"So what if I lied about WMD?" blurted Bush (2003 interview)

[The Count]

PRESIDENT BUSH: “SO WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE” IF YOUR SONS AND DAUGHTERS ARE NOW DEAD BECAUSE I LIED

President’s Shocking Taunt Caught On Video

DIANE SAWYER: (You) stated as a hard fact, that there were weapons of mass destruction as opposed to the possibility that he could move to acquire those weapons still —

PRESIDENT BUSH: So what's the difference?

“So what’s the difference?” if he lied, said our President plainly. “So what’s the difference?” if hundreds of our sons and daughters are dead and still dying, if we killed thousands of Iraqis, if the American taxpayers have spent over $100 billion dollars, sending the nation even further into massive debts. “So?” “So what’s the difference,” if it was all just a trick and a bunch of lies on his part?

Diane, as you could expect, was flabbergasted, and could only get out:

DIANE SAWYER: Well —

The President had become the arrogant gangster boss who just told the chief of police, “Yeah, so what if I’m running a drug cartel – what are you going to do about it?” In reality, what could Diane do – she had done all she needed to, capturing the President’s confession on video tape.
http://www.moderateindependent.com/v1i18bush.htm

[zabet]

1. We care

ya fuckin' nimrod!!!!!!

That is to dumbya, not the OP.
:)

[spanone]

2. bu$h* has trivialized 'truth'

[liberal N proud]

3. ..

:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:
:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:
:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:
:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:
:mad: :mad: :mad: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:
:mad: :mad: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:
:mad: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:
:nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:

[Amonester]

4. "The audience laughed. I grimaced."

~snip~
"After a few more slides, there was a shot of Bush looking under furniture in the Oval Office. "Nope," he said. "No weapons over there." More laughter. Then another picture of Bush searching in his office: "Maybe under here." Laughter again.

Disapproval must have registered upon my face, for one of my tablemates said, "Come on, David, this is funny." I wanted to reply, Over 500 Americans and literally countless Iraqis are dead because of a war that was supposedly fought to find weapons of mass destruction, and Bush is joking about it. Instead, I took a long drink of the lovely white wine that had come with our dinner. It's not as if I was in the middle of a talk-show debate and had to respond. This was certainly one of those occasions in which you either get it or don't. And I wasn't getting it. Or maybe my neighbor wasn't.

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/capitalgames?pid=1336

(emphasis mine)

[tanyev]

5. Yes. That whole incident should not be forgotten.

Bad enough that the Bush administration made the presentation, absolutely appalling that a roomful of "journalists" laughed at it.

[lonestarnot]

6. None to him! Serial killers sociopaths have no conscience. No difference!

[Reader Rabbit]

7. Is there a video clip of this?

I checked your link, but couldn't find one. Maybe 'cause I just got up.

[The Count]

9. The person who wrote the article refers to a video - but it's not linked

you tube has a "redux" version:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nasaZ4DqXA

[Rosemary2205]

8. my bullshit detector is going off

[The Count]

10. Well, the "redux" version has the "what's the difference" line

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nasaZ4DqXA
You might want to check the White House transcripts to prove this wrong

[Rosemary2205]

11. Lame

Sorry but the video is "Daily Showesque"

[The Count]

13. The line is there. Ball is in your court to prove the trascript is made up

I read stuff before from that source - and they seem trustworthy to me. If you want to call them liars, produce evidence, don't just say "BS"

[alfredo]

17. I have to agree. I would have to see an unedited video, or an

original sourced transcript. If he had said that, it would have been all over DU at that time.


We must not be like the right wing by allowing false misleading info be part of our arguments. We need to be the party of truth. If this is the truth, we need good solid sources to back us up. If it is false, reject it.

[Kelly Rupert]

12. There's a rather inaccurate headline.

He didn't say, "So what if I lied." What he said was, "I don't see a difference between having WMD and 'moving to acquire WMD'," which is something both he and his advisors have repeatedly said in an attempt to justify his claims of WMD in Iraq. It's a totally-fallacious, incredibly-ignorant comment, but not the one the headline and article claim he was making. There's enough in that comment to hate without distorting it.

[The Count]

14. It's the GD forum - headline is mine - short version of the source's

I don't think it's a distortion - but rather it amounts to it. "No difference from having or wanting to have them= I pushed the truth a bit - so,sue me" In my book.

[Kelly Rupert]

15. I think rather than admitting to "pushing the truth,"

he's saying that he honestly doesn't see a difference between "having WMD" and "maybe going to get WMD."

[The Count]

16. Agreed. Literally - yes. But to me it also means "so what if he didn't actually have it"?

And maybe not just to me. It's still a brazen, in your face lie - because in the reality based community, committing a crime is not the same as thinking about it.
As I see it, he DID lie - and he DID say that it does not matter - therefore, I stand by by headline.