Does Scaraborough make a valid point?

[wuushew]

Transcript from July 9th show



Now, the story was an old one and the president’s intel was bad. But the Democratic candidates casting stones were always privy to top-level intelligence briefing, and yet they never once raised a question about the intel that they and the president received on this matter. They are, of course, now playing dumb. And they are acting as if they were the real victims of the president’s evil designs.

Hey, Joe Lieberman sits on the Armed Services Committee. John Kerry is on the Foreign Relations Committee. Dennis Kucinich sits on the National Subcommittee of Government Reform. Bob Graham is the ranking member on the Senate Intelligence Committee. And Dick Gephardt actually led the House Democrats for years and he’s calling himself an expert on foreign affairs.

Now, all of these gentlemen, every one of them, had access to the top-secret briefings that Congress gets any time they want it. And I know because I was there. And I got those briefings when I was in Congress all the time. If the president was misled, so were they. And since Congress has oversight responsibilities over our intel community, the real question the press needs to ask tonight is, what did these Democrats in Congress know and when did they know it?

[PretzelWarrior]

1. uhhh...Democrats weren't spouting WMD WMD...reconsituted nuke program

Bush, COndi, Cheney, RUmmy and the whole sick game were. It is not up to the Senators to go in and DISPROVE the claims of Bush and his evil band. They gave resolution for support of action PROVIDED several things happened which subsequently DIDN"T happen.

THey weren't kept in the loop later on in the process leading up to a war. They were not listened to re: getting UN support for whatever action is taken.

Scarborough is shifting blame. Let's talk about WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR LIE IN SCOTUS before casting a wider net for senators.

Bush lied. People died.

[Homer12]

5. Unfourtunatly

We're going to hear this spouted by right-wing nuts as an anti-argument now.

It's like even if they tried to speak out, they would have been called traitors, the media would have ignored them, etc....

[CWebster]

8. Byrd

spoke out.

[PretzelWarrior]

25. you and I both know Byrd was teflon coated politically

he's so old he could care LESS if he never holds another term in the Senate after this run. He is an elder statesman and the Repukes tried along with media to ignore him or paint him as a crazy old coot not worth listening to with respect.

Your contention that Byrd spoke up so others should have is politically unfair and you know it.

[CWebster]

34. Who cares if you win elections

if in oder to win you can't be effective?

Besides, this argument has been shot to shit. Democrats who stood their ground did will in the last election cycle--those who followed the DLC line fell on their face. The point was made: why vote for the party who emulates, when you can vote for who is being emulated?

"Unfair"...HA! Why the hell do you think these boards are bursting with dismay at the "spineless" dem leadership every day for the past couple of years?

This is not to say that some Democrats didn't stand their ground and fight---they just weren't the ones leading the parade to get their photo-opts in the rose garden to show the world that they were just as tough as *.

[PretzelWarrior]

36. I agree with some of what you're saying but your comments to disservice

in that the focus should be and must stay on BUSH'S failings. Congress wouldn't have mobilized the US Armed forces for such action on their own. Bush and company were on a months long campaign to discredit anyone who DARED to speak out in even polite tones. Daschle was called a FRIGGIN TRAITOR or unpatriotic by so called government leaders because he called Bush's diplomacy a failure.

You DON"T know that some who voted Yes to resolution and won would have perhaps lost if they voted no. Here's what I know. We WILL see the Dems make a difference and part of it will be after this debacle where the Repukes FUCKED UP when they had all 3 branches of government completely in a stranglehold.

[wuushew]

9. I just want to be able to defend myself against right wingers..

who will say that congress had the same info as the President. Congress remained silent on the war vote because if it went badly bush would take the fall. Is the info available to congress of the same caliber as that available to the President?

[blm]

17. If you recall...one of the problems Dems had was Bush keeping them out

of the loop where he could. They were even accused of leaking at one point. Bush made promises to them about stuff that turned out not to be true. Check out Hillary Clinton's and Kerry's floor speeches. They EMPHASIZED the promises Bush made to them.

[Cocoa]

2. no

the Bushies are not known for their forthcomingness, if that's a word. Everyone's in the dark except them.

This is all on Bush, the dems are sitting pretty. Some pro-war, some anti-war, it makes no difference, their criticisms of Bush are equally valid. Scarborough is as full of it as ever.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Stumpy]

4. In short, no.

If I'm not mistaken the President's office shared the information they wanted to share with members of congress. Plus, he's commander in chief, it's HIS responsibility to understand the intelligence he's getting.

stumpy

[Homer12]

10. Good point, Stumpy!

I'll remeber that one when the anti-argument comes up.

[CWebster]

6. Possibly

It has not been the finest hour of many Democrats who ride the tides of the popular culture rather than making a courageous, but unpopular stand, defined by the side force-feeding the lie.

[Trajan]

7. Those receiving 'Top Secret Briefings' ..

are NOT privy to the details of ALL intelligence in the detail that the administration receives ....

The Democrats who voted for war, did so on the WORD of the President that Iraq was an IMMINENT threat, based on the 'evidence' which the PRESIDENT used to plead his case ...

Remember how EVERYONE waited for the President to 'MAKE THE CASE for war' ???? ..... Remember how so MANY people felt he DIDNT make the case for WEEKS and WEEKS ... and it took these SEXED UP reports to pull others over the line and into the war camp ??....

No .. Scarbourough is passing the buck and shifting the burden ....

[CWebster]

15. garbage

Tthe whole world knew there was no imminent threat--they never could make the case, they just invaded as planned after they went through the expected formalities.

[Trajan]

19. You must have mistook the intent of my post ...

I CERTAINLY do not support the push to war, NOR do I believe the case was actually made ....

The point was about HOW much access the Democratic Candidates have to 'intelligence' .... obviously they DONT command the entire ranges of agencies as the Executive branch does ....

[CWebster]

23. Sorry, don't buy it.

They took a gamble and threw their lot with a illegitimate, arrogant punk, who exploited nationalism after 911 to pull this stunt. They were counting their political chickens before they hatched and did not demonstrate strong and level-heade=d leadership. In a time of madness they followed the mob.

That is why Dean has the advantage.

[Trajan]

29. Chuckles ....

We ARENT going to dismantle the Party and rename it the DEANOCRATIC party .....

I have YET to make a choice for Presidential nominee, but I CERTAINLY didnt mistake Dean as the Messiah, nor the other candidates as Devils ....

Get a grip bud: .... YOU are attempting to stretch credulity on behalf of YOUR candidate, and at the cost of many good men ....

You dishonor Dean, and the party ........

[CWebster]

35. Not worth a response

.

[Beetwasher]

11. Total Bullshit

Congress absolutely did not have the same intel the admin. had. As a matter of fact, the admin. was even having security breifings for REPUBS ONLY before the war. The congress was given ONLY what the admin. wanted them to have and no more. Congress was told by the admin. "trust us, we have the evidence but we can't share all of it for security reasons, but this is what we can share." then they went ahead and gave them evidence like forged documents and bullshit photos of trucks and BS about aluminaum tubes and balsa wood drones and plagiarized british dossiers.

As it turns out, that shoddy evidence was ALL they had. Congress was mislead, not by the intel agencies, but by the admin. who assured them that there was MUCH more damning intel that couldn't be shown.

[LoneStarLiberal]

12. Hmm...

I don't like Scarborough but he does raise a tough point, particularly for Lieberman and Graham.

I think before Scarborough casts stones at others, though, he should first push for a full investigation into the questions and causes of death for his Congressional aid, Lori Klausutis.

<http://www.americanpolitics.com/20010808Klausutis.html>

[retread]

13. Dead Intern in Office and Valid Point = oxymoron

I mean oxymoran.

[FrankBooth]

14. Absolute Crap

The Dems have been stonewalled on all fronts - there is no way they were given the same level of access, the same info as the white house boys.

Think about it - if they were given the same level of access, the dems would have known about the CIA's contention that the yellowcake report was dubious - do you think they would have sat on that info until now?

Wasn't one of the big reasons that Carl Levin decided to open his own WMD intelligence committee based on the fact that the info the dems were getting was incomplete?

This is a BS, repub talking point.

[CWebster]

18. This is not news

that story was known to be bogus but they kept harping on it regardless and did you hear a chorus of Democratic voices contesting it? Did you hear the damn Democrats raise a stink after they gave away authority and Bush couldn't make the case? And what is disgusting is they knew better. Alot of people--alot of politicians did not fall for it and did not support it--5 Dems voted against it who were on the intelligence committee.

Why the hell do you think there has been vast anger and frustration with the Democrats over the past few years? Why do you think they rally around Dean when he confronts the illusion for what it is?

The truth is the truth when it comes to either party.

[Trajan]

22. Oh .. I get it now ....

You HATE the Democrats, and so are therefore now trying to foist the SAME BLAME which Bush deserves on the DEMOCRATS to benefit YOUR political agenda .....

Much like Scarbourough is trying to sully the Democrats ..... YOU are attacking the Democrats, for what the WH has done .....

Silly boy ..... We arent biting .....

I DONT believe that EVERY congressperson had the complete access you imply ..... you are stretching the facts ....

[CWebster]

27. get fucking real

That's the best you can come up when confronting what makes you uncomfortable to hear - even if it is the way it is? That is exactly like those hopping on the war bandwagon, accusing those who don't as un-American or un-patriotic.

Do you have ONE piece of intelligence that hadn't already been outed as trash before they invaded?

[FrankBooth]

24. I happen to be one of the frustrated dems

and a Dean supporter.

But I still believe this is a damage control tactic. Yes, the dems have been culpable for much of the carnage from this stupid war, but I also solidly believe that they were misled - intelligence given to the Dems by the White House was emphasized or de-emphasized, (or omitted completely) based on how it made the case for war. For Bush to lie in the State of the Union, and then say "The Democrats Made Me Do It" is simply inaccurate, and better yet, is not going to work.

What Scarborough is saying is that the Dems knew exactly what the White House knew - that is simply bullshit.

[CWebster]

28. They knew enough

the old gentleman of the senate, Byrd certainly did.

[ithinkmyliverhurts]

16. Valid or not,

expect to hear this talking point for the next 48 hours (at least). Muddle the message, make the dems. defend themselves (after all, they are the ones who authorize war, right?), and chimpy slithers off. You'll hear it all over cable. Change the subject, change the subject, change the subject. New talking point, new talking point, new talking point. New truth, new truth, new truth.

In my best Howard the Duck Fineman voice: "You know, Chris, the democrats are in a tough position here. They had access to this same information. Where were the objections then? I mean, who is the average American going to beleive here: Bush, who they like to see as a straight shooter and whose poll numbers are high; or Bob Graham, a quirky man who writes about his breakfast in his journal. The American public remembers their commander-in-chief on that flight deck (cut to Chimpy McSockinmydrawers) and they want to beleive him. No, Chris, I think this is another losing issue for the democrats. After all, Americans like republicans when it comes to foreign policy. But more than anything, they like George Bush, they want to believe him. I mean, come on, it's this man who stood at Ground Zero, embracing those brave firemen, who by the way love him, so much that they even booed their own Senator, Hillary Clinton, at a concert, and it's Bush who guided the nation through it's most terrifying moment. Or are we going to support Al Sharpton and the democratic party. I don't know Chris.

Tweety: "Ladies and Gentleman, the brilliant Howard Fineman. Thanks, Howard. Brialliant as always"

[CWebster]

21. can't

argue with that.

[soupkitchen]

31. Very good lampoon n/t

*

[soupkitchen]

32. Very good lampoon n/t

*

[soupkitchen]

20. The difference: the WHouse knew the intelligence was bogus n/t

*

[ewagner]

26. Not so

During the run-up to the war there were many pics of democrats on TV coming out of briefings saying that they didn't hear anything "compelling", "diffinitive", "they haven't made their case,"etc., from those briefings. While dems were saying these thing,
Reps were coming out of the briefings pounding on the war drums. I think some dems even asked if the repubs were talking about the same briefing.

Correct me if I'm wrong on this but a lot of dems weren't buying what the briefers were selling.

[Generic Other]

30. This is like saying that the Democrats are babysitters

who neglected to watch the brat carefully, so that he was able to set the house on fire. Yes, they were in charge but told that they would lose the job if little boy George were to be upset in any fashion. They are his whipping boys and as such must take HIS punishment for him.

[haymaker]

33. Did you kill Lori Klausutis?

You fuckin' whore.