NBC and MSNBC pull a "Dan Rather"

[GWB]

NBC has joined CBS in biasing its so called "fact checks" into anti-Bush distortions now.

After the debate: Brian Williams, NBC, did a "fact check" on Cheney where he said he never claimed Iraq was directly responsible for 9-11. Williams then played a Meet the Press clip, Sept. 14, 2003 where Cheney seemed to contradict this. Williams (and Chris Matthews) claimed that Cheney didn't have his facts right (possibly implying he lied).

CHENEY EXCERPT PLAYED BY WILLIAMS "...now we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11."

HOWEVER THIS IS THE CONTEXT OF THAT QUOTE

VICE PRES. CHENEY: ...if we can stand up a good representative government in Iraq, that secures the region so that it never again becomes a threat to its neighbors or to the United States, so it’s not pursuing weapons of mass destruction, so that it’s not a safe haven for terrorists, now we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11. They understand what’s at stake here. That’s one of the reasons they’re putting up as much of a struggle as they have, is because they know if we succeed here, that that’s going to strike a major blow at their capabilities.

MR. RUSSERT: So the resistance in Iraq is coming from those who were responsible for 9/11?

VICE PRES. CHENEY: No, I was careful not to say that.

SO, CHENEY DID NOT SAY IRAQ WAS DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR 9-11!! HE EVEN DENIED KNOWING OF A SPECIFIC IRAQ CONNECTION TO 9-11 EARLIER IN THE INTERVIEW!

Meet the Press Transcript 9/14/2003 (http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3080244)

I am expecting elwoodblues to call for Brain Williams to be fired any time now. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[anatta]

Hey pal, I remember that Meet the Press. You know, the one where right after, Bush had to correct Cheney and state for the record that there was no evidence of Saddam and 9-11. Strange that the press would question Bush about Cheney's remarks on Meet the Press about this issue on Monday if he hadn't of suggested a link on Sunday.

I haven't read that transcript, but I seem to remember him repeating the already debunked "intelligence" that 9-11 hijacker Mohammad Atta was meeting with Iraqis in Chech Republic. He said it hadn't been disproven, when it had, thus suggesting a link, which of course you, as President, were forced to correct.

Quit lying and get some sleep for your big speech tommorrow.

[GWB]

I provide actual transcipts, and you respond with "I seem to remember". If you want to disprove anything, please provide facts not recollections. I'll wait for you.

[andyfox]

MR. RUSSERT: The Washington Post asked the American people about Saddam Hussein, and this is what they said: 69 percent said he was involved in the September 11 attacks. Are you surprised by that?

VICE PRES. CHENEY: No. I think it’s not surprising that people make that connection.

MR. RUSSERT: But is there a connection?

VICE PRES. CHENEY: We don’t know. You and I talked about this two years ago. I can remember you asking me this question just a few days after the original attack. At the time I said no, we didn’t have any evidence of that. Subsequent to that, we’ve learned a couple of things. We learned more and more that there was a relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda that stretched back through most of the decade of the ’90s, that it involved training, for example, on BW and CW, that al-Qaeda sent personnel to Baghdad to get trained on the systems that are involved. The Iraqis providing bomb-making expertise and advice to the al-Qaeda organization.

We know, for example, in connection with the original World Trade Center bombing in ’93 that one of the bombers was Iraqi, returned to Iraq after the attack of ’93. And we’ve learned subsequent to that, since we went into Baghdad and got into the intelligence files, that this individual probably also received financing from the Iraqi government as well as safe haven.

Now, is there a connection between the Iraqi government and the original World Trade Center bombing in ’93? We know, as I say, that one of the perpetrators of that act did, in fact, receive support from the Iraqi government after the fact. With respect to 9/11, of course, we’ve had the story that’s been public out there. The Czechs alleged that Mohamed Atta, the lead attacker, met in Prague with a senior Iraqi intelligence official five months before the attack, but we’ve never been able to develop anymore of that yet either in terms of confirming it or discrediting it. We just don’t know.


-So Cheney said he was not surprised people make the connection between Hussein and 9/11. I wouldn't have been suprised either, given Cheney's "we just don't know" and "we've learned a couple of things." Certainly Cheney intimated there might be a connection given those "couple of things." He did everything he could short of saying there was a connection without actually saying it.

[anatta]

[ QUOTE ]
I provide actual transcipts, and you respond with "I seem to remember". If you want to disprove anything, please provide facts not recollections. I'll wait for you

[/ QUOTE ]

Andy kindly helped me out. See how from memory I refute you ridculous statements. I even got "Atta's" name right.


Now Cheney said, "I never SUGGESTED that there was a relationship"

A questions for you Mr. President,

Do you doubt that I am correct that the next day, you had to clear up the issue, which had become muddied by the fact that Cheney had, in fact, suggested the relationship?

I'll wait for you too, but I suspect it will be in vain. You will either not answer or deny the obvious, that Cheney was lying, he had in fact "suggested a relationship between 9-11 and Iraq".

[GWB]

[ QUOTE ]
Do you doubt that I am correct that the next day, you had to clear up the issue, which had become muddied by the fact that Cheney had, in fact, suggested the relationship?


[/ QUOTE ]

From the transcript (and the original post above) Cheney said "No, I was careful not to say that."

This was not a day-later clarification, it was right there during the interview in question. You liberals can distort Cheney's words and project onto him whatever you want, it doesn't change the fact that he never directly linked Saddam to 9/11.

He linked Saddam to support of terrorism, not specifically to 9/11.

Do you think lying about what he said will make us think he said it?

[ThaSaltCracka]

MR. RUSSERT: So the resistance in Iraq is coming from those who were responsible for 9/11?
No, I was careful not to say that

This is not even the same thing that Williams was talking about. True, the clip Williams showed(even the full transcript) don't show Cheney saying that Iraq was involved in 9/11, because that topic directly didn't even come up. Russert asked Cheney something totally different than "was Iraq involved in 9/11". Russert asked him(I am paraphrasing) "are the insurgents in Iraq from the same group as those involved in 9/11?"

Cheney(and the Admin) definitely tried to make a connection that was never there, and now they are being forced to back track from their absurd pre war claims.

[cjromero]

What do you mean it isn't the same thing Williams was talking about? Cheney's soundbite on Meet the Press was faulty in two respects: (1) they didn't play his entire answer to Russert's question, and (2) they didn't show his statement to Russert's very next question, in which he said he was careful not to make the connection.

The fact that Russert was on the air with Brokaw when they played the MTP excerpt and Russert didn't speak up to say that the excerpt was out of context made the whole thing even worse.

[ThaSaltCracka]

I will assume you skimmed my response instead of reading the whole thing. I said the clip Williams showed was Cheney talking about something which didn't even pertain to what Williams was trying to prove. Furthermore, the second question Russert asked Cheney has nothing to do with Cheney's earlier claims that IRAQ had something to do with 9/11(via association with AQ).

[ QUOTE ]
The fact that Russert was on the air with Brokaw when they played the MTP excerpt and Russert didn't speak up to say that the excerpt was out of context made the whole thing even worse.

[/ QUOTE ] I would agree.

[anatta]

[ QUOTE ]
This was not a day-later clarification, it was right there during the interview in question.

[/ QUOTE ]

How is President Bush going to clarify something during the interview in question, Cheney's interview?

Read what Cheney said in Andy's post. Read what Cheney said in the debate last night, "I never suggested that there was a relationship". Ask yourself why would the press question President Bush about this issue the next day if Cheney hadn't suggested it in his interview? Why did the entire Hardball lineup's "jaws drop" at that remark?

Could it be that Cheney lied in the debate, that he indeed did "suggest" such a relationship, not just on Meet the Press, but in several other instances?

Maybe Williams' video doesn't show the suggestions, but read Andy's post, its seems obvious that Andy's conclusion at the end of his post is correct...

[ QUOTE ]
He did everything he could short of saying there was a connection without actually saying it.

[/ QUOTE ]

[anatta]

Then there is this...Sure sounds like a "suggestion"...from msbc.msn.com

...Cheney snapped at Edwards, "The senator has got his facts wrong. I have not suggested there's a connection between Iraq and 9/11." But in numerous interviews, Cheney has skated close to the line in ways that may have certainly left that impression on viewers, usually when he cited the possibility that Mohamed Atta, one of the hijackers on Sept. 11, 2001, met with an Iraqi official — even after that theory was largely discredited

On Dec. 9, 2001, Cheney said on NBC's "Meet The Press" that "it's been pretty well confirmed that [Atta] did go to Prague and he did meet with a senior official of the Iraqi intelligence service in Czechoslovakia last April, several months before the attack." On March 24, 2002, Cheney again told NBC, "We discovered ... the allegation that one of the lead hijackers, Mohamed Atta, had, in fact, met with Iraqi intelligence in Prague."

On Sept. 8, 2002, Cheney, again on "Meet the Press," said that Atta "did apparently travel to Prague. ... We have reporting that places him in Prague with a senior Iraqi intelligence officer a few months before the attacks on the World Trade Center." And a year ago, also on "Meet the Press," Cheney described Iraq as part of "the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault for many years, but most especially on 9/11

[caretaker1]

[ QUOTE ]
But in numerous interviews, Cheney has skated close to the line in ways that may have certainly left that impression on viewers

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point. I suppose the issue then is to what extent should Cheney be held accountable for this, compared to if he had in fact directly stated it. I'm not sure there's an easy answer.

[anatta]

"good point"

I should have bolded the quote and provided a link, I didn't write the above, it was from MSNBC.com. I am having trouble with my computer:

1. I cannot see the link on top with the web site address.
2. I get a about: blank screen which freeze Explorer.
3. I can't link to other web pages without this error.

Sorry for the confusion.