Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

REUTERS BREAKING:BUSH ADMITS DECLASSIFYING IRAQ INTEL

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 10:55 AM
Original message
REUTERS BREAKING:BUSH ADMITS DECLASSIFYING IRAQ INTEL
Edited on Mon Apr-10-06 11:15 AM by kpete
Bush acknowledges declassifying Iraq intelligence, ducks questions on leak

BUSH ADMITS DECLASSIFYING IRAQ INTEL, DUCKS LEAK QUESTIONS...
RAW STORY
Published: Monday April 10, 2006

REUTERS BREAKING:

President George W. Bush acknowledged on Monday he ordered the declassification of parts of a prewar intelligence report on Iraq to respond to critics.

But Bush said he could not comment on an assertion that he authorized Vice President Dick Cheney's former top aide, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, to release the information to reporters. Libby is accused of obstruction of justice and perjury in an investigation designed to discover who leaked the name of a CIA operative.

"I will say this, that after we liberated Iraq, there was questions in peoples' minds about, you know, the basis upon which I made statements, in other words, going into Iraq," Bush said in his first words on the subject since it flared up last week.

Answering questions after a speech, Bush said he declassified an October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate in July 2003 for a reason.

"I wanted people to see what some of those statements were based on. I wanted people to see the truth. I thought it made sense for people to see the truth. That's why I declassified the document," he said.

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Bush_acknwoledges_declassifying_Iraq_intelligence_ducks_0410.html
and: Bush admits declassifying Iraq intelligence after question from student, not reporter
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Rush_transcript_Bush_admits_declassifying_Iraq_0410.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
wtmusic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 10:58 AM
Response to Original message
1. "There was questions...."
I haves many questions about Junior's qualificatedness
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
helderheid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 10:59 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. qualificatedness
:spray: :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 11:03 AM
Response to Reply #1
9. And what remains of his sanity. He's going, soon.
There's no way they can leave him in the building unattended.

Anyone keeping track of whether McCain has bought his gonna be sworn in as VP tie and jacket, yet? Tell him to get to his tailor, quick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TomInTib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 11:13 AM
Response to Reply #1
19. Read that sentence aloud while standing on one foot.
Tough, eh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
juajen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #1
41. Yeah, that's great!
His grammar is hilarious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stop the bleeding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 10:59 AM
Response to Original message
2. Second bus today that has ran Darth over
thank you
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
file83 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #2
38. You mean, THIS "Darth"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr. Jones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 10:59 AM
Response to Original message
3. And after Arlen Specter heads a non-sworn-in investigation on the matter,
it'll all go back under the radar, just like the NSA thing did.

What is next? How many more lies will the American people take before we can impeach this bastard?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beelzebud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 10:59 AM
Response to Original message
5. Now if some journalist would just ask the million dollar question:
If you declassified this information, why did you feel the need to do a press conference in 2004 saying you wanted to find out who was responsible for leaking it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stop the bleeding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. let's hold our collective breath
shall we?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beelzebud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 11:03 AM
Response to Reply #7
10. If we had more than 1 Helen Thomas, I'd hold my breath.
But i'm not going to because I know I'll probably die from lack of oxygen before it happens.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ellenfl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #5
25. if you declassified . . .
why not tell the american peeps and not just a couple of reporters?

ellen fl
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beelzebud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #25
29. Another good one. Too bad we're not journalists, huh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emulatorloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #29
35. If you declassified, why did you let Judy Miller sit in jail?
If it was all on the up and up, why did you allow this and not come forward?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ellenfl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #35
36. good one! i think we need to make a list for ko. eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wtmusic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 06:00 PM
Response to Reply #35
44. And when Rove paid her the visit in jail
maybe he could have let her and her lawyers know too, seeing as she enabled their goddamn war for them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 11:36 AM
Response to Reply #5
32. And the second and third questions should be
How was declassifying that information helpful? Which truth were you intending to prove to America and the world, that the WMD/nuke info you were giving us was wrong?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sydnie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 11:01 AM
Response to Original message
6. this is what he said - and what he did
"Can't talk about ... you're not supposed to talk about classified
information" wink wink.

I saw this happen and made note of it in another thread. He stumbled answering it and then he winked at the questioner.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madame defarge Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 11:02 AM
Response to Original message
8. Total crap...
He's claiming he declassified them in the public's interest, which is apparently "legal" for a president to do. But it flies in the face of what was going on behind the scenes at the WH to discredit Wilson & cover it up.

From today's NYT: A senior administration official confirmed for the first time on Sunday that President Bush had ordered the declassification of parts of a prewar intelligence report on Iraq in an effort to rebut critics who said the administration had exaggerated the nuclear threat posed by Saddam Hussein. ... Confirmation that Mr. Bush ordered the declassification was published late Saturday by The Associated Press, which quoted "an attorney knowledgeable about the case." Once it appeared, the administration official was willing to confirm its details. <...> But the official said that Mr. Bush did not designate Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis Libby Jr., or anyone else, to release the information to reporters.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/10/washington/10leak.html?ex=1302321600&en=a822dffc46e8662d&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewJeffCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 11:04 AM
Response to Original message
11. Oh, so many questions...
1) Why declassify through a leak?
2) Why have the AG's office appoint a special prosecutor? Couldn't he have stopped the whole frackin' thing in its tracks right there?
3) Why not tell said prosecutor that he declassified the documents?
4) Why didn't Libby or Rove or Hadley, or even Bush/Cheney mention this to Fitzgerald before?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ladjf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #11
34. Why didn't the grand jury process simply call it off after learning
that the information had been declassified anyway? What a mess!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mr_Spock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 11:04 AM
Response to Original message
12. Moran. Why can't he even speak a complete sentence?
This guy should go back to being a drunken AWOL cheerleader...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rustydog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 11:04 AM
Response to Original message
13. Can you say CONSPIRACY ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AndyA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 11:05 AM
Response to Original message
14. Elvis has left the building...
and George needs to vacate the White House. The man has lost it. It's all a joke to him, it's all a game. That's what the winking was all about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
young_at_heart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 11:05 AM
Response to Original message
15. Surely, the MSM will not fall for this
He wanted people to know the "truth"?? I'm amazed anyone trusts him....his credibility it completely gone!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
npincus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 11:07 AM
Response to Original message
16. he said that during the Q & A
B*sh's criminal lawyer must be shaking his head and saying "Dumbass".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GeorgeGist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 11:08 AM
Response to Original message
17. Then why wait til now to fess up?
"I wanted people to see what some of those statements were based on. I wanted people to see the truth. I thought it made sense for people to see the truth. That's why I declassified the document,"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
myrna minx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 11:25 AM
Response to Reply #17
28. If it was perfectly legal, why didn't he just explain his legal
justification 3 years ago? Why lie? :eyes: He is so screwed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 11:09 AM
Response to Original message
18. Book em Danno.
They're organ donors.

Forked.

History.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thereismore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 11:16 AM
Response to Original message
20. another dose of truthiness from * n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 11:17 AM
Response to Original message
21. Truth? Not from that NIE


I wanted people to see what some of those statements were based on. I wanted people to see the truth. I thought it made sense for people to see the truth. That's why I declassified the document," (Mr. Bush) said.
-- From Reuters, April 10; Mr. Bush is explaining why he declassified parts of the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate

From CommonDreams.org
Dated Friday February 6, 2004



Still Smoke and Mirrors
By Ray McGovern

For some reason February 5 has been chosen two years running for rhetoric aimed at what Socrates termed “making the worse cause appear the better”—last year by Secretary of State Colin Powell at the UN and Thursday by CIA Director George Tenet at Georgetown University.

As in the case of Powell’s spurious depiction of the threat from Iraq, Tenet’s disingenuous tour de force becomes more embarrassing the closer you look.

Tenet chose to defend the indefensible—the bogus National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) hurriedly conjured up in September 2002 to support spurious charges made by Vice President Dick Cheney on August 26, 2002 in beating the drum for war on Iraq. The conclusions of that estimate have now been proven —pure and simple—wrong.

Even so, that is not the most important point. What all should know is that the Bush administration’s decision for war against Iraq came well before any intelligence estimate. There is ample evidence that that decision was made, at the latest, by spring 2002.

That there was no NIE before that speaks volumes. During my 27 years of service as a CIA analyst, never was a foreign policy decision of that magnitude made without FIRST commissioning a National Intelligence Estimate. Why did Tenet not take the initiative and see that one was done? Surely, if he did not know that decisions on war and peace were being made at the White House and Pentagon in early 2002, he was the only one in Washington so unaware.

Read more.

Comment by JR:

The NIE was a pack of lies. It was nothing but a summary of the pre-war propaganda that the Bushies put out to justify the war. As we know, none of it panned out. Putting it in the form of an NIE allowed the policymakers to set up the intelligence community for the fall when something turned out to be inaccurate.

Whether Bush and the neocons knew how inaccurate it was is something yet to be determined, but it is now certain that they didn't know whether it was accurate. They knew this because Cheney and Libby were down in Langley telling intelligence analysts what to say and Feith was in the Pentagon cherry picking and editing intelligence reports. We know they knew it because the Downing Street documents speak of their being aware that the case against Saddam was "weak" and the most recent one, revealed in the British press in February and the US MSM more recently, have Bush himself saying to Blair that the case is weak.

So, once again, Bush is pulling out that worthless NIE to obfuscate the fact that he lied about what he knew for certain about Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EVDebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 09:54 PM
Response to Reply #21
46. Read the Oct 2002 NIE and then read the Duelfur Report...who's lying ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChickMagic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 11:17 AM
Response to Original message
22. Egad
That child wouldn't know the truth if it
came right up and bit him in the ass. I've
seen occasions (I'm old and can't remember
the specifics right now) where he lied
when he didn't even need to do so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DearAbby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 11:18 AM
Response to Original message
23.  .....I wanted people to see the truth.
but, but...it wasn't the truth, the documents were forgeries...there were no weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq. WHAT TRUTH???






TOAST- I would say there is no way of saving this..can't even scrape the edges. Burnt toast. IMPEACH!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FormerOstrich Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 11:19 AM
Response to Original message
24. Am I in a time warp or is he?
I guess I haven't followed the timing of events well. We invaded in March 2003. However, wasn't Wilson speaking out prior to the invasion. Didn't the campaign to discredit Mr. Wilson start immediately prior to the invasion? So was it really in July 2003 that Plame was outed? I thought it was way before. We knew the niger things were forgeries in March 2003.



"I will say this, that after we liberated Iraq, there was questions in peoples' minds about, you know, the basis upon which I made statements, in other words, going into Iraq," Bush said in his first words on the subject since it flared up last week.

Answering questions after a speech, Bush said he declassified an October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate in July 2003 for a reason.

"I wanted people to see what some of those statements were based on. I wanted people to see the truth. I thought it made sense for people to see the truth. That's why I declassified the document," he said.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ellenfl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 11:23 AM
Response to Original message
26. but he only released the parts that backed him up! eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clark2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 11:23 AM
Response to Original message
27. "liberated" Iraq
:rofl:

From what? Stability?

Sorry - couldn't get passed that stupid phrasology to read anymore. Will go back now and see if I can read the rest without sarcastically laughing my ass off.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bullimiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 11:30 AM
Response to Original message
30. the same nie brief that shot holes in the aluminum tube theory?
didnt happen to mention that did he.

he is a fucking liar.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CrazyOrangeCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #30
31. "fucking liar" sums it up pretty well . . .
then there's

"murderous, hypocritical scumbag"

I've got more, but the medicine is starting to kick in.

Mmmmmm. Comfortably numb.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rateyes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 11:38 AM
Response to Original message
33. Did you catch this?
Edited on Mon Apr-10-06 11:46 AM by rateyes
"Bush said he declassified an October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate in JULY 2003 for a reason.-------Libby was talking with Miller in JUNE, 2003.

The pRresident is trying to cover his own ass for the illegal leak. What a P.O.S.!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peacetalksforall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 04:19 PM
Response to Reply #33
39. Evidently the NIE is published six days a week. Do you know which
Edited on Mon Apr-10-06 04:20 PM by higher class
day in October? Anyone ever heard which one it is?

Didn't Wilson return from Niger in October?

George expects us to believe every little pittance coming out from the Oval Room, the bunker, and PNAC Headquarters - but we don't even know what part was declassified.

All we know is that there was an article that had parts declassified and there was an article (or something appended to that report that mentions Plame or Wilson) and not everyone in Congress saw the part that had Plame or Wilson - then or later on in 2003, but some reporters did?

I am so confused.

Why is the act of telling a reporter about who Plame was have that much to do with declassifying a part of a CIA report called a NIE? Why doesn't anyone take them to task for the telling part? Why all the emphasis on the declassifying of a report.

LAW - outing an operative - on the books since the 1980's. Serious crime.
NIE - National Intelligence Estimate - a report prepared by the CIA on a nearly daily basis to update those who have clearance. An estimate of risk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rateyes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 05:37 PM
Response to Reply #39
40. October....
is enough. It's not the PDB (Presidential Daily Brief)--It usually takes 6 months for an NIE to be produced, as I understand it, and this one was a poorly crafted one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 01:47 PM
Response to Original message
37. who declassified Brewster Jennings covert operation?? inquiring minds
want to know..i have been waiting years now to know who outed brewster jennings to novak???????????????

fly
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Initech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 05:44 PM
Response to Original message
42. Impeach the fuckers. NOW!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 05:48 PM
Response to Original message
43. Bad lies followed by even worse lies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
symbolman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 06:05 PM
Response to Original message
45. If this is a Reuter's Breaking Story
why the Raw Story links?

If I'm not mistaken I recieved a press release about how Raw Story was all pissed off that Reuter's had "stolen" a story from THEM, and now we're using the "right wing media" in the Thread Title to like to a Raw STory "version" of what was said in the ACTUAL STORY?

Sorry, but I thought the rules said that PROPER ATTRIBUTION is the RULE here.

Can you at least ADD the Reuter's LINK for those of us who don't want to be pelted with ads or don't wish to visit Raw Story?

I appreciate many of your posts, but this one seems like a pretty blantant PLUG for RS, doesn't it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EVDebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-10-06 09:58 PM
Response to Original message
47. Oct 2002 NIE vs. The Duelfur Report Smackdown...
Edited on Mon Apr-10-06 10:00 PM by EVDebs
Key Judgments
http://www.fas.org/irp/cia/product/iraq-wmd.html

Bush 'declassified' it in order to say Iraq "HAD" WMDs despite none being physically present in the country. Neat trick.

"We judge that Iraq has continued its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs in defiance of UN resolutions and restrictions. Baghdad has chemical and biological weapons as well as missiles with ranges in excess of UN restrictions; if left unchecked, it probably will have a nuclear weapon during this decade. (See INR alternative view at the end of these Key Judgments.)"

In essence, the NIE says there ARE WMDs in Iraq 'because the administration says so'....

Compare and contrast this Oct. 2002 NIE with the Duelfer report's conclusions

U.S. 'Almost All Wrong' on Weapons
Report on Iraq Contradicts Bush Administration Claims

By Dana Priest and Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, October 7, 2004; Page A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A12115-2004Oct6.html

""Charles A. Duelfer, whom the Bush administration chose to complete the U.S. investigation of Iraq's weapons programs, said Hussein's ability to produce nuclear weapons had "progressively decayed" since 1991. Inspectors, he said, found no evidence of "concerted efforts to restart the program.""

Who, praytell, is lying to us ? The President or Mr. Duelfer ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Notoverit Donating Member (302 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-11-06 09:05 AM
Response to Original message
48. There was questions: is our children learning?
Yup. Trust this guy!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
magellan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-11-06 09:13 AM
Response to Original message
49. Keep digging that hole, Dimson!!
Pretty soon it'll be big enough for you and your whole filthy administration to fall into. Don't worry, we've got shovels!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marie26 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-11-06 09:18 AM
Response to Original message
50. But this has nothing to do w/Plame, right? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 10:24 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC