Transcript and Video of Last Nights BLOCKBUSTER "Hardball" Show!

[KoKo]

Two CIA operatives raise questions about use of pre-war intelligence
MSNBC
Updated: 8:37 p.m. ET May 2, 2006

Did President Bush lead our country to war based on faulty intelligence, or did his administration twist and cherry-pick the information for a war they had already decided to start?

Somebody is responsible for this war. Is it the president, the politicians in Congress who voted to authorize the war, the military who saluted Bush three years ago when the war was popular who are now calling for Defense Secretary Rumsfeld’s resignation, or was it cooked intelligence from the administration?

Two high-ranking CIA operatives who were actively involved in the run-up to the war answered this question and more.

Tyler Drumheller was the CIA’s chief of operations in Europe until he retired last year. He says that the White House ignored warnings that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction.

Gary Berntsen is a former CIA field officer who served on the ground in Afghanistan. He says the military let Osama bin Laden get away because they didn’t commit the right amount of forces to get him. He’s also the author of “Jawbreaker: The Attack on bin Laden and al Qaeda.”

This is a transcript of their conversation.

CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST, "HARDBALL": The case made by the president of the United States in his State of the Union in 2003, was that Saddam Hussein was purchasing uranium materials in Niger in order to build nuclear weapons to use against us.

We were warned by Condi Rice and others there would be a mushroom cloud if we waited around for a smoking gun. The case was made to smart people in this country, and they bought the case. We faced a nuclear threat.

Then afterwards, the administration outed Valerie Plame Wilson, because they wanted to punish, apparently, Joe Wilson for coming out and outing them and saying there never was a deal with Niger. Am I right on that?

TYLER DRUMHELLER, FMR. CIA EUROPEAN OPS. CHIEF: That’s the way it appears. You’re certainly right on the fact that the information that was in the State of the Union Address was inaccurate, and that the yellowcake reporting from Niger, the reports that had come in on the issue of yellowcake were well-known to have been discredited as far back as September and October.

(Much more of Matthews going point by point down the list of Bush Admin's LIES that took us into Iraq...also grilling about Neo-cons)
Check our the Video and Transcript here.........

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12601112/

[rodeodance]

1. took 3 years to get to this point. suspose better than nothing.

[chelsea0011]

2. Ummmm. Isn't this story way past Rip Van Winkle?

Matthews and his ilk are all ratings and advertising driven. He is a raving right wing nutcase when the tide suits but is now coming around as the country turns father away from the corrupt administartion? Sorry Chris. You are suppose to be the media who isn't afraid to buck trends and expose crooks. This should have happened years ago. Too late. Too little. We are way past you in what we know is true and real.

[KoKo]

4. The importance of this is that Matthews grilled both of these CIA Agents

about every comment Bush/Cheney and Condi made leading up to the Invasion.

You haven't seen that anywhere in the Mainstream Media have you? It was an important show and a breakthrough. While all of "us" here and on the liberal internet have known this...who has really addressed it POINT BY POINT.

It's significant that Matthews devoted the first part of this show to this when neither the NYT's/WaPO or any other Newspaper of Record has done so. And neither has CNN/Faux or anybody else.

GE gave the go ahead for this. It could be trying to stop the Iran Invasion is now a top priority. The Transcript is worth reading or I wouldn't have bothered to post that it was a DU MUST READ AND MUST SEE.

[Catrina]

11. Thank you for the transcript, Koko01

It it interesting that he is doing this. But if you read it carefully, while he is pointing towards Cheney, he is very subtly still trying to protect Bush. Here's an example:

Chris Matthews:

Why is George Tenet so supportive of the Bush family and not supportive of the agency he was leading? Why doesn’t he admit that he was given a report and the report was going back to the vice president after he triggered that inquiry about a deal with Niger to buy nuclear materials? Why didn’t the vice president tell the president you can’t claim a nuclear threat from Iraq, we just found out from a former ambassador, Joe Wilson, that there is nothing to the case? Why didn’t the paper trail go to the president?

After Libby's testimony revealed that Bush was involved in the outing of Valerie Plame, and Bush himself has acknowledged, what to some people looks like cover-up, de-classifying the NIE memo 10 days after the fact, why would Chris Matthews assume that Bush was not also involved in 'catapulting the propaganda' about the war?

But this is progress although he has been reporting on the Plame affair, featuring David Schuster's excellent reports over the past few months. He also warned Joe Wilson when he was told that his wife was 'fair game'.

It's hard to know what to think of Tweety. But it's obvious he likes Bush and Joe Wilso, but doesn't like Cheney.

[pacalo]

13. Chris also pointed out that the WH complained in 2003 about a

similar discussion about the lead-up to war. The story has so much traction now that Bush would have to appoint a new cabinet member just to handle damage control.

Btw, thanks for the link, koko, because the segment that was pre-empted for the "breaking news" yesterday is on video there.

[flamin lib]

3. This isn't news, it's history . . .nt

[emulatorloo]

5. It is news to those who aren't logged onto DU 24/7 EOM

[havocmom]

6. For too many Americans, it is news. Thanks to MSM, most unaware

Since more finding out they have been lied to, more coming to the internet for the info MSM purposely did not report, there is a lot of catching up to do. Chris having former CIA operatives on his show IS new!

The info former CIA operatives bring may not be news to us news hounds who have been here for several years, but it IS NEWS to a lot of Americans. Many of those newly informed folks are surfing the web, checking out new sources for information. We would do well to keep that in mind and not be so quick to put down what to is may be a rehashing of old news. Instead of being dismissive, it might be good to recognize that we can help America play catch up on the info they had hidden from them.

Not everyone can take the time to ferret out enough info to keep up with all the stunts bushco has pulled. It is nice to be gracious about other's attempts to help get the info out there for the new initiates.

Tweety actually letting former CIA operatives on his show is the news. We long timers know the facts those agents bring to the discussion, but Tweety and MSNBC giving them a platform is, in its self, news and an indicator that things are changing. Take some comfort in the fact that MSM's cone of silence seems to be getting a lot of cracks in it of late. ;)

[flamin lib]

12. emulatorloo, havocmom are both right about news to so many

people.

My point about history is that had the MSM done some of this during the lead up to Iraq it would be investigating and reporting the news. As it is, reporting on it now is reciting history and while the information is damning to Bush it's sort of too late to be useful.

Too late to help 2400 dead soldiers, 17000 wounded soldiers, tens of thousands of Iraqis.

There are no more journalists, only media people.

[blm]

10. Americans were PREVENTED from hearing this news by a corpmedia intent on

protecting the Bushboy throughout his first term.

You can go into any airport and not find 10% of the people there who are aware of how any of this went down.

[wiggs]

7. Hardball story is the tip of the iceberg of the story of the century.

How we went to war and what we've done afterward is a gigantic story that is being glossed over. Even the Hardball story just scratches the surface. There's Paul ONeill and Richard Clarke saying the administration wanted Iraq from day 1. There are energy task force meetings in which maps of Iraq are on the wall. There's 700,000,000 illegally transfered from Afghanistan to Iraq. There are scores of resignations in pentagon and in diplomatic circles over the invasion. DSM. Waxman's report on WMD deception. Chalabi. Iran/contra figures in place in Iraq.

There are so many puzzle pieces out there just waiting for Time, Frontline, Newsweek or 60 minutes to put it together for the masses. There's a Pulitzer waiting for someone. I think the story does advance each week a little bit. Each week more people are receptive to criticisms of the administration and discussion of misdeeds.

[Supersedeas]

8. I agree...this is only a start

[Libby2]

9. Thanks for the link!!

[lumpy]

14. kick

v

[MethuenProgressive]

15. "Blockbuster"? What about 60 Minutes?

Drumheller was already on 60 Minutes. Tweety didn't exactly break this story.

[KoKo]

16. 60 Minutes only featured Drumheller this one featured 2 Agents Bernsten

who wrote "Jawbreaker" (more a Bush CIA) and Drumheller who served under Clinton. And Matthews grilled them both about the Intelligence.

It's an interesting read because the transcript is the whole show which had other guests and was very interesting indeed coming from MediaWhore Matthews.

The "Big Picture" of this show was fascinating to see how they now are onto the news we here on DU have known for ages.