Bush Aides Disclose Warnings From CIA

[DannyRed]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A31597-2003Jul22.html?nav=hptop_tb

Bush Aides Disclose Warnings From CIA
Oct. Memos Raised Doubts on Iraq Bid

By Dana Milbank and Walter Pincus

The CIA sent two memos to the White House in October voicing strong doubts about a claim President Bush made three months later in the State of the Union address that Iraq was trying to buy nuclear material in Africa, White House officials said yesterday.

<snip>

The information, provided in a briefing by Hadley and Bush communications director Dan Bartlett, significantly alters the explanation previously offered by the White House. The acknowledgment of the memos, which were sent on the eve of a major presidential speech in Cincinnati about Iraq, comes four days after the White House said the CIA objected only to technical specifics of the Africa charge, not its general accuracy.

<snip>

Yesterday's disclosures indicate top White House officials knew that the CIA seriously disputed the claim that Saddam Hussein was seeking uranium in Africa long before the claim was included in Bush's January address to the nation. The claim was a major part of the case made by the Bush administration before the Iraq war that Hussein represented a serious threat because of his nuclear ambitions; other pieces of evidence have also been challenged.

<snip>

My comment:

"recently discovered"???

"not at the specific request of anyone"???

"I should have recalled . . . that there was controversy associated with the uranium issue,"????

BZZZZZZZZZT You LOSE, liars.

[priller]

1. Note that these admissions come during a very busy day of news

News that was generally good news for Bush (despite yet more deaths and injuries to American soldiers). You know that they had the information for a while, but were just waiting for the right time to unveil it. Sorry, but I don't believe these guys just "suddenly" turned up memos--searching for damning evidence would have been the very *first* thing they did once the brouhaha broke out.

The disclosures punctured claims made by Rice and others in the past two weeks. Rice and other officials had asserted that nobody in the White House knew of CIA objections, and that the CIA supported the Africa accusation generally, making only technical objections about location and quantity.

Yeah, keep hammering away at Condi. She's given us a variety of excuses and explanations and every damn one of them is a lie. She really, REALLY has to go.

[Stanchetalarooni]

3. Wasn't Condi a University professor at Stanford?

The dog ate my homework.

"The dog ate my homework".

You can use this
or any similarly constructed excuse
along with an eyes wide
sincere
vacant
demurring
approach
and get away with it
at least 50% of the time
throughout college
and graduate school
so long as
you only use it
once
per
professor/instructor/lecturer.

[havocmom]

7. busy news day was very convienent

Am wondering how long they might have kept Saddam's boys in cold storage before discoveing that they had killed them. Sure came at a time when the weather over the WH was getting hot and sticky.

[priller]

2. And they're still lying...

It remains unclear why the Africa uranium claim continued to bubble up in key presidential speeches. White House officials insist they did not push hard for the accusation to be included...

I'll tell you why. Tricky Dick Cheney wanted it in there. He's the one that pushed the "nukular" angle so hard. He even claimed that Saddam had reconstituted his nuclear weapons program.

Yesterday, Bartlett insisted that its inclusion in the State of the Union address was "not at the specific request of anyone" and said that one of the speechwriters had come up with the information after reviewing the Oct. 2 intelligence estimate.

Ah yes, another one of the troublesome low-level people mucking up the works. Damn, it's hard to find good help!
:eyes:

[radfringe]

4. Just heard on Good Morning America

talking about the latest scapegoat falling on swords (apologies for the mixed metaphors)

"....in yet ANOTHER CHANGE in the white house's story..."

so let's recap the "fallout" since the story broke -

Kelly - supposed suicide
Tenent - fell on sword
current two staffers - fell on sword
Ambassador Wilson - Smeared
Wilson's wife - exposed

White House excuse - "The pResident is not a fact checker..."

will the white house blame "barney" the dog for eating a report?

[MostlyBlackCat2]

5. kicking

:kick:

[LeftHander]

6. Kick

!!

[BadGimp]

8. What further evidence is needed?

This establishes 2 things clearly imho:

1) Codi lied here ass off recently when she clained that the CIA never opposed the inclusion of the info in Bush's speeches.

2) Multiple people in the administration deliberately misled Congress by including this information in Bush's SOTU address before Congress.

Immediate criminal prosecutions need to commence immediately.