he does not represent their interests in DC, and is just a Bush apologist PERIOD.
February 22nd, 2006 at 6:06 pmUh, bluestocking…we attacked al Qaeda and Iraq for those ties in 1998. Before Bush was president.
Comment by Red and Karly Pyoub
***************
Even if that’s true (and I see more than a few people here challenging your claims), it still doesn’t change the fact that our own intelligence officials have gone on record stating categorically that the current insurgency in Iraq from al-Zarqawi et al. is largely due to our military actions there — military actions which to all appearances were based largely on distorted evidence and exaggerated claims. All we’ve really succeeded in doing is robbing Peter to pay Paul — whatever presence (if any) that al-Qaeda may have had in Iraq prior to the war has only gotten stronger as a result of the actions we took in attempt to lessen it!
February 22nd, 2006 at 6:38 pmI had a job that lasted 3 months in Salt Lake City. Stayed at the Tri-Arc Travelodge, nice place back then.
At the bar they sent you to the 13th floor liquor store to buy your bottle, which you turned over to the bartender. They then charged you $1.00 for water mix.
When you went upstairs to the night club, you took your bottle with you.
Great place, prosties all over the place. The first night there I danced with three different gals, got propositioned by all three. One was married to a doctor, she said.
There is a lot of liquor flowing in Utah, bet on that.
February 22nd, 2006 at 6:40 pmHeckuva Job Hatch
February 22nd, 2006 at 6:53 pmSpent many hours on Colorado River singletrack. I should have headed north and stayed at the Tri-Arc.
February 22nd, 2006 at 7:02 pm“whatever presence (if any) that al-Qaeda may have had in Iraq prior to the war has only gotten stronger as a result of the actions we took in attempt to lessen it! ”
February 22nd, 2006 at 7:15 pmYou should be looking at Iraq as a continuous war since the first gulf war. You are aware that the Brits and US were bombing Iraq all through the 90’s? Enforcing the cease fire agreement. And we were spending 7-10 billion a year doing it. And in the process terrorist activities against the west and saudia arabia increased. You may think that there’s been incline, that’s fine. But the west and other cooperating countries have been able to suppress almost all major strikes, that were be planned during the 90’s.
Well, at least he had the cajones to correct, er, I mean clarify, his statements. Better than we can say about some people who have the tendency to lie…
February 22nd, 2006 at 7:20 pmWell, at least he had the cajones to correct, er, I mean clarify, his statements. Better than we can say about some people who have the tendency to lie… like Bush about wmd’s, how he used the intel, knowing Abrarmoff, Ken Lay, Cheney about WMD’s his statements about Iraq security service and Atta, meeting John Edwards, Drinking before he shot a man, how far the man he shot was from him, DeLay about trips to scotland, money laundering in texas politics, Abrarmoff, Frist about stock deals, Cunningham about bribery until he was cornered, Ney about Abrarmoff, Doolittle about Abrarmoff, Scanlan about fraud and bribery until he got caught, Abrarmoff about bribery and fraud until he got caught, Blackwell in Ohio until he got caught, Fletcher in Kentucky until he perdoned everybody, Weld they are investigating, and oh yea Clinton about a blowjob, see it all equals out.
February 22nd, 2006 at 8:09 pmThe man has no upper lip.
February 22nd, 2006 at 8:32 pmWTF? Is there a news source besides fvcking Fox News that the righties will not call partisan?
Fvcking crazy. Straight up!
February 22nd, 2006 at 10:05 pm#30 Hatch blasts ‘phony’ issues
http://www.cnn.com/US/9607/30/clinton.terrorism/
Comment by walter66
The old news stories in that link are classic! I don’t know if TP has talked about them before, but they make for mighty ironic reading about Repub hypocrits.
Follow the links at the bottom:
And then the bill finally passes:
February 23rd, 2006 at 1:27 am
Something off about those dates. The April dates must be August. Someone screwed up somewhere.
February 23rd, 2006 at 1:32 am#42 by I-R-I
Just because Hatch and the Repubs stoops so low to be the party of division doesn’t mean you have to follow suit. Lift yourself out the muck by your bootstraps. Come on, you can do it.
February 23rd, 2006 at 1:35 amHmm…the April dates are correct, since the anniversay of the Oklahoma City bombing is April 19th. Were there two anti-terrorism bills that year? Googling…yes, it looks like there were two bills.
** The Effective Death Penalty and Anti-Terrorism Act of 1996) made it into law in April.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c104:427:./temp/~mdbsl5nmyt::
** The Aviation Security and Antiterrorism Act of 1996 seems to have passed the House but died in the Senate in September.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d104:HR03953:@@@L&summ2=m&
February 23rd, 2006 at 1:54 amI am curious if I-Right-I has a functioning brain or if his cranium is filled with swamp-gas like Hatch > lol.
February 23rd, 2006 at 2:27 amRed and Karly Pyoub….you seem to be supporting Hatch’s original statement that saddam supported al-qaeda. Hatch has seemed to have moved away from that statement. Now, what exactly are you saying?……….that Hatch is a liar or that Hatch is a coward?
February 23rd, 2006 at 6:24 amdouble speak… they have used it and will use it until their last breath… and may that be soon. it’s like it’s 1984 once again. We must hold them accountable. All of the great decievers. We must ‘listen’ with our hearts and minds, and not just with our ears. We will be called soon to decide for ourselves. The truth WILL set us free.
February 23rd, 2006 at 5:19 pm“Nobody denies that he was drunk. Well, I shouldn’t say nobody. Nobody with brains.”
February 24th, 2006 at 6:06 am“Let me clarify…..only after cheney shot wittington in the face did he get wasted…..certainly there was no drinking before or during the hunt…..nada, zip, none”
February 24th, 2006 at 6:13 amBasically Most Americans are waiting for the wealth to come from stealing Iraqs oil wealth and possibly Irans too (( as in American Battle plans for Iran here http://www.craigmurray.co.uk/ archives/ 2006/ 02/ battle_plans_fo_1.html
The democrats I think dont speak out against the war because monkey boy Bush might just manage to steal all the worlds oil reserves …therefore most say morgage paying americans , workers, fear for their future …and have hidden ajendas …If Bush pulls this steal off …and America becomes rich again the democatrats will look very foolish …I think and thats why they do not speak out
February 24th, 2006 at 5:53 pmFrom the 911 commision Report page 66
From the Senate Report on the U.S. Intelligence Community’s Prewar Intelligence Assessments on Iraq, page 306.
First, no we do not have evidence of a collaborative relationship, that is to say we have no evidence of one, not that there was not one.
Second, that Saddam had contacts with al-Qaeda is not in dispute with anyone halfway well informed. You progressives are delusional. That is why the American electorate will never entrust our national security to the likes of you nit wits.
February 25th, 2006 at 6:05 pm[...] Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) "clarified" his remarks in the Salt Lake Tribune, via Nico at Think Progress: On Tuesday, Hatch said he may have misspoken at the event, and he was speaking of conditions in post-Hussein Iraq and the terrorist network led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. [...]
November 29th, 2006 at 3:17 am