THE Imus-Santorum-WMD discussion -- transcript

[Bozita]

Right side of screen, under "Quote of the Day"

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036713/

Thursday June 22, 2006

Imus speaks with Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA) about the his comments on the Senate floor regarding the discovery of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

Imus: "Well, the administration is not jumping all over this. Why aren't they? The President--I talked to David Gregory... He's in Budapest with the President this morning, the President's just--The President said they weren't there. We made a mistake and--"

Senator Rick Santorum: "Yeah, well, all I can tell you is, and having talked to the administration and lots of folks over there, what they are focused in and they keep saying this is, we need to look forward. I don't want to debate this issue anymore about weapons of mass destruction. We need to just look forward in what we want to do in the future. And that's very admirable, but the bottom line is the American public has a right to know what we have found and what we haven't found, and the last report by the intelligence community that came out was the Duelfer Report, which said no stockpiles existed, and there was headlines everywhere in the country, no WMD. Three members of the United States Senate yesterday on the floor of the Senate said that we found no weapons of mass destruction. That is factually incorrect. We have found at least 500 and in fact, having read the classified report let me assure you that there are others."

Imus: "Yeah, but another unnamed Pentagon official is saying that these weapons were pre-1981, 1991, rather, munitions, that they were in such a degraded state that they couldn't be used for, certainly for what they were designed for and perhaps anything else."

Senator Rick Santorum: "That's not--well, again, I can't comment on what the classified report is, but let me just assure you that I, I'm not sure that that Pentagon official read the report. Just let me put it that way."

Imus: "See, here's what has to happen, Senator Santorum, is you guys all have to finally say, admit you were wrong, that this was a hideously horrible idea, and that you're sorry you got us into this. And we're gonna get us out of it as quickly as possible and go on and fight the real war on terror.'"

more...

[KeepItReal]

1. I tried to listen to that fool Imus this morning and he was full of crap

He said the #2 guy in Al Qaeda looked like a professor at the New School.

[Bozita]

2. Malloy read parts of the transcript on the air last night

[UTUSN]

3. Beltway bozos made fools of by sL-IMUS, but in Ricky's case he's

so DESPERATE that he just licked it up.

[Norquist Nemesis]

4. HMMMM....How very, very, very, very strange. Hoekstra said

the same things last night on Lou Dobbs. He said the reason the administration wasn't trumpeting this all over the place was they are "looking forward".

I was really disappointed with Dobbs last night allowing Hoekstra to go on with this propaganda...completely unchallenged.

Nora O'Donnell and her two 'analysts' were ROFL at Santorum when the clip played. She asked Pat Buchanan, "Why would the WH allow Rick Santorum to announce this if it's true?" Pat's answer was, 'If it were true, Karl Rove would be announcing it!' :rofl:

[Gabi Hayes]

5. hah....I started a thread on Dobbs' reaction to Hoekstra last night,

and quite a few responses said he DISAGREED with Hoekstra, and was being sarcastic in his allowance of him to make his remarks without countering himself. I certainly didn't get that impression. Dobbs offered no counterpoint to what Hoekstra had to say

there were concurrent threads about the Hardball and Countdown responses to Santorum/Hoekstra, and both shows were amazingly contemptuous.

[Norquist Nemesis]

6. You and I had the same reaction to Dobbs

I've been surprised at Dobbs over the past few days. He gave sunlight to the NAFTA Superhighway and North American Union. I honestly thought these were both tinfoil speculation. But Dobbs gave them credibility by airing the info, so I dunno.

Then, when he put Hoekstra on...well, I'm almost ready to believe that Dobbs has become a target and is being set up for a Rathering. He is fully in charge of his show decided what does or does not air. The way he went after corporations for a full year, day after day after day did not make happy campers for the aristocracy. He's been bluntly critical of "this government" not only on his show, but at public forums as a panelist.

I just hope he stays off of small planes.

[Gabi Hayes]

8. seen this yet?

SWEET!

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/14884394.htm

WASHINGTON - In Jack Abramoff's world, prominent Washington tax-cut advocate Grover Norquist was a godsend. Moving money from a casino-operating Indian tribe to Ralph Reed, the Christian Coalition founder and professed gambling opponent, was a problem. Lobbyist Abramoff turned to his longtime friend Norquist, apparently to provide a buffer for Reed.

The result, according to evidence gathered by the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, was that Norquist's Americans for Tax Relief became a conduit for more than a million dollars from the Mississippi Choctaw to Reed's operation, while Norquist, a close White House ally, took a cut.

Without citing any specific group, the Senate panel found numerous instances of nonprofit organizations that appeared to be involved in activities unrelated to their mission as described to the Internal Revenue Service.

Thursday's 373-page Senate report on Abramoff's influence-peddling said some nonprofits channeled money from one entity to another in an effort to obscure the source of funds, the eventual use of funds and to evade tax liability.

[Norquist Nemesis]

9. Oh, yes! I've cleared the dance floor

but knowing Grover, I'm not ready to start the jig just yet. Norquist is more evil and diabolical than Dick Cheney. While Cheney is looking to line his pockets along with 'friends', Norquist's goal is to destroy the government. He's gone unchecked far too long and should be brought up on charges of treason against America.

[Gabi Hayes]

10. couldn't agree more about that skunk

is there a more ubiquitously malign influence?

I mean, who's worse?

he's everywhere, influencing everybody, helping grease everybody's wheels

is he still having those weekly 'breakfasts,' or is he too big for that?

[derby378]

7. Looks like they scrubbed it

Got another link?