NYT Magazine "Hillary's War"

[bklyncowgirl]

This long article goes into great depth on Senator Clinton's record on the Iraq war.

One thing which surprised me. She has never said whether or not she read the full National Intelligence Estimate before the war. When asked directly, she said she was "briefed" but did not elaborate further.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/29/magazine/03Hillary-t.html?ref=politics

[keopeli]

1. That's because she didn't read the NIE.

This has been discussed by many inside the beltway (who aren't happy with Hillary).

Apparently, she simply consulted Bill about what to do. Or, that's the conventional wisdom anyway.

[bklyncowgirl]

2. If you don't read it you can't be held responsible for not knowing what's in it.

Of course if you're a United States Senator voting to authorize a President to go to war--a life and death decision if ever there was one--one would think it was your duty to fully examine the evidence.

Senator Clinton has a reputation for being a detail oriented workhorse. This sounds like a case of willful ignorance.

Incidently, I'd like to see Edwards, Dodd and Biden, all of whom voted for the IWR answer that question.

[Tellurian]

5. Whatever this issue is...

why now? what would be the motivation behind it, so long after the fact?

[papau]

9. Only Bob Graham read-was allowed to read - the full NIE because that is the rule post 2000

The Bush executive order restricted access to the minority head of the intel committee.

Why the hell this piece of crap formulation that there is something wrong with reading the summary that was provided all other Dems other than Graham that is floating in media is even given the time of day is a bit beyond me.

Once again the left buys into a GOP mantra and uses it against one another.


The leaders of the smear of the day are only the New York Times in the piece posted by the OP, but also the Washington Post:

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/05/30/.aspx

"As the Washington Post noted earlier from the Gerth-Van Natta book, Clinton might not have read the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate before she cast her vote. "The question of whether Clinton took the time to read the N.I.E. report is critically important. Indeed, one of Clinton’s Democratic colleagues, Bob Graham, the Florida senator who was then the chairman of the intelligence committee, said he voted against the resolution on the war, in part, because he had read the complete N.I.E. report. Graham said he found that it did not persuade him that Iraq possessed W.M.D. As a result, he listened to Bush’s claims more skeptically. ‘I was able to apply caveat emptor,’ Graham, who has since left the Senate, observed in 2005. He added regretfully, ‘Most of my colleagues could not.’"

THE ABOVE ARTICLE is a lie by again telling a partial truth - Bob Graham is called one of Clinton’s Democratic colleagues and it is noted that he read the complete N.I.E. report, it did not persuade him that Iraq possessed W.M.D., - and voted no - all true.

But It cuts out the rest of Graham's statement where he noted that only he was allowed to read the report because of the Bush order that said no one by the minority leader and the chair of the intel committee could be allowed to read the report under penalty of law - and that he was forbidden from even discussing the report with anyone. The blue smoke summary that was given everyone had been stripped of the words that made Graham pause and vore no.

What a crock.

Hillary can cross NBC, the Washington Post, and the New York Times off the list of unbiased news outlets that she can trust.

[MethuenProgressive]

3. So... if she had read "full National Intelligence Estimate" you think her vote'd been different?

All I know is what I read in the papers, but the NIE pretty much said Saddam had/was going to have what Bush was saying. Since Bush owned the "facts" that's not too surprising. The dissenting opinions were hardly mentioned.
I think this "she never even read it!" dust-up is misleading.

[bklyncowgirl]

4. The full NIE was far more cautious regarding WMD than the publicly available statement

Senator Bob Graham changed his position after reading it and strongly urged other Senators to at least look at the thing.

When a Senator votes on life and death issues, he or she should examine all of the available evidence. Senator Clinton apparently did not. I don't know about Edwards, Biden and Dodd. Edwards, of course, as a member of the intelligence committee, was in the best position of all to get to the truth and he to voted for the resolution.

The Iraq war has been a disaster and I think everyone who helped to get us unto this mess needs to be held accountable for what they did. If these Senators, particularly one who has a reputation for being a detail oriented workhorse like Senator Clinton, did not bother to read the full estimate, there has to be a reason.

Isn't it better to discuss these issues now than after a nominee has been chose and the Republicans unleash their attack ads?

[papau]

10. Graham did not "urge" NIE anything to other Senators as the law stopped him n/t

n/t

[MethuenProgressive]

11. How do we know "The full NIE was far more cautious regarding WMD"?

"The full NIE was far more cautious regarding WMD than the publicly available statement"?
And you go on:
"If these Senators, particularly one who has a reputation for being a detail oriented workhorse like Senator Clinton, did not bother to read the full estimate, there has to be a reason."?
You're saying she didn't read it becauase she "had a reason"? What "reason"?

[primative1]

6. Iraq-Vietnam Correlations ...

People have been so surprised to see how the two wars have tracked eachothers "progress" thus far.
So I guess its natural to wonder if Hillary will turn into this generations LBJ.

[illinoisprogressive]

7. the big but, not discussed story is the deal with the Levin admendment

Hillary has said she was for it. Levin's admendment put attachments to make the administration do diplomacy and not war. Hillary voted against it. Now she is saying she was for it.
This is the little part that is damaging and yet, it's not discussed in the msm or anywhere.

[bklyncowgirl]

8. The Levin amendment would have apparently tied Bush's hands. Clinton voted against it.

If she is now saying that she was for it but voted against it, that's a big contradiction.

[freesqueeze]

12. Her Capris are on Fire!

I'm glad there are some who stand up against this phony hypnotism from the Hillary campaign.

She was right in Rummy's pocket when we needed her most and I'll never forget it.



"Look at the shiney ball"

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

http://www.freesqueeze.com/hillary.htm