WaPo’s Ignatius deems Bush’s NIE lie ‘a non-story.’
Last week, the White House conceded that President Bush had been informed in August that Iran’s nuclear weapons program “may be suspended,” despite his earlier claim that he didn’t have “the information” until November. On the Chris Matthews Show this weekend, Washington Post columnist David Ignatius claimed that Bush lying about the National Intelligence Estimate was “a non-story.” Watch it:
Greg Sargent writes: “It seems like a story that the same President who misled the nation into a war once already by hyping a non-threat was again caught dissembling on what he knew and when about another nuke threat.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
75 Responses to “WaPo’s Ignatius deems Bush’s NIE lie ‘a non-story.’”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
Visit Our Affiliated Site
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
Reports
In depth studies on select topics
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Beck
Big Oil
Bolton
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Drudge
Economy
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Feith
Fox News
GI Bill
Global Warming
Guantanamo
Hagee
Health Care
Immigration
Impeachment
Iran
Iraq
Justice
Kristol
LGBT
Lieberman
McCain
McClellan
Media
Military
O'Hanlon
O'Reilly
Obama
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Rove
Surveillance
Terrorism
Torture
Veterans
Wiretapping
Women's Rights
ArchivesBlog Roll
Move along. Nothing to see here. Move along…
Yeah, right. Whatever you say. *eyeroll*
December 10th, 2007 at 1:11 pmDavid ain’t no saint. When did fellating the administration become the job description for WaPo journalists?
December 10th, 2007 at 1:12 pmThere goes that Librul media again
December 10th, 2007 at 1:14 pmHINT: If something is dismissed as a “non-story”, there’s more to the story than the dismisser wants to acknowledge.
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.
December 10th, 2007 at 1:14 pmThe Washington Post has become a complete sellout. Katharine Graham must be rolling in her grave.
December 10th, 2007 at 1:15 pmDavid Ignatius-bought and paid for by BuschCo.
∞
December 10th, 2007 at 1:16 pmsecretaries have been fired for less.
December 10th, 2007 at 1:18 pmWaPo is a nonpaper.
December 10th, 2007 at 1:23 pmNO STORY?????!!!!!!! THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OS AMERICA (CURRENTLY KNOWN AS THE FACISTS STATES OF AMERICA) LYING TO HIS PEOPLE ABOUT AN ‘IMINENT THREAT’ THAT DIDN’T EXIST IS A “NO STORY’??????!!!!!! IMPEACHMENT IS THE MINIMAL CONSEQUENCE FOR HIS LIES, THAT IS, IF THE USA WAS A SERIOUS COUNTRY…
December 10th, 2007 at 1:23 pmA few more of these ‘non-story’s and we’ll be handing over ownership to the cockroaches
December 10th, 2007 at 1:26 pmWho cares if this lying POS pResident was trying to start another bloody war which would have killed millions of people, they were just brown and muslim anyway. What’s the big deal? It’s not like Russia or China would have stepped in, or the rest of the world for that matter. We are the United States of America and we are right, and what we do is right for the world.
/snark
Bush/Cheney/Ignatius
Hague Trials ‘09
Buck Fush
December 10th, 2007 at 1:27 pmThat statement is truly staggering. “Non story” that a President lied in an attempt to get this country to launch a war resulting in untold thousands dead. Something he’s already done What would have to happen to actually constitute a story then, oh wait an intern and a blue dress…got it??
The press is a pathetic joke, but the joke is on the American people and those around the world.
December 10th, 2007 at 1:29 pmLook! Something shiny!
Britney Spears! Jessica Simpson! Bill Clinton did it too!
Aw… a puppy… how cute!
December 10th, 2007 at 1:30 pmand we’ll be handing over ownership to the cockroaches
Comment by raynman — December 10, 2007 @ 1:26 pm
Well, the rats are already running the place…
December 10th, 2007 at 1:30 pmTIRED? DISGUSTED? ANGRY?
DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!!!!
NewsAlert@letters.washingtonpost.com, letters@washpost.com, webnews@washingtonpost.com, georgewill@washpost.com, jimhoagland@washpost.com, ombudsman@washpost.com, kurtzh@washpost.com, abramowitz@washpost.com, achenbachj@washpost.com, allenh@washpost.com, allenm@washpost.com, aranam@washpost.com, argetsinger@washpost.com, balzd@washpost.com, barrj@washpost.com, barrs@washpost.com, bennettp@washpost.com, benningv@washpost.com, beyersd@washpost.com, bonesteelm@washpost.com, boustanyn@washpost.com, religion@washpost.com, brownw@washpost.com, browar57@aol.com, carlsonp@washpost.com, castanedar@washpost.com, rajiv@washpost.com, chod@washpost.com, clarkp@washpost.com, cohensh@washpost.com, coopermana@washpost.com, copelandl@washpost.com, davenportc@washpost.com, davisp@washpost.com, deaned@washpost.com, deinerj@washpost.com, deyoungk@washpost.com, dobbsm@washpost.com, drezenr@washpost.com, duttj@washpost.com, dvorakp@washpost.com, eggend@washpost.com, ahrensf@washpost.com, aizenmann@washpost.com, nightwatch@washpost.com, donovanc@washpost.com
December 10th, 2007 at 1:35 pmWhat did I tell you, Mr P is back…
December 10th, 2007 at 1:36 pmHe’s right, the fact that the President is a lying warmonger is a nonstory.
December 10th, 2007 at 1:39 pmInteresting article from Slate
http://www.slate.com/ id/ 2179593/ pagenum/ all/ #page_start
December 10th, 2007 at 1:39 pmYeah, TRAITOR Bush needs to pardon TRAITOR Libby.
Because TREASON comes naturally to the Bush WAR CRIMINALS, especially the REALLY TREASONOUS acts.
Sincerely,
NRA Gun Nutes
December 10th, 2007 at 1:40 pmLeftists are prone to suffer from P derangement syndrome. Talk with your doctors.
Comment by Mayja Jenera — December 10, 2007 @ 1:38 pm
I see we have another troll whose IQ would rival that of a house plant.
Sorry, that was an insult to house plants.
December 10th, 2007 at 1:40 pm#13: What is your problem? I don’t care if the President has to lie or break all the laws as long as he makes sure that the US and American citizens are protected.
Why are you liberals so obsessed with some technicality?
Comment by Frank M — December 10, 2007 @ 1:40 pm
The Constitution is a technicality?
How’s that new fascist party thing going, Frank?
December 10th, 2007 at 1:41 pmI don’t care if the President has to lie or break all the laws …
Why do you hate the Constitution, you bedwetting weenie?
December 10th, 2007 at 1:41 pmIf this is a “non-story”, it’s because A) an argument is being made that lying is no big deal, OR because B) Bush has lied so often that his lies no longer make news (sort of like Southern California traffic fatalities).
It could be either one, and in both scenarios Bush is lying through his teeth. Nancy, why is the table still empty?
December 10th, 2007 at 1:42 pmI don’t care if the President has to lie or break all the laws as long as he makes sure that the US and American citizens are protected.Why are you liberals so obsessed with some technicality?
Comment by Frank M — December 10, 2007 @ 1:40 pm
Technicality, or as others higher on the evolutionary food chain than you call laws and the Constitution on which this country is based.
Another troll who lives in constant fear. How many times do you have to be told, the terrorists don’t care about your trailer, they really don’t.
December 10th, 2007 at 1:43 pm#13: What is your problem? I don’t care if the President has to lie or break all the laws as long as he makes sure that the US and American citizens are protected.
Why are you liberals so obsessed with some technicality?
Comment by Frank M — December 10, 2007 @ 1:40 pm
MURDERER Bush the COXUCKER punk TRAITOR to the USA is a LIAR who cares NOTHING for the people of the USA.
Only his Saudi oil buddies, the Bin Ladens, and the ones financing Al Queda.
He needs to be tortured in Gitmo until he DROPS DEAD.
And joins his new MASTER Satan.
Who will smash the little punk’s face in EVERY SECOND.
For ETERNITY.
WHAM! SPLAT!
WHAM! SPLAT!
WHAM! SPLAT!
WHAM! SPLAT!
WHAM! SPLAT!
WHAM! SPLAT!
WHAM! SPLAT!
WHAM! SPLAT!
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Sincerely,
NRA Gun Nutes
December 10th, 2007 at 1:44 pmSEND MONICA LOWINSKY! SHE WILL GET THEM A STORY!
December 10th, 2007 at 1:44 pmI’m sure Frank M. will have the same stance if/when Hillary becomes president.
December 10th, 2007 at 1:45 pmThe recent Israeli airstrike against Syria only further clouds the issue. While it is increasingly clear that the target struck was neither a nuclear reactor under construction (despite the alarmist conclusions arrived at by David Albright and others) nor a plutonium extraction plant (an absurdity postulated without any factual basis by some Israeli nuclear “experts”),
BUSH TRIED TO START A WAR HERE
December 10th, 2007 at 1:46 pmOne reason why the terrorists hate us so much is for the freedoms that we enjoy and are protected under the constitution.
So, in order to defeat the terrorists, we ignore the very thing that makes us great (laws espoused by the Constitution) and instead, become exactly like the terrorists we claim to hate.
Someone please tell me how that makes sense??
December 10th, 2007 at 1:47 pmone would have to be DEEPLY in the tank to say such a thing.
even deathskull kristol tried to spin it as a positive, rather than a “non-story”.
December 10th, 2007 at 1:51 pmComment by Mayja Jenera — December 10, 2007 @ 1:34 pm
Funny, this twit claims to not be Mr P, but up until that, no one had called him Mr P on this thread. And that absurd Pardon 4 Libby post sure seems like a Mr P special. So either he knows who Mr P was, and knew right where to go copy the ridiculous beast, or he just made it up on the spot.
Geez, P, it’s so nice to have you back, briefly… ever so briefly. Bye!!!
December 10th, 2007 at 1:51 pmI thought leftists stood up for the poor.
Yeah you give a sh!t about the poor.
December 10th, 2007 at 1:51 pmSomeone please tell me how that makes sense??
Comment by raynman — December 10, 2007 @ 1:47 pm
Perhaps if we waterboarded you for a while, it’d make sense.
December 10th, 2007 at 1:51 pmSo David Ignatius is naive about Bush’s lies in hyping more war.
But he’s deeply suspicious of the Clintons.
Not that he’s a Republican leaning partisan or anything.
Stories like this make me miss Media Whores Online.
December 10th, 2007 at 1:55 pmWhat would you expect of the talking heads. mathews and ignatius are not journalists or news people. They are strictly on to spout the right’s point of view for the ignorant masses and the nursing home elderly.
December 10th, 2007 at 1:55 pmTRoS ~ I outed Major Troll as Mr P on post #19…
December 10th, 2007 at 1:56 pmSomeone please tell me how that makes sense??
Comment by raynman — December 10, 2007 @ 1:47 pm
We need to prioritize. Who cares about Constitutional rights when there are gay people kissing?
December 10th, 2007 at 1:58 pmYou’re not welcome to respond.
I will respond when I please with whom I please, fascist. This is a public forum and you are not the arbiter of who can and cannot respond to what. YOU will not be telling anyone here what they are allowed to do.
Kiss my azz.
December 10th, 2007 at 2:01 pmMayja is a bit defensive. It doesn’t matter that Mayja posted a Libby coment on a post about the WH attempt to squash information on global warming.
December 10th, 2007 at 2:02 pmComment by lefty — December 10, 2007 @ 1:51 pm
I’m not the topic here, loony. The topic at hand would be contradictory statement of your fellow leftist, Blue Skater.
My posting wasn’t addressed to you. You’re not welcome to respond.
Comment by Mayja Jenera — December 10, 2007 @ 1:57 pm
YOU responded to my calling MURDERER Bush a COXUCKER punk TRAITOR, which he IS…
Since YOU responded without being addressed, I declare that ANYONE can respond to YOU, an azshole-licker of
MURDERER Bush the COXUCKER punk TRAITOR to the USA…
Have a nice day,
NRA Gun Nutes
December 10th, 2007 at 2:02 pmLying to the American public is not news. Being able to read My Pet Goat upside down, however, is news.
December 10th, 2007 at 2:02 pmYup, MURDERER Bush IS a COXUCKER punk TRAITOR to the USA. So is Libby.
Sincerely,
NRA Gun Nutes
December 10th, 2007 at 2:05 pmmy bad, not the global warming post. It’s the non story post.
December 10th, 2007 at 2:05 pmStay on topic Mayja. Focus. Funny but it seems like I’ve had this discussion with you before. But that can’t be true because you are new here right?
December 10th, 2007 at 2:06 pmWhat is your problem? I don’t care if the President has to lie or break all the laws as long as he makes sure that the US and American citizens are protected.
Why are you liberals so obsessed with some technicality?
Comment by Frank M — December 10, 2007 @ 1:40 pm
Piss-soaked troll, doing the one-handed keyboard tango from his dripping bed in mom’s basement.
December 10th, 2007 at 2:09 pmNope, still not welcome to respond.
There is no response to an emotional child like you. You’re right. I won’t comment any further so you can finish playing with your blocks.
December 10th, 2007 at 2:10 pmWaPo is that Moonie newspaper, isn’t it?
I don’t think the Bush Family’s Asian Messiah can help with this one, no matter what he tells that paper to print.
December 10th, 2007 at 2:17 pmI don’t like the way people make fun of trailer parks. Whether poor people are conservative or liberal, I agree with Bob Dylan: they’re only pawns in the game.
However, that is not the subject of this discussion even if our unbalanced troll wants it to be. The subject of this discussion ought to be what the hell has happened to the Washington Post. This paper, which once distinguished itself by valiantly standing up for the principle that the people should know the truth, has turned into a pathetic right-wing front propaganda mill.
December 10th, 2007 at 2:18 pmI’m obsessed with these “technicalities” by way of returning Righty the favor they did me by bringing civilization to a halt in the ’90’s so they could examine a cum stain.
December 10th, 2007 at 2:19 pmTom, I think the Washington Times is the moonie paper, but I’m not sure about that. At any rate, what’s the difference. If they think lying to start another war with Iran is a “non-story,” what good are they as a source of information?
December 10th, 2007 at 2:20 pm“My posting wasn’t addressed to you. You’re not welcome to respond.
Comment by Mayja Jenera ”
And you’re welcome to go back to your cave, you hairy-legged mountain troll. (and by mountain, I mean you like to be mounted by lower animals and orcs).
December 10th, 2007 at 2:20 pmHowever, that is not the subject of this discussion even if our unbalanced troll wants it to be. The subject of this discussion ought to be what the hell has happened to the Washington Post. This paper, which once distinguished itself by valiantly standing up for the principle that the people should know the truth, has turned into a pathetic right-wing front propaganda mill.
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper — December 10, 2007 @ 2:18 pm
Once Katherine Graham was gone, it was all downhill.
December 10th, 2007 at 2:22 pmWashington Times = Moonie Times
December 10th, 2007 at 2:23 pmFrank M.: “Why are you liberals so obsessed with some technicality?”
I swear, some conservatives are so duplicitous that they could be part of a comedy routine. Let’s see, was lying about a sexual affair technically “perjury?” Or, was it simply lying to a federal prosecutor about an issue not related to the judicial subject at hand. And, when Clinton looked into his secretary’s office to ask her “how they were treating her,” was that “Obstruction of Justice” or was it simply checking on the wellbeing of a subordinate? These were all very technical questions which were of great importance to conservatives in the 90’s.
December 10th, 2007 at 2:24 pmWaPo is that Moonie newspaper, isn’t it?
I don’t think the Bush Family’s Asian Messiah can help with this one, no matter what he tells that paper to print.
Comment by tombaker — December 10, 2007 @ 2:17 pm
Different newspaper. You’re referring to the Washington Times, not the Post. It’s likely that the Post has shifted to the right because of competition from the Times, but also because the hands that guided it when it truly could be considered “liberal” have been replaced by more conservative and greedy people.
December 10th, 2007 at 2:25 pmgummitch: “Once Katherine Graham was gone, it was all downhill.”
Exactly! And that’s just one reason why ownership and management is a much more important issue than individual journalists’ political party affiliation.
December 10th, 2007 at 2:27 pmok - thanks gum.
December 10th, 2007 at 2:29 pmAnd, of course he says it’s a “non-story” on “Hardball” and the hard-hitting host stares off into space.
On this show, the biggest stories are Hillary’s vile habit of clapping when she walks on stage, whether or not Bill Clinton could be having another affair, Al Gore’s deeply disturbing buttoned-up suits and what a “great guy” Huckabee is.
December 10th, 2007 at 2:36 pmThe Washington Post is a non-newspaper!!
December 10th, 2007 at 2:47 pmLet’s please keep in mind that the Washington Post mercilessly attacks Hillary Clinton and completely ignores John Edwards. By contrast, they’re very nice to Barak Obama. That should tell us something.
December 10th, 2007 at 2:50 pmWhat is your problem? I don’t care if the President has to lie or break all the laws as long as he makes sure that the US and American citizens are protected.
Why are you liberals so obsessed with some technicality?
Comment by Frank M — December 10, 2007 @ 1:40 pm
I see the terrorists have won.
December 10th, 2007 at 3:00 pm“My posting wasn’t addressed to you. You’re not welcome to respond.
Comment by Mayja Jenera â€
And you’re welcome to go back to your cave, you hairy-legged mountain troll.
Comment by Bobwurst — December 10, 2007 @ 2:20 pm
I don’t think we have to worry about Mayja Jenera anymore. All his/her posts have been deleted — including the “Mr. P”-like one about pardoning Libby. And good riddance.
At least O. Bigfoot and cold_hard_left are coherent, speak English, and attempt to make rational points instead of just wasting space.
The “not welcome to respond” angle was something new — I hadn’t ever seen that from any troll, not even Mr. P. Maybe this was somebody completely different.
December 10th, 2007 at 3:09 pm“At least O. Bigfoot and cold_hard_left are coherent, speak English, and attempt to make rational points instead of just wasting space.”
My head made the cartoon sound and whipped quickly from side to side when I read that.
December 10th, 2007 at 3:18 pmWhat is your problem? I don’t care if the President has to lie or break all the laws as long as he makes sure that the US and American citizens are protected.
Why are you liberals so obsessed with some technicality?
Comment by Frank M — December 10, 2007 @ 1:40 pm
Let’s see if I can put this into terms a conservative can understand. Imagine this scenario:
A president decides that there are too many murders in this country committed by handguns, citing incidents like Virginia Tech, the Omaha shopping mall, and other shooting rampages. He declares this is an emergency situation and in order to keep people safe, he issues an executive order decreeing that all handguns are hereby banned, completely ignoring the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights. He also wants to destroy gun manufacturers and vendors if they don’t cease and desist making and selling firearms — bombing their factories, if necessary.
In order to ramp up fear among the populace, and in order to ram needed legislation through Congress, he lies about pertinent information that Congress needs to make decisions regarding the matter — information relating to the degree of threat that handguns in the hands of citizens presents.
Now, this president is lying and breaking laws to “make sure that American citizens are protected.” Not to mention directly violating the U.S. Constitution.
I assume this would be OK with you, and you would regard his lies as just “some technicality”? I mean — anything to keep Americans safe, right?
December 10th, 2007 at 3:26 pmWait, Bush told a bald-faced lie and got caught? Yeah, that IS a non-story.
December 10th, 2007 at 3:32 pmWell, it certainly is a non-story to a non-journalist working at a non-newspaper.
December 10th, 2007 at 3:45 pmNon story? The facts make this a GIGANTIC STORY. If Seymour Hersh wrote about these same facts in November of 2006 and Bush claims that he knew nothing about these facts until August of 2007, then why is this man still president? When a news reporter has the facts and writes about them 13 months ago, are we to believe that Sy Hersh is psychic?? Or should this evidence point to the fact that Bush is lying - AGAIN!!??
December 10th, 2007 at 4:00 pmOf course, Bush’s lying reached pathological proportions long ago so his lying again may be a “non story” but the fact that this article was written 13 months ago outlining the NIE intel back then proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the report was “out there” for public consumption.
Now whether this president is so walled off so as not to even know what his very own intelligence agencies are discovering is another story. If this is so, he’s unfit to serve any longer.
More likely, however, is the fact that if Sy Hersh “knew”, then Bush and Cheney “knew” as well. Lying about material intelligence findings in an attempt to convince the people that Iran is a nuclear threat and needs to be attacked IS another impeachable offense.
Let’s get on with the next right thing, congress, which is impeachment of these two liars.
December 10th, 2007 at 4:03 pmThose willing to give up a little liberty for a little security deserve neither security nor liberty, and will lose both. –Benjamin Franklin
The only security of all is in a free press. The force of public opinion cannot be resisted when permitted freely to be expressed. The agitation it produces must be submitted to. It is necessary, to keep the waters pure. –Thomas Jefferson
What do these guys know anyway?
December 10th, 2007 at 4:16 pmThank God people like Ignatius no longer get to decide what is or isn’t a major story.
Without the internet, he and his ilk could still bury whatever they didn’t want us to know.
The major media players are starting to figure out that they have to look to the internet to know what is and isn’t a story of interest.
Maybe they will even learn at some point that we don’t give a damn what Hillary Clinton wears. We care what the candidates will do about war, the economy, health care, jobs, education and other important issues. And we care about whether the president or presidential candidates lie to us.
December 10th, 2007 at 4:20 pm#65
EXCELLENT Post, a true keeper, and one that should be thrown at all those ‘tards who somehow think the 2nd Amendment is anymore sacrosanct than the other 9 in the Bill Of Rights (NOT the “Bill Of Suggestions/Guidelines”)
That argument also works for those vile Bush Dog Dems who hold far too much sway in the Democratic party, it frames the issue in a way that they think their constituents will agree with
I still can’t figure out why the blabbering W brigade thinks all these unchecked, imperial powers won’t be used by W’s successor, no matter who it is
Of course, when it’s a Dem as President, suddenly, the MSM and all the current W lackeys will suddenly assert just how vital it is for there to be not only a clear “Separation Of Powers” when it comes to strong oversight of the Executive Branch, but also how important it is to keep a clearly power-mad President in line with as short and tightly-held leash as possible
Too late for the W lackeys then, because if they don’t speak up, strenuously, NOW, then they absolutely deserve their turn under the warrantless spying microscope with the next President
December 10th, 2007 at 4:22 pmOf course the Wapo is a “Liberal Paper”. They wouls NEVER shield for the BUah Administration. Not only did he make this comment but so did David Gregoery
December 10th, 2007 at 4:28 pmIt’s all about timing. NIE jump to CIA Tapes forget NIE
December 10th, 2007 at 5:22 pmMissMolly, that was a great argument above. Thanks.
December 10th, 2007 at 6:12 pmKingCranky: “Of course, when it’s a Dem as President, suddenly, the MSM and all the current W lackeys will suddenly assert just how vital it is for there to be not only a clear “Separation Of Powers†when it comes to strong oversight of the Executive Branch, but also how important it is to keep a clearly power-mad President in line with as short and tightly-held leash as possible”
Yes, that was clearly the Post’s and the NYT’s policy starting in early 1993 up to about early 2001.
December 10th, 2007 at 6:14 pm