NBC: Dean, Kerry Wrong on Cheney CIA Charge

Search

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
3,530
Tokens
More lies by the Libs........ but then again, when have the libs evere let a little lie prevent a good theory.
icon_rolleyes.gif


This just goes to show you that MOST (not all)Libs are unethical, manipulators who will do anything to get in power.



NBC: Dean, Kerry Wrong on Cheney CIA Charge

Allegations leveled during last night's debate by Gov. Howard Dean and Sen. John Kerry that Vice President Dick Cheney "berated" CIA analysts to get them to exaggerate Iraq war intelligence are false, NBC's Washington correspondent Andrea Mitchell said Friday.

"It's absolutely not true," Mitchell told radio host Don Imus. "The vice president went over to the CIA on a couple of Saturdays, you know, more than once . . but he did not, by anybody's account, berate the analysts."

Mitchell noted that former CIA analysts Ray McGovern and Larry Johnson, who were not present during the Cheney meetings, have said mid-level employees may have felt "pressured" by Cheney's presence.

But she quickly added, "For outsiders to say that anonymous people felt pressured is a far cry from . . Howard Dean saying in the debate that they, quote, berated the analysts."

In response to a question from debate moderator Tom Brokaw about chief weapons inspector David Kay's contention that there was no pressure from the White House on Iraq war intelligence, Dean complained:

"What we now find out is that Vice President Dick Cheney went to the CIA on at least one occasion, and maybe more, sat with middle-level CIA operatives and berated them because he didn't like their intelligence reports."

In the next breath number two Democrat in the presidential race continued:

"It seems to me that the vice president of the United States therefore influenced the very reports that the president then used to decide to go to war and to ask Congress for permission to go to war."

Asked by Brokaw about Dean's charge that Cheney had "berated" CIA analysts, Democratic presidential front-runner John Kerry lent credence to the wild-eyed allegation, saying, "There is a very legitimate question, Tom, about what the vice president of the United States was doing at the CIA. There's an enormous question about the exaggeration by this administration."
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
14,280
Tokens
Dean went too far stating it as a fact. That was wrong. But Kerry isn't exactly wrong to say it's a legitimate question. It is a legit question and there's no doubt that the Admin. generally exaggerated, or as the Brits say "sexed up", the threats.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
3,530
Tokens
D2bets- How do we know that the threats were exaggerated? If we hadn't of given Saddam 3 months to hide his weapons and had gone in there and found them, would the threats still be exaggerated?

KMAN
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
14,280
Tokens
Yes, come on, they exaggerated the threats, What was all that stuff about Saddam bringing a nuke over on a ship and blowing u the east coast or some shit. I don't remember exactly, but they floated all kinds of nonsense to scare everybody. If one thing didn't work they tried another. Listen, they were hellbent on taking Saddam down and they were gonna say whatever they thought would achieve that end. You can defend that as good policy if you want because he's a bad guy and all that, but don't deny the obvious that the threats were trumped up. They hyped whatever would help their case and turned a blind on eye on thing they didn't. Why would this surprise anybody?
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
818
Tokens
Did anyone see Condi Rice's scripted interview with Matt Lauer yesterday. She backpedaled faster than Ty Law covering Marvin Harrison.

She must have said 5 times, saddam was a dangerous man in a dangerous region.

To paraphrase:

Matt: Condi, do you thik you got bad intelligence from the CIA?

Condi: What we do know is that Saddam was a dangerous man in a dangerous region and he needed to be removed.

ad nasuem. another scripted turn of phrase by the bushies.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
14,280
Tokens
These people wouldn't give you a straight answer if you wanted to know what toppings they wanted for their pizza.

If they had been honest all along they should be leading the charge in questioning the intel from the CIA and demanding answers. I don't understand why they are not outraged. Why don't they want an independent investigation? Of course we all know the answer and this Admin. is the most secretive Admin. at least since Nixon.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
3,530
Tokens
D2Bets- Come on now......All politicians are dishonest....Are you just now figuring that out. Remember "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" Clinton.

Come on.

KMAN
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
14,280
Tokens
Yes, and call me cooky, but I think that the subject matter of the dishonesty matters. Seems to me to be a slight difference between getting a hummer in the oral pffice and lying about the reasons for taking the country to war. Maybe I'm alone in that, I dunno.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
3,530
Tokens
d2bets - It's alot easier to prove Clinton's dishonesty though.

KMAN
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
14,280
Tokens
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by KMAN:
d2bets - It's alot easier to prove Clinton's dishonesty though.

KMAN<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well there ya go.
1053177568.gif
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,119,179
Messages
13,565,029
Members
100,758
Latest member
alexabil
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com