White House disputes account of Tenet testimony on Iraq uranium

[Nambe]

(White House-AP)

The White House is disputing an account of CIA chief George Tenet's testimony about the Iraq uranium furor.

A senator who heard the secret testimony -- Democrat Dick Durbin -- says Tenet named a White House official who insisted President Bush's State of the Union speech include a dubious claim that Iraq tried to buy uranium in Africa.

But Press Secretary Scott McClellan calls the account "nonsense" -- from a lawmaker who voted against authorizing the Iraq war. ---

Asked repeatedly if Bush is responsible for what's in his speech, McClellan insisted the issue has been "fully addressed."

But Durban repeated his version on the Senate floor today -- and demanded Bush give a full accounting to Congress on the issue.

Banish bush From Texas Too

[gWbush is Mabus]

1. in response to...

Asked repeatedly if Bush is responsible for what's in his speech, McClellan insisted the issue has been "fully addressed."

i give you:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/stateoftheunion/behindthescenes/05.html

[soupkitchen]

2. So let me get this straight

The White House is saying that they guy they asked to lie for them is not telling the truth?

[Walt Starr]

6. They did NOT ask him to lie for them

They told him to not tell them it was a lie, so he didn't.

Edited to add:

And yes, they are saying the guy they told not to tell them it was a lie is lying.

[joshcryer]

19. Thing is...

...what's the difference?

[Walt Starr]

20. Well.. TECHNICALLY, Tenet didn't lie

:evilgrin:

[PurityOfEssence]

34. Hmmm...does that mean he "layed"?

This grammar stuff's just so tricky these days.

Stating that something you know to be highly questionable is fact is a lie. Stating that someone said something when your intent is to have people believe that you trust the word of this person is deception.

"the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth."

Let's not quibble. Did he LIE? Well...yes. But he definitely insinuated, hinted, misled, terrorized and deceived.

It's all that Republican laughing at people who can be suckered; it truly is the party of the con-man. Just like that Jeb Bush line in last year's primary: "what is this problem that Democrats have with voting?"

[diplomats]

9. I guess he didn't

"fall on his sword" after all.

[Stevendsmith]

10. God that is absurd isn't it?

I'm getting dizzy!

[Frances]

3. I realize that some right wing Republicans

live in an alternate universe, but what about the Republicans from the northeast who are not in that tradition? How can they live with themselves when they see that this administration is running a fundamentalist Mafia?

[snooper2]

4. I'm really hoping here...

That this damn is going to break, but Karl always has some special gum to plug the cracks...

What is the next move besides continual denial?

[qb]

5. One clue that they don't have a leg to stand on

is the use of terms like "nonsense", "beyond the pale", "unthinkable"...

[plcdude]

7. as you can see

they are getting caddy and super defensive with statements such as "from a lawmaker who voted against authorizing the Iraq war". What is that supposed to mean? Does it mean that if you oppose war you are naturally less than truthful? So far the evidence points to the untruthful side having a different position. The arrogance continues. The outrage, however, grows.

[justicebuilder]

15. The sad thing is

Durbin didn't really oppose the war - he was one of the wishy-washy "not without U.N. backing" folks. So basically Durbin was taking the radical position that the U.S. should follow international law and not violate the U.N. charter.

This is a very short-sighted tactic by the WH - eventually Durbin's account will be corroborrated, unless he just made it up, in which case Tenet will probably say publicly "No, I didn't say that."

What a bunch of idiots. They are only hastening their demise.

jb

[JohnOneillsMemory]

50. Journalists (sic) will put this in the Dem vs Repub themed conflict...

to safely carry the story of mass murder for an oil war as instead (to those who are inclined to think everything in American politics is just two-party sibling rivalry for public affection) just part of the '04 presidential whores-oops, I mean- horse race. More pretend journalism that normalizes outrageous revelations as 'no big deal.'

[NYC]

8. Sounds just like Ari:

...the issue has been "fully addressed."

I wish people would answer questions.

[1monster]

11. the issue has been "fully addressed."

Perhaps, but they apparently forgot to put on the stamp, 'cause the answers certainly have not been delivered just yet.

edit: be to been

[nixonwasbetterthanW]

18. anyway, how would McClellan know?

How would the presidential press secretary even know what Tenet told Congress in secret? Did Tenet have to vet his presentation with the White House?

[nixonwasbetterthanW]

12. "White House official" may be key

It could very well be that McClellan is hanging his hat on the definition of "WH official" ... he could argue, for example, that a member of the vice president's team, or perhaps even Lurch himself, are not "White House officials." Not a good argument, but what other explanation could there be, given that Durbin has twice gone out on limb on this matter in the last 24 hours?

[JohnyCanuck]

13. Get with the program

Shrubster has put this issue behind him. LOL What a FARKING IDIOT

[Trajan]

14. Non sequitur arguments are ALL the rage in today's GOP .....

Question: "WHY did the President mislead the american people ??? "

Answer: "Our soldiers are brave and fight for our freedoms: are you some kind of pacifist, communist, homosexual socialist ????"


Question: "WHY did the President use information in his SOTU speech that he KNEW was faulty ????"

Answer: "The world is a MUCH better place without Saddam Hussien"


Question: "From aluminum tubes to Bioweapon trucks: ... NONE of the PRE war assertions made by this administration have been borne out by facts on the ground : .. can YOU explain this ?? .... "

Answer: "what do you want ? ... a MUSHROOM CLOUD over the US ?? .."

[Enraged_Ape]

16. So it's come down to Georgie vs. CIA

I wonder who will win?

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

17. It's getting hot and heavy on

Pennsylvania Avenue! :)
So let me get this straight. They told us Saddam was a liar and therefore invaded.
Now they say an elected U.S. Senator, who was present at these hearings, is a liar.
You know that song, "Signs"? I keep hearing the tune but the words are now "lies, lies, everywhere lies, he said this, he didn't say that, can't you hear our lies?"

[joeunderdog]

21. Either way--we do know this for sure...

Someone in the Bush Administration is LYING. There's no denying that at this point.

Guess we need to investigate this to find out more, don't we?

[jbfam4]

23. Queen of Hearts

was right........OFF with their heads!

[damnraddem]

28. Hey, c'mon, I come her for news.

Now, news would be something like: 'Someone in the Dubya Administration didn't lie today.'

[Maeve]

22. Circular firing squad, I'm telling you!

Pass the popcorn.

[Augspies]

24. Yeah the issue has been "fully addressed" alright

International Court of Justice
Peace Palace
2517 KJ The Hague
The Netherlands

And its going to be mailed soon.

Goodbye you sick bastards.

Jeremy

[Sushi_lover]

25. Pay attention, Condi!

Even when you take one for the team, you still end up taking it up the end.

[hang a left]

26. Durbin wasn't the only one

that came out of that hearing spewing wh. Pat Roberts said it too.

[fizzana]

27. What amazes me is that a little "mea culpa"

from Bush when the story started breaking would have put all of this to restbut I guess he isn't man enough to assume any responsibility.

Every time any of them open their mouths they seem to dig themselves deeper into a hole. I can't recall ever seeing such ongoing stupidity and mendacity from an adminstration before. I guess that's what happens when you exist in an echo chamber and every idea and comment from outside their own circle is automatically dismissed and ridiculed.

I say "Bring it on!"

[FubarFly]

29. shrub has already admitted guilt

I'm surprised no one is harping on this.

To quote from his July 14th press conference:

"And look, I mean, the thing that's important to realise is that we're constantly gathering data, subsequent to the piece of the speech the CIA had some doubts, but when I gave the, when they talked about the speech and when they looked at the speech, it was cleared, otherwise I wouldn't have put it in the speech."


Well as it turns out the CIA actively warned the president that the information was questionable. The president then decided to use the information anyway, but with a "technically" accurate caveat- The British government claim. Apparantly, the president thought that technical accuracy was good enough. It's not. The CIA has apologized for not telling the president that the implications of his speech would be erroneous. But that isn't their job- it is the president's responsibility to understand the implications of the words that he himself admitted to placing in his own speech. shrub is guilty of deliberately misleading the public in a SOTUA, and we don't need a investigation to implicate him. The information is already in the public domain. The words came from his own mouth.

(on edit: typos, and then clarity)

[tableturner]

30. There is no mea culpa...

that Bush could say that would have put this issue to rest. The reason: any mea culpa given that is backed by a semblance of truth and/or logic would result in even bigger troubles. There is a reason why their excuses and explanations are so obviously false and even more than that, totally ridiculous. The White House has a choice: 1)make the president look like an incompetent boob who is totally out of touch; or 2)allow the president to be seen as a guy who lied to Congress and the American people to get us into a war. The only reason that the administration's defense makes the president look like such an incompetent is that looking incompetent is better than looking like a guy who lied to the American people and Congress about going to war. In other words, there IS no exculpatory explanation. If there were a truthful explanation or even a false one that sounds logical, they would have used it! THAT is why their explanations are so ridiculous.

[karlschneider]

33. What was that line from -Sum of All Fears- by the Russian Prez...

"these days it's better to be guilty than incompetent"...something like that.
:eyes:

[fizzana]

35. I think not

If he had come out and taken responsibility for including the statement in the SOTU, the whore press would have been all over him praising him to high heaven.

Instead they've handled this about as badly as they could, thankfully and in so doing they're rapidly losing a significant chunk of the media.

[PurityOfEssence]

31. But he still has our fulsome confidence

Really. We didn't pressure the CIA at all, even though they repeatedly bounced back all such claims, this one just slipped by them. Gosh, it must've slipped by us too. Oh no, that's right: the Brits are infallible and we don't even have to question them, even when purporting something that's repeatedly disputed.

We didn't pressure anyone.

He has our complete confidence.

[karlschneider]

32. Uh, would that be the same White House whose head cockroach just

expressed 'complete confidence' in Tenet a couple of days ago. Good god, how do they keep from falling over from dizziness?
:crazy:

[Dhalgren]

40. That's right!

It is becoming impossible to follow them. Maybe that's their plan - to sound so stupid, so insane that no one believes anyone could be that far gone.

But why hasn't there been a louder roar of laughter from the Gimp in Chief's statement in front of Kofi Anan that the US invade Iraq "because Saddam wouldn't let the instectors in there. So we invaded" in support of the UN!!!!!!! No one but NPR has even mentioned it that I have seen (and then only in passing).

No this bullshit Empire of the Asses is imploding before our very eyes - and I am loving it! I just hope we all don't get killed in the process. :scared:

[0007]

36. FUCK FOX News

When have they ever got it right.

junior is digging a hole that's bigger than the hole in his stupid head.

[skip fox]

37. More secret Tenet testimony is leaking out to

DU's crack CAPTIONing staff!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=105&topic_id=27585&mesg_id=27585&page=

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=105&topic_id=27627&mesg_id=27627&page=

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=105&topic_id=27661&mesg_id=27661&page=

[casual_observer]

38. Their days are numbered - They can't talk their way out of this

As things become worse in Iraq and no WMD are EVER found ALL of their publicly stated reasons for going into this will we brought into question. In about a month or so, the public will have had enough of this and the lies. resignations and criminal charges will follow.

Bush lied, Widows Cry.

[janx]

42. They more they dispute, the more they cover up,

the worse the outcome will be. You're right: They can't get out of it.

[underpants]

43. Stop Digging W

And for your own sake DON'T ask for a bigger shovel.

[fizzana]

44. Thank god the "adults" are now in charge

n/t

[underpants]

45. "Adults" who can't take any criticism or face the music

Welcome to DU :hi:

[0007]

39. If junior has nothing to hide

....then why doesn't he come to the Senate floor like a "real man" and state his position. Instead of acting like a pussy whipped wimp.

[fizzana]

41. If only he were just a pussy whipped wimp

He's a mean-assed drunk (whether he's sober or not) who can't take responsibility for anything and runs like a coward at the first hint of trouble.

[Imalittleteapot]

46. Question. Was Tenet under oath?

If the testimony is under oath, they should (can they ?) call in the pres., vp, Rice, Powell to testify?

[Imalittleteapot]

47. Question. Was Tenet under oath?

If the testimony is under oath, they should (can they ?) call in the pres., vp, Rice, Powell to testify?

[peterh]

48. What needs to be pointed out to these assholes….

Is the fact that in a democratic society, the process of getting from point A to point B is just as important as the actual achievement of point B. To trivialize the process is akin to trivializing the rule of law. The planting of evidence to facilitate the arrest of a known criminal is no more legal than the acts of the criminal himself. To say otherwise is again, akin to trivializing our rule of law. The issue is not whether America or the world is safer….the issue is the “rule of law” and the continuity of that concept.

<http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/07/17/intelligence.flap/>

"There are some in Congress who are seeking to rewrite history and making those claims," McClellan said. "Some of these were in the small minority who opposed the action that we took. They are sitting there seeking to justify their votes against the action that we took. But the bottom line is America is safer -- the world is safer -- because of the action we took."

[skip fox]

49. New leaks of Tenet testimony!! (DU's CAPTIONers get scoop.)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=105&topic_id=27891&mesg_id=27891&page=

[Kade]

51. What will become of Colin Powell I wonder

Throughout boy George's maddness the only one of his cronies I have remotely felt for has been Colin Powell. I've always gotten the impression that all hes ever tried to be is a good soldier and unfortunetly hes been made to lie to the world (via the UN security council) because of it. If this thing blows up like I hope it does...in what ways will it affect Powell?


-Kade