Seymour Hersh: Cheney Says 'Whether Or Not Dems Win-NO STOPPING Military Option With Iran'

[kpete]

CIA analysis finds no Iranian nuclear weapons drive:

REPORT: WASHINGTON (AFP) - A classifed draft CIA assessment has found no firm evidence of a secret drive by Iran to develop nuclear weapons, as alleged by the White House, a top US investigative reporter has said.

19/11/2006 04h18

........................

Seymour Hersh, writing in an article for the November 27 issue of the magazine The New Yorker released in advance, reported on whether the administration of Republican President George W. Bush was more, or less, inclined to attack Iran after Democrats won control of Congress last week.

......................

"If the Democrats won on November 7th, the vice president said, that victory would not stop the administration from pursuing a military option with Iran," Hersh wrote, citing a source familiar with the discussion.

Cheney said the White House would circumvent any legislative restrictions "and thus stop Congress from getting in its way," he said.

...........

"The CIA found no conclusive evidence, as yet, of a secret Iranian nuclear-weapons program running paallel to the civilian operations that Iran has declared to the International Atomic Energy Agency," Hersh wrote, adding the CIA had declined to comment on that story.

more at:
http://www.afp.com/english/news/stories/061119034024.d010tlyg.html

[deutsey]

1. But remember: let's keep impeachment off the table.

:sarcasm:

[On the Road]

11. I Do Think an Attack on Iran Might Just Put it Back on the Table

at the very least it should be a sword of Damocles over Bush's head.

[electron_blue]

22. this reminds me of what it feels like to be trapped in an abusive relationship

You keep saying what would cause you to leave him/her once and for all.

And then when *that* happens, you just draw a new line in the sand.

My point being - why are we waiting for Iran? Don't we have enough info on the legality Bush Presidency?

[deutsey]

23. But Bush didn't get a blow job in the Oval Office, so he's in the clear.

:eyes:

[WinkyDink]

24. That we're aware of. Jeff Gannon visited SOMEbody.

[deutsey]

27. But he wisely destroyed his blue dress.

:evilgrin:

[Buttercup McToots]

2. Scarey

:nuke:

[seemslikeadream]

3. Thank you so much

I was told on my thread about Iran to GO AWAY!

[Lugnut]

17. Don't feel too badly

Back in '02 I posted that I was envisioning a Viet Nam type endeavour in Iraq and was pooh-poohed as well.

[Julius Civitatus]

4. As the MSM says, Dems should compromise and work in bipartisanship with Bush

because this election was a huge win for conservatism, not for the Dems.
:sarcasm:

Dems should be non apologetic and oppose anything the Bush regime may want to do.

[Tom Joad]

14. But what if the Dems support this war, as many seem willing to do?

The problem is not that Dems not sticking to their principles, it is that for some of the officeholders, their priniciples are very much in line with Republicans, esp. on foreign policy.

[AZCat]

5. I wonder if he considers impeachment a "legislative restriction"

Because we know he thinks subpoenas are.


I have run out of nasty words to call this man. There is nothing in my lexicon sufficent to describe him.

[no_hypocrisy]

6. Technically, Cheney is correct as the Constitution and Supreme Court

interpretation thereof would allow the President as Commander-in-Chief to order an attack in defense of the country (or the pretense thereof) without any intervention of Congress or the Courts or even the Pentagon itself. Even if Congress were not likely to endorse such an attack 90 days afterwards (by resolution or refusal to fund further endeavors), it really wouldn't matter as the damage would be done by the destruction from bombing Iran, the political fallout, if not nuclear fallout, would have to be dealt with and it would be near impossible to go back 180 degrees. Congress and the Courts would only have the issue of development and/or damage control of the situation until * and Cheney could be removed from office.

[Kolesar]

10. The Dems need something in the short term to impeach Cheney &remove him with

Prosector Fitzgerald seemed to be getting close to the cabal, but only nabbed "Scooter" Libby.

[no_hypocrisy]

12. While I do think impeachment in some respects should be

on Page 2 of the To-Do List for Speaker Pelosi, I am very concerned about leaving * and Cheney in charge of the military for the reason I have offered. Impeachment is the only constitutional method to neutralize their destructive tendencies. So, I want impeachment, but I also realize that the process would be anything but expedient, thus allowing (another) pre-emptive (so-called) strike on another country during the interim. I can't come up with a better idea, but I'm open to any others.

[DoYouEverWonder]

15. The Libby trial is scheduled to start in January

plus there are at least 3 other major investigations that are ongoing. Cheney is full of it. Instead of deluding himself that he's going to invade anybody at this point, he should be lawyering up instead.

[bullimiami]

7. no money no war. congress holds the purse strings.

and if there is something that might push the needed 10 or so senate republicans over to allow impeachment and conviction a WH gone rabid and intransigent may do it.

[spanone]

8. i WISH cheney would TRY to circumvent Congress.

Try you fuckhead. This man has no idea how America works and I think incarceration would give him plenty of time do study our constitution.

[MannyGoldstein]

9. They Already Have - Which is Why We Need Impeachment

Those "signing statements" are a direct circumvention of Congress.

[WinkyDink]

25. They were ALSO taking our collective measure, and finding us wanting.

Bushco has us now pegged as Casper Milquetoasts. Impeachment proceedings are the ONLY gauntlet they will cower before.

[Tom Joad]

13. There are Dems who would just as enthusiastic about this as the Repubs.

Obama was talking about the military option with Iran several years ago.

[Marie26]

16. So what?

Cheney has shown, again & again, that he is not in touch with reality. I don't care what he wants, the tide has turned, & he doesn't have the popular support, party support, or military support for such an invasion. Rumsfeld is gone, & the neocons are being purged from the Pentagon. Cheney had better watch his back, or he'll be next. And if he seriously tries to start another war, he will be next.

[Joe Chi Minh]

18. I suspect the fact that wholesale tyrrany has not been expedited by *

up to this point, is because his father is too intelligent to "go nuclear". He knows the only sane vista open to them is now a last-ditch damage-limitation exercise.

[Strelnikov_]

20. And What Happens If The Chimp Meets An Untimely Demise Between Now

and late January?

These are very dangerous days.

[Marie26]

28. Doesn't Cheney already run things?

I'm not sure it would change that much, honestly. It seems like Bush was pretty much doing anything Cheney & Rumsfeld said anyway. Even if that nightmare scenario occured, Cheney has lost his key ally, is even LESS popular than Bush, & totally hated by the military he's overstretched, the CIA he's bullied, & the "old guard" Republicans he's alienated. I think he'd be basically boxed in even if he did become president. The neoconservative party is over, thank God!

[Strelnikov_]

29. Cheney Has Been Chopped Off At The Knees, Daddy's People Have Been

brought in to run things.

With a Cheney POTUS we would be back to the neo-con agenda with a vengeance, IMHO.

[TheBaldyMan]

19. An attack on Iran won't happen

The VP is back to his old tricks of lying as a matter of habit. How long did he keep up the fiction of strong links between Al Qaida and Iraq ? Is he still coming out with that old chestnut ?

He is one of the most shameless liars ever to hold that office, don't believe a single word he says.

[Perky]

21. I agree

This is at best international posturing trying to leverage more NATO troops or something. War with Iran without Congressional sanction would snowball towards immediate impeachment and conviction by the Senate. Warner, McCain and Inhofe would all vote for conviction.

My guess is that Nancy Pelosi would inherit a grand mess and would have to take a caretaker role probably with someone like Warner or Dick Lugar as VP. She would not run in 2008.

[Disturbed]

26. When the new Congress is convened the Impeachment of

Cheney needs to be Priority #1!