Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Transcript of Steven Hayes, Chuck Todd and Chris Matthews (911 and Iraq)
NewsBusters ^

Posted on 11/12/2005 9:20:31 AM PST by april15Bendovr

Matthews, after a commercial break: "Welcome back to Hardball. More now on our special report on how the Bush administration sold the war in Iraq, with Stephen Hayes, a senior writer for The Weekly Standard, who has reported extensively on the Iraq War, and Chuck Todd, editor-in-chief of The Hotline. What did you two guys make of the Vice President of the United States denying to Gloria Borger that he had made that claim that there was a connection, a meeting in Prague between intelligence officials of the Iraqi government, at the time, and Mohammed Atta, and then saying he never made such a claim?"

Chuck Todd, The Hotline: "It was to me a political fumble. I mean, how do you mess that up?"

Matthews: "But isn't that part of the, isn't that part of the creed, the belief? You hear it from people like Lori Melroy, that a lot of people who support this war with great fervor, who really do believe that there was some kind of Iraqi role in 9/11."

Stephen Hayes, The Weekly Standard: "Look, the Vice President has never claimed an Iraqi role in 9/11. What he said in that clip that you showed-"

Matthews: "The Mohammed Atta meeting in Prague?"

Hayes: "He said that it was pretty well confirmed at a time, December 9, 2001. If you read The New York Times three days later, I believe, December 12, 2001, you have senior intelligence officials throughout the story confirming the meeting-"

Matthews: "Right."

Hayes: "-the alleged meeting. So he wasn't saying anything at that time that the intelligence community didn't also believe-"

Matthews: "But a year later, he denied making that claim."

Hayes: "Well, a year later, it was three-"

Matthews: "Why did he deny making that claim?"

Hayes: "It was three years later. It was a mistake."

Matthews: "Why did he deny making that claim?"

Hayes: "It was a mistake."

Matthews: "You mean he forgot he made the claim?"

Hayes: "Yeah, he probably did. It was a mistake, I mean-"

Matthews: "He forgot making the claim that-"

Hayes: "What do you think he was doing? I mean, do you think he was lying at that point?"

Matthews: "I think he was denying the obvious, according to the video. That's all I can go by."

Hayes: "Well, if you know, if you're the Vice President of the United States and you know that there's video of you making the claim, why would you deny it?"

Matthews: "Okay, let's talk about the politics of this. It's not, it's not just the assertions that have been made and remade. It's the language that's been used, that the war on Iraq was a war on terrorism, that somehow it was payback. That was part of our culture for three years. A lot of people supported this war. In fact, poll data shows, just like poll data now shows they think the President deliberately misled on the intel, poll data before we went to war was that there was, Iraqis were on the planes that attacked us on 9/11. The people thought so, that somehow Iraq had attacked us. That's why we had to attack them."

Todd: "Because the lines were fuzzed during the runup to the war there. I mean, nobody can deny it is technically accurate that this administration never said Iraq was part of 9/11. But it was fuzzy, and it fuzzed everything up."

Matthews: "Was that conflation on purpose?"

Todd: "It certainly appears to be on purpose. It was a political sales job. So, of course, in some form, it was purposeful because they were trying to get, build political support."

Matthews: "Was this a 'Remember the Alamo' kind of war where we went to war in Iraq to get even for something done to us at 9/11?"

Hayes: "No, I don't think it was. I mean, it, look, if it was a conspiracy to conflate 9/11 and the Iraq War-"

Matthews: "It might be a public relations strategy."

Hayes: "Look, if it was a conspiracy, you had Hillary Clinton involved in the conspiracy."

Matthews: "What was she saying about the connection between 9/11 and Iraq?"

Hayes: "She said, October, she said, she mentioned Iraq in the same paragraph as 9/11, which these days apparently is [forbidden]. We're not supposed to do that. Nobody's supposed to do that."

Matthews: "No, only saying that it's payback, that it's somehow connected. What is the connection?"

Hayes: "They didn't say that. They didn't say that."

Matthews: "What did Hillary say?"

Hayes: "Hillary said on the Senate floor, Iraq has harbored and sponsored terrorists, including al-Qaeda. She didn't say that Iraq was behind 9/11, just as the Bush administration didn't say Iraq was behind 9/11. And let me say one other thing. When President Bush was asked that question twice directly, 'Was Iraq behind 9/11?' he twice said we have no evidence to suggest that Iraq somehow directed or was behind 9/11. Condi Rice said it repeatedly. The administration said it repeatedly in the runup to war. What they said was that Iraq changed, or 9/11 changed everything, we have to look at threats in a different, through a different prism after 9/11. The threat that we see from Iraq is unacceptably high based on what we've seen happen in our own country."

Matthews: "And so you deny that the administration made it seem to the American people like the people who attacked us 9/11 are the same people we're going after in Iraq? You deny that?"

Hayes: "No, I think, look-"

Matthews: "Same people?"

Hayes: "I don't think, the President, at one point, said you can't distinguish between Iraq and al-Qaeda in the war on terror. Now, you can take that literally and say you literally cannot distinguish because they were the same. Fine. I think he was making a much more general statement that Iraq is part of the war on terror, which is something he said ever since."

Todd: "I think the better question is would the, did the administration ever want to correct people who said, correct supporters who said, 'Oh, so you're saying Iraq's part of 9/11?' No, they never, they wanted that, they didn't, it was an added benefit-"

Matthews: "Is that a fair assessment?"

Todd: "It was an added benefit that people thought that."

Matthews: "That they never disabused people of the notion, those who did hold it? The polls show people believed that Iraqis were on the planes."

Hayes: "No, I actually disagree with it because of what I-"

Matthews: "You think the President corrected the record?"

Hayes: "-because of what I just, because of what I just said this. He told Newsweek, there's a Newsweek article in which he's quoted as saying we have no evidence that Iraq was behind 9/11."

Todd: "But by saying we have no evidence, that's a trial, that's what a trial lawyer says when they're trying to use circumstantial evidence, when they're trying to get circumstantial evidence."


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: iraq; prewarintelligence; stephenfhayes
This is a transcript taken from Chris Matthews Hardball off of NewsBusters from this article

MSNBC Distorts Bush, Cheney Words on Iraq-9/11 Link Posted by Brad Wilmouth on November 12, 2005 - 03:52.

http://newsbusters.org/comment/reply/2791

Please click on URL for the full story

1 posted on 11/12/2005 9:20:33 AM PST by april15Bendovr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All

http://newsbusters.org/comment/reply/2791


2 posted on 11/12/2005 9:21:49 AM PST by april15Bendovr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: april15Bendovr
Its Harball when its Republicans.Its softball when he has on Democrats and that other closet Dem McCain.
I do not watch his program anymore.He will not let people who contradict his statements with facts speak.He talks over them and then if that does not work he does the Matthews Shuffle.He has done it to countless Republicans as well as Maulkin and Orin.He attempted it with Hitchens but Christopher Hitchens can out talk him and he got his point out.
Matthews is terrified that his sons are going to be drafted.That is what is fueling this daily diatribe.
3 posted on 11/12/2005 9:33:38 AM PST by ricoshea
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: april15Bendovr

This was the Clinton view of a relationship between OBL/Saddam:

The Clinton View of Iraq/AQ Ties.
December 29, 2003. The Weekly Standard.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/527uwabl.asp

Tape Shows General Wesley Clark linking Iraq and AQ
January 12, 2004. The New York Times.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1056113/posts

Britain insists that AQ was in Iraq pre war.
June 17, 2004. MiddleEast Online.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1155369/posts

How the Networks Pretend to Ignore their own Reporting in the 90's that AQ and Iraq worked together.
June 17, 2004. Media Research Center
http://www.mediaresearch.org/cyberalerts/2004/cyb20040617.asp

The Clinton Administration first linked Saddam and OBL.
June 25, 2004. The Washington Times.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20040624-112921-3401r.htm

Long List of Clinton Administration Officials who Believed There was an AQ/Iraq connection.
July 12, 2004. NewsMax.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1169397/posts

Gore, Cohen, Clinton linked AQ and Saddam.
July 15, 2004. The Daily Texan.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1165515/posts

Clinton feared Iraq gave AQ chemical weapons in Sudan under a cooperative agreement they had.
July 2004. 9/11 Commission
http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1087373948467

Excellent reference material on Clinton/Iraq/WMD:
http://freerepublic.com/focus/news/1513669/posts?page=1

Who is lying about Iraq.
November 2005. John Podhoritz
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/Production/files/podhoretz1205advance.html




4 posted on 11/12/2005 9:35:51 AM PST by Peach (The Clintons pardoned more terrorists than they ever captured or killed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Peach

Thank you


5 posted on 11/12/2005 9:40:40 AM PST by april15Bendovr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Peach

BUMP


6 posted on 11/12/2005 9:43:34 AM PST by MEG33 (GOD BLESS OUR ARMED FORCES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Peach

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1413167/posts


Saddam's al Qaeda Connection (Salman Pak)
Weekly Standard ^ | 09/01/2003 | Stephen F. Hayes


7 posted on 11/12/2005 9:51:21 AM PST by april15Bendovr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: april15Bendovr

Hayes has been great with his reporting on Iraq/Al Queda connections


8 posted on 11/12/2005 9:54:08 AM PST by petercooper (The Republican Party: We Suck Less.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: april15Bendovr

What's this Hayes guy trying to do? If you present facts to Matthews all you do is confuse him.


9 posted on 11/12/2005 9:58:15 AM PST by highlander_UW (I don't know what my future holds, but I know Who holds my future)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: april15Bendovr
Maybe I live a very sheltered life (well, I do, actually!) but I spend a lot of time on FR ... read the news and listen often to the radio. I have quite a few conservative friends, and most of my family are liberals. Out of everyone I have ever talked to about Iraq and 9/11, NOT ONE has expressed the belief that Iraq was behind 9/11. I remember years ago that we were trying to make a link between Atta and Iraq but nothiing became of it. The closest Iraq came to 9/11 was Iraq's support of Al Queda. That's close enough for me. But Iraq was directly resonsible for 9/11? Where did this belief come from? Did the Libs/'Rats/MSM make it up?
10 posted on 11/12/2005 10:00:30 AM PST by manwiththehands
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: petercooper
What's sad is even Frontline PBS even knows there is a connection between Saddam and Al Qaeda.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/gunning/interviews/khodada.html
11 posted on 11/12/2005 10:01:50 AM PST by april15Bendovr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: april15Bendovr

12 posted on 11/12/2005 10:05:13 AM PST by petercooper (The Republican Party: We Suck Less.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: april15Bendovr

Matthews is one of those intentional deaf Dims who never heard President say, "Either you're with us or against us." And that we would treat both terrorists and terrorist supporters alike.


13 posted on 11/12/2005 10:08:01 AM PST by savedbygrace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: april15Bendovr

You know what? Bush has finally opened it up... let's continue to bombard the press through emails on past statements of dems, the actual findings of the reports, the resolutions and the time it gave Saddam to remove weapons, the chemical warheads/RDX/HMX/uranium that has been found and intelligence people who have been in the region who knew what Saddam had and was planning after sanctions. I find it effective to send emails of (many have disappeared, some of us have captured), their own articles before the war (NYT, WaPo others), that pushed for the war on WMD and Saddam's lack to abide to the UN and not destroying weapons (the resolutions). This is great that you posted this. Also, thanks to Peach as usual.


14 posted on 11/12/2005 10:09:07 AM PST by AliVeritas (Weldon Ops, Earle Fatwa Team, Pork Jihadi, MOOSEMUSS, Stick Brigade, Go Steele)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: manwiththehands

Two Clinton advosors talked of it Laurie Mylroie and Mansoor Ijaz.

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/COMMUNITY/10/29/mylroie/

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-ijaz021803.asp


15 posted on 11/12/2005 10:09:08 AM PST by april15Bendovr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: petercooper

What kind of training went on, and who was being trained?

Training is majorly on terrorism. They would be trained on assassinations, kidnapping, hijacking of airplanes, hijacking of buses, public buses, hijacking of trains and all other kinds of operations related to terrorism.


http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/gunning/interviews/khodada.html


16 posted on 11/12/2005 10:13:08 AM PST by april15Bendovr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Peach
Con Coughlin, executive editor of London's Sunday Telegraph, writes in his pre-war biography--Saddam, King of Terror--that in early September 2001, Hussein put the Iraqi military of "Alert G", the highest state of military readiness since the 1991 Gulf War. Saddam himself retreated to a heavily fortified bunker in Tikrit just before the 9/11 attacks. He placed his two wives in another deep bunker.
Saddam was the one Mideast head of state who justified the 9/11 attacks publicly.
17 posted on 11/12/2005 10:18:49 AM PST by Brad from Tennessee (Anything a politician gives you he has first stolen from you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: savedbygrace
Matthews is one of those intentional deaf Dims who never heard President say, "Either you're with us or against us." And that we would treat both terrorists and terrorist supporters alike.

Yo, Crissy the sissy...

Remember The Bush Doctrine - "We will make no distinction between the terrorists and the states that support their existence." ???

We will also make no distinction between the terrorists and the PROPAGANDA ARMS that support their existence.

18 posted on 11/12/2005 10:23:52 AM PST by ez ("Abashed the devil stood and felt how awful goodness is." - Milton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ricoshea

"Matthews is terrified that his sons are going to be drafted.That is what is fueling this daily diatribe."

Uh, there is no draft in this country. And unless something drastic happens, there won't be because you could never get enough votes to pass the measure.

Perhaps he is afraid they may just have a micro-ounce of patriotism in their blood and volunteer.


19 posted on 11/12/2005 10:29:44 AM PST by lawdude (Err Amerika induces "in-talk-sication".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Peach

bump for later reading


20 posted on 11/12/2005 10:45:01 AM PST by Roberts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ricoshea

"Matthews is terrified that his sons are going to be drafted.That is what is fueling this daily diatribe"

If that is true, he's a bigger idiot than I thought. He knows that no draft would come (unless, of course, it was a Dem administration)
Matthews is a Dem pure and simple. He was outraged by Clinton because of the perjury.....but he is incapable of being honest here. He knows that the few viewers he DOES have are liberals..he's not going to alienate his audience.


21 posted on 11/12/2005 11:01:48 AM PST by t2buckeye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Brad from Tennessee

I'm so glad you reminded me about that book and Saddam going into that state of military readiness before 9/11. I'd read that book, typed notes about the situation that you described, and then had a computer crash and lost those notes.


22 posted on 11/12/2005 11:03:41 AM PST by Peach (The Clintons pardoned more terrorists than they ever captured or killed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: april15Bendovr

Haven't been able to watch Matthews much in recent years. He's a big mouth liberal hack.


23 posted on 11/12/2005 11:03:56 AM PST by Reagan Man (Secure our borders;punish employers who hire illegals;stop all welfare to illegals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: april15Bendovr

Salmon Pak is a very important connection that the left would just as soon we all forget about. Thank you for posting that link.


24 posted on 11/12/2005 11:06:54 AM PST by Peach (The Clintons pardoned more terrorists than they ever captured or killed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: april15Bendovr

Thanks, Matthews get me so opset at times that I watch weel of fortune


25 posted on 11/12/2005 11:18:11 AM PST by munin ( I support the war on Muslim terror and GWB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ricoshea

I don't Watch Matthews anymore either. He is a complete nut job and is a card carrying member of the Vast Left Wing Howard Dean Conspiracy and treasonous little B**tard. He is absolutely pathetic. Thank goodness nobody watches him but Babs Strisand.

I absolutely believe that Iraq had something to do with 9/11, not only because of documents discovered after the war, but by the speech Saddam Hussein gave during the summer of 2001. (July 2001, I think)

I've tried to find a copy of that speech. Can someone post it? If so, read it very carefully. Read where he talks about "America's arm was going to be hurt where it is already hurting". (paraphrased) I took that to mean our ECONOMY.


26 posted on 11/12/2005 11:19:56 AM PST by nightowl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: manwiththehands

"But Iraq was directly resonsible for 9/11? Where did this belief come from? Did the Libs/'Rats/MSM make it up?"

Yes, they made it up that Bush said it, and they kept repeating that over and over again. Just the way they keep repeating that Bush said Iraq was an "imminent threat" - when in fact he said just the opposite, that we couldn't wait until Iraq became an imminent threat.


27 posted on 11/12/2005 12:16:04 PM PST by RAldrich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: RAldrich
Thank you for the clarification. That's what I thought too, but for a while there I thought I was losing my mind. :-)
28 posted on 11/12/2005 12:38:47 PM PST by manwiththehands
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: RAldrich

I have often seen that noone is watching CM, so, in view of his complete obsession with speculation, I have decided to stop waatching after many years. I think he is off the deep end.


29 posted on 11/12/2005 12:38:56 PM PST by ClaireSolt (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson