Bartlett: ‘It’s Never Been A Stay The Course Strategy’
Bartlett: ‘It’s Never Been A Stay The Course Strategy’
On CBS this morning, White House Counselor Dan Bartlett claimed that the administration has “never” had “a stay-the-course strategy.” Watch it:
President Bush made the same claim over the weekend. It’s not true. For years, the White House has repeatedly described their Iraq policy as “stay the course.” Here’s the video evidence:
Transcripts: More »
- Comments
- 183
“There was arrogance and there was stupidity
“There was arrogance and there was stupidity
from the United States in Iraq.” — Alberto Fernandez, a top U.S. diplomat in the State Department, 10/21/06
Original NYT Story Strongly Suggests Suspended Staffer Could Not Be Source of NIE Leak
Original NYT Story Strongly Suggests Suspended Staffer Could Not Be Source of NIE Leak
A Democratic staffer’s access to classified information was recently suspended by House Intelligence Chairman Pete Hoekstra (R-MI), supposedly because the staffer requested a copy of a National Intelligence Estimate two days before it was reported in the New York Times.
But, as the Washington Post notes, the New York Times was interviewing government officials about the NIE for weeks before the story was printed:
Intelligence community sources, speaking anonymously because the NIE remains classified, have told The Washington Post that Times reporters were asking questions about the contents of that NIE weeks before publication of the story. In his story, Times reporter Mark Mazzetti wrote that over the weeks he had interviewed “a dozen United States government officials and outside experts . . . for this article.” He added that all “had either seen the final version of the document or participated in the creation of earlier drafts.”
The staffer requested the NIE because Rep. John Tierney (D-MA) received a media inquiry about it. The staffer provided the NIE to Tierney in an appropriate manner. Once Tierney saw the NIE was classified “he refused to discuss it with reporters.”
Hoekstra’s only apparent reason for suspending the staffer was the timeline of his request. The timeline, however, virtually precludes the possibility that the staffer was the source of the leak.
LaHood Admits He Was ‘Playing Politics’ When He Asked For Intel Staffer To Be Suspended
LaHood Admits He Was ‘Playing Politics’ When He Asked For Intel Staffer To Be Suspended
This week, on the request of Rep. Ray LaHood (R-IL), Intelligence Chairman Pete Hoekstra (R-MI) suspended a Democratic staffer’s access to classified information. Hoekstra said the suspension would remain in place pending a review to determine if that staffer leaked a classified National Intelligence Estimate to the New York Times.
Today on Fox News, LaHood said, “I’ll tell you why I did it. The reason I did it was because Jane Harman released the Duke Cunningham — who sat on our Intelligence committee — report.” That report, which detailed the misconduct of Cunningham, who is now serving a jail term, was not classified.
A Fox anchor asked, “So, it’s payback?” LaHood responded, “There are some of us on the other side who can equally play politics, and I’m not afraid to do it.” Watch it: Watch it:
Transcript: More »
Harman: Intelligence Committee Chairman Abused Power, Suspended Staffer To Settle Political Score
Harman: Intelligence Committee Chairman Abused Power, Suspended Staffer To Settle Political Score
This week Intelligence Committee Chairman Peter Hoekstra (R-MI) suspended a committee staffer’s access to classified information. Hoekstra said the suspension would remain in place pending a review to determine if the staff leaked a classified National Intelligence Estimate to the New York Times.
Today, Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA), the ranking member of the committee, fired back:
The Chairman’s unilateral action is without basis and an abuse of his power to provide security accesses. There is no evidence to suggest that the professional staff member in question did anything wrong.
In May, the NIE was provided to multiple congressional committees and made available to thousands of individuals throughout the intelligence and policymaking community. The document was posted on the internal Committee website and available to every Committee staff member days before the story was published. In securing the document and providing it to a Member of the Committee in the secure Committee offices, this staffer acted appropriately.
The Chairman has acknowledged in a letter to me that his action was a direct response to my decision to release the 5-page unclassified Summary of the Cunningham Report by the Special Counsel.
The Majority staff has also informed Minority staff that they do not believe the staffer in question actually leaked any classified information, but they felt “compelled” to take this action because a Majority member of the Committee requested an investigation.
Harman also sent a letter to Hoekstra. You can read it HERE.
Former Top Bush Administration Official Calls For Withdrawal of U.S. Troops From Iraq
Former Top Bush Administration Official Calls For Withdrawal of U.S. Troops From Iraq
President Bush and other administration officials have been smearing anyone who suggests we begin to withdraw troops from Iraq as “defeatist” and “cut-and-runners.”
Now Richard L. Armitage — who served as deputy secretary of state from 2001-2005 — is advocating a phased withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq. From the New Jersey Express-Times:
“We notify the Iraqis that we’re going to be drawing down a reasonable but careful percentage of our troops over a reasonable interval of months — just for example, 5 percent of troops every three months,” Armitage told a crowd of 850 at DeSales University.
“This will show seriousness of purpose, I think. It will give our population some hope and enthusiasm that this is not a never-ending affair. And also it will put the heat on the Iraqis, because ladies and gentlemen, we can’t win this militarily. By the way, we can’t lose this militarily.”
Armitage’s remarks acknowledge the failure of the administration’s “as Iraqis stand up, we’ll stand down” strategy. As Armitage points out, until Iraqis know we will stand down, they may never stand up.
Armitage was intimately involved in the Iraq war policy and recognizes that he and other top administration officials bear responsibility for a policy that ended up being a colossal failure. “A lot of us, including me, are going to have a lot to answer for,” Armitage said.
Armitage’s proposal closely tracks a plan that the Center for American Progress has been advocating for more than a year, Strategic Redeployment.
POLL: Two-Thirds of Americans Believe There’s A Civil War In Iraq
POLL: Two-Thirds of Americans Believe There’s A Civil War In Iraq
A poll released by the Wall Street Journal this morning found that 66 percent of Americans believe there is a civil war in Iraq. Here is the question and the results:
In other words, 40 percent of Americans believe that violence in Iraq should be described as “Iraqis fighting against each other in a civil war.” Another 26 percent think there is a civil war in addition to an anti-U.S. insurgency. (ThinkProgress noted yesterday there are actually at least four different violent conflicts ongoing in Iraq.) Therefore, fully 2/3 of Americans believe there is a civil war in Iraq.
Conservative pollster Bill McInturff noted “If Americans continue to see U.S. troops caught in the middle of a civil war…that will ratchet up the pressure to terminate our deployment in Iraq.’”
REPORT: Bush Loyalist James Baker Calls Iraq ‘A Helluva Mess’
REPORT: Bush Loyalist James Baker Calls Iraq ‘A Helluva Mess’
Former Secretary of State James Baker, one of the most ardent Bush family loyalists, is heading up a commission to review our policy in Iraq. According to the BBC, Baker was “visibly upset” during a recent visit to Iraq, calling the country “a helluva mess.” Watch the BBC report:
The media has reported that Baker’s panel has “ruled out the prospect for victory” and will recommend a “change in course,” possibly including “withdrawing American troops in phases, and bringing neighboring Iran and Syria into a joint effort to stop the fighting.” Both options were proposed over a year ago by progressives in Strategic Redeployment.
Transcript: More »
Matt Drudge’s Efforts To Cast Doubt on Global Warming Reaches New Level of Desperation
Matt Drudge’s Efforts To Cast Doubt on Global Warming Reaches New Level of Desperation
Global warming is real. Matt Drudge, “the Walter Cronkite of his era,” is working overtime to convince people it isn’t happening. Here’s what he put up on the Drudge Report today:
First, this is totally irrelevant. Global warming does not mean there is never going to be a cold day or a cold month somewhere on the globe. Globally, September 2006 was the 4th warmest on record.
Second, Drudge leaves out this crucial fact from the NOAA report he links to:
The January-September 2006 combined temperature is warmest on record. The previous record warm January-September happened in 2000.
In other words, according to the NOAA report Drudge cites, there has never been a warmer year in the United States so far than 2006. Amazingly, Drudge is seizing on this report to suggest that global warming isn’t real.
O’Reilly: ‘You Cannot Be Confrontational With The President of the United States’
O’Reilly: ‘You Cannot Be Confrontational With The President of the United States’
Fox’s Bill O’Reilly, who argues in a new book that Osama Bin Laden is “cheering” the progressive movement in America, was invited to the White House yesterday for an exclusive interview with President Bush. It was Bush’s third interview with O’Reilly.
Last night, just before he broadcast the first installment of the interview, O’Reilly explained to his viewers that, “You cannot be confrontational with the President of the United States.” Instead, according to O’Reilly, “President Bush will have his say.” O’Reilly added, “I think it is important to look ahead rather than to look back. What good does it do to rehash WMDs? Does that do you any good?” Watch it:
Full transcript: More »
Snow on Iraq: ‘I Don’t Know’ If We Are Winning
Snow on Iraq: ‘I Don’t Know’ If We Are Winning
Sen. John Warner (R-VA), one of President Bush’s staunchest allies, now says we are moving “sideways” and “backwards” in Iraq. Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) agrees and says we need to find a way out.
During today’s White House press conference, Tony Snow was asked a simple question about Iraq: “Are we winning?” Here was Snow’s response:
QUESTION: Just a simple question: Are we winning?
SNOW: We’re making progress. I don’t know. How do you define winning?
The fact is, in taking on the war on terror — no, let me put it this way: The president’s made it obvious we’re going to win. And that means ultimately providing an Iraq that is safe, secure and an ally in the war on terror. And at any given time, as you’ve seen in previous wars, there are going to be spikes in violence.
More than 53 American soldiers have died in Iraq this month already. Things are going so badly that even Tony Snow, who is paid to spin the news in the most positive light possible for the administration, can’t claim that the United States is winning.
UPDATE: Carpetbagger Report digs up this Bush quote, from 12/18/05:
And for every terrorist working to stop freedom in Iraq, there are many more Iraqis and Americans working to defeat them. My fellow citizens: Not only can we win the war in Iraq, we are winning the war in Iraq.
See the new Dixie Chicks movie. (Free!)
See the new Dixie Chicks movie. (Free!)
Tomorrow at 8PM we are hosting a sneak preview in Washington DC of the documentary Shut Up and Sing. (Watch the trailer and read the rave reviews.)
There will be a panel discussion afterwards with the director, Mudcat Sanders and TP’s Judd Legum. Find out the details and RSVP HERE. Space is very limited.
“I just looove saying that! Yeaaah, I was in the Oval Office.
“I just looove saying that! Yeaaah, I was in the Oval Office.
Just meeee and the president. Nooooobody else.” — Tony Snow, on why he likes being White House Press Secretary, 10/15/06
Paramount Hires Path to 9/11 Writer For Movie On ‘The Hunt For Osama Bin Laden’
Paramount Hires Path to 9/11 Writer For Movie On ‘The Hunt For Osama Bin Laden’
Cyrus Nowresteh wrote ABC’s docudrama “The Path to 9/11.” Norwresteh maintained the movie was “an objective telling of the events of 9/11.” But his script contained several glaring inaccuracies, all of which shifted blame to the Clinton administration. Nearly 100,000 people contacted ABC to protest the film.
Now Paramount Pictures and Oliver Stone have signed up Norwresteh to write another movie about 9/11. Variety has the details:
After steering clear of political controversy with 9/11 heroism tale “World Trade Center,” Oliver Stone and Paramount Pictures are venturing into edgier territory with “Jawbreaker.” Pic will focus on America’s response to the terrorist attacks with the invasion of Afghanistan and hunt for 9/11 mastermind Osama Bin Laden.
Cyrus Nowrasteh, whose most recent credit was the controversial ABC miniseries “The Path to 9/11,” is set to write a second draft of “Jawbreaker.”
The movie is to be based on a book, also called “Jawbreaker,” that blames the Clinton administration for failing to capture Bin Laden and praises President Bush:
In a memoir heavily vetted by the CIA (there are pages of blacked-out lines), Bernsten details feeling stymied by bureaucrats in President Bill Clinton’s administration who prevented operatives from engaging a growingly malicious Al Qaeda and Bin Laden presence. While Bernsten describes how he and his cohorts were stunningly told to stand down when they had Bin Laden cornered in Tora Bora, he writes approvingly of President George W. Bush’s handling of the invasion.
Nowrasteh is an avowed conservative activist. Last year, he spoke on a panel titled, “Rebels With a Cause: How Conservatives Can Lead Hollywood’s Next Paradigm Shift.” When confronted with his bias, Nowrasteh lied about his political leanings in the Wall Street Journal.
Hagel: ‘We Need To Find A New Strategy, A Way Out Of Iraq’
Hagel: ‘We Need To Find A New Strategy, A Way Out Of Iraq’
Today on CNN’s Late Edition, Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) delivered a blistering critique of the Bush administration’s Iraq policy.
Hagel said, “The American people are not going to continue to support, sustain a policy that puts American troops in the middle of a civil war.” He added, “So we need to find a new strategy, a way out of Iraq, because the entire Middle East, Wolf, is more combustible than it’s been probably since 1948, and more dangerous, and we’re in the middle of it.” Watch it:
If Hagel is looking for a responsible way out of Iraq, he should take a look at the American Progress plan, Strategic Redeployment.
Transcript: More »
Bush keeps revising war justification.
Chris Wallace Ignores 20,000 Emails Demanding He Ask Rice About The U.S.S. Cole
Chris Wallace Ignores 20,000 Emails Demanding He Ask Rice About The U.S.S. Cole
More than 20,000 people emailed Chris Wallace and demanded he ask Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice this question today:
Prior to 9/11, you had eight months to respond to the al-Qaeda attack on the U.S.S. Cole. Why didn’t the Bush administration take action and put al-Qaeda out of business?
Wallace didn’t ask the question or any question on the topic. It’s the twenty-fourth time Rice has been on Fox News Sunday since 9/11 without being asked about the U.S.S. Cole.
Last month, Fox’s Chris Wallace asked President Clinton why he didn’t respond to the Oct. 12, 2000 bombing of the U.S.S. Cole. He asked the question even though the “CIA and the FBI refused to certify that Bin Laden was responsible” until early 2001, which foreclosed the possibility of a full response during the Clinton administration.
Wallace claimed he asked the question of Clinton because “I got a lot of e-mail from viewers.”
10,000 14,000 People Demand Chris Wallace Ask Rice About The U.S.S. Cole
10,000 14,000 People Demand Chris Wallace Ask Rice About The U.S.S. Cole
This morning, we suggested that readers email Chris Wallace and tell him to ask Condoleezza Rice the following question:
Prior to 9/11, you had eight months to respond to the al-Qaeda attack on the U.S.S. Cole. Why didn’t the Bush administration take action and put al-Qaeda out of business?
After all, Wallace asked President Clinton this question last month, even though the “CIA and the FBI refused to certify that Bin Laden was responsible” until early 2001, which foreclosed the possibility of a full response during the Clinton administration.
Also, Chris Wallace said he asked Clinton because “I got a lot of e-mail from viewers.” So far 10,000 people have emailed Wallace and told him to ask this question. Join this effort HERE.
We’ll monitor Fox News Sunday this weekend and let you know how Wallace responds.
UPDATE: As of 9PM, 14,000 people sent emails to Chris Wallace.
REPORT: The Cost of Ignoring Climate Change Is $20 Trillion A Year
REPORT: The Cost of Ignoring Climate Change Is $20 Trillion A Year
Global warming deniers frequently fall back on the following argument: even if global warming is real, it’s too expensive to mitigate. For example, the National Review’s Jason Steorts said it would require “economic castration.” Such arguments, however, ignore the costs of inaction.
A new study by the Global Development and Environment Institute at Tufts University reveals the severe economic consequences of doing nothing. From the report:
[I]f nothing is done to restrain greenhouse gas emissions, annual economic damages could reach US$20 trillion by 2100 (expressed in U.S. dollars at 2002 prices), or 6 to 8 percent of global economic output at that time (Kemfert 2005). The same study found that immediate adoption of active climate protection policies could limit the temperature increase to 2° and eliminate more than half of the damages…If, however, climate protection efforts do not begin until 2025, the same model estimates that it will be impossible to limit warming to 2° by 2100 — and climate protection in general will be more expensive, the later it starts.
Even that estimate “necessarily omit[s] some of the most troubling potential consequences of climate change.” Importantly, the study found that the cost of mitigation is about one quarter the cost of doing nothing.
Tell Chris Wallace To Ask Rice About The U.S.S. Cole
Tell Chris Wallace To Ask Rice About The U.S.S. Cole
Last month, Fox’s Chris Wallace asked President Clinton why he didn’t respond to the Oct. 12, 2000 bombing of the U.S.S. Cole. He asked the question even though the “CIA and the FBI refused to certify that Bin Laden was responsible” until early 2001, which foreclosed the possibility of a full response during the Clinton administration.
Clinton pressed Wallace: “I want to know how many people in the Bush administration you asked why didn’t you do anything about the Cole.” Wallace responded, “We asked, we asked.”
In fact, he hadn’t asked. Neither Chris Wallace, nor his predecessor, Tony Snow, ever asked anyone in the Bush administration why they failed to respond to the bombing of the U.S.S Cole. (They had 42 opportunities with top administration officials to do so, including 23 with Condoleezza Rice.)
Wallace claimed he asked Clinton the question, because “I got a lot of e-mail from viewers.”
This weekend, Condoleezza Rice will be back on Fox News Sunday. Email Chris Wallace and tell him to ask the Secretary of State this question:
Prior to 9/11, you had eight months to respond to the al-Qaeda attack on the U.S.S. Cole. Why didn’t the Bush administration take action and put al-Qaeda out of business?
You can email Wallace HERE.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll