12/05/2007
Bush and the NIE Iran Report: Edwards and Huckabee React
Following up on this news from yesterday...
Here are a couple of clips related to the recently revealed information that Bush knew of the NIE report that said Iran had ended its nuclear weapons program in 2003 months before he warned America of the threat of World War III should Iran's weapons program not be halted.
The first is Bush's press conference yesterday, and the second is John Edwards' appearance on the Today show.
Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo makes a good point: "If you look closely at what President Bush said this morning about the Iran intelligence, his dodge about what he knew and when is actually worse than the charge he was trying to deny. The essence of what President Bush was saying was that whatever chatter he may have heard last summer, he didn't hear the key details until this week. If you take at face value what the president is saying, his spy chief, Mike McConnell, comes in to the president and says, 'Mr. President, we've got some important new information on the Iran nuclear front.' And the president apparently says, okay. And then he doesn't ask him what the information was."
Meanwhile, Mike Huckabee says, "Huh?"
Don't miss...
NIE Report Contradicts White House 'World War III' Iran Rhetoric [tr]
Posted 11:05 AM EST by Andy Towle in George W. Bush, Iran, John Edwards, Mike Huckabee, News | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
This is the what transpired between Huckabee and the reporter.
Reporter: I don’t know to what extent you have been briefed or been able to take a look at the NIE report that came out yesterday …
Huckabee: I’m sorry?
Reporter: The NIE report, the National Intelligence Estimate on Iran. Have you been briefed or been able to take a look at it –
Huckabee: No.
Reporter: Have you heard of the finding?
Huckabee: No.
Doesn't really sound like "huh" like Andy portray. At least he didn't try to make up something and seem like a moron.
Posted by: Matt | Dec 5, 2007 11:21:35 AM
And before I get bashed let me explain something. We can not look at Huckabee as a simpleton with a simple "huh?" He's a smart man garnering a lot of attention and we need to pay attention to everything he says. He is extremely right wing. Even more right wing than I usually like. He will be worse than Bush. Brushing him off as a simpleton Republican is not a wise choice for anyone.
Posted by: Matt | Dec 5, 2007 11:25:49 AM
Bush’s assertion that he wasn’t fully briefed is a Catch 22. Either he is blatantly lying (about when he was informed) to cover-up that fact that he was lying about Iran’s nuclear pursuits (which I personally believe), or Bush is saying his advisors are completely incompetent and didn’t think to fully debrief him on the matter.
Whichever it truly is, Bush still looks like a fool for this one. Just add it to his tab.
Posted by: RP | Dec 5, 2007 11:40:34 AM
I hardly think you should be bashed, Matt. As of November 2008, we will have been through 8 years of complete insanity as a country, so in an effort to right our sails, no-one should be brushed aside as irrelevant. But, just as Dennis Kucinich takes multiple blows for being HONEST, Huckabee deserves every angle of character assassination possible.
Posted by: FizziekruntNT | Dec 5, 2007 11:42:54 AM
Oh I agree Fizziekruntnt. But character assassination only truely works if it's true. In this case the character assasination was suppose to make Huckabee look dumb or incompetent when the transcript proves he answered No that he had not been briefed on it.
Posted by: Matt | Dec 5, 2007 11:53:22 AM
I agree with you, Matt. I think that it might work both ways though. Just as we can't blame him for not knowing about the NIE, I'm surprised that as a presidential candidate, his staff let him conduct an interview a day after it broke without briefing him on the obvious question of the hour. Not that I have any leanings toward Huckabee even remotely, but it's a bit disappointing that he didn't even know.
Posted by: David | Dec 5, 2007 12:17:56 PM
OK, lets say this information took along LONG time to be analyzed and be proved correct, Wouldn't logic follow that then They should have also held off on the WORLD WAR THREE speech till they had ANALYZED FACTUAL INFORMATION?
Somewhere, someone is lying up the ass.
Posted by: JayA | Dec 5, 2007 1:22:18 PM
MATT,
before this thread is sent to oblivion, i have to question your sanity. do you actually think that aw-shucks-abee is a viable candidate?
Posted by: nic | Dec 6, 2007 11:18:22 PM
And what do you think of the very popular view by a leading Israeli analyst Obadiah Shoher? He argues (here, for example, www. samsonblinded.org/blog/america-arranges-a-peace-deal-with-iran.htm ) that the Bush Administration made a deal with Iran: nuclear program in exchange for curtailing the Iranian support for Iraqi terrorists. His story seems plausible, isn't it?
Posted by: Alex | Dec 11, 2007 4:38:14 PM