White House Ducks Prewar Intel Questions

AP ^ | 11/2/5 | LIZ SIDOTI

[SmithL]

WASHINGTON -- The White House sought to deflect politically charged questions Wednesday about President Bush's use of prewar intelligence in Iraq, saying Democrats, too, had concluded Saddam Hussein was a threat.

"If Democrats want to talk about the threat that Saddam Hussein posed and the intelligence, they might want to start with looking at the previous administration and their own statements that they've made," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said.

He said the Clinton administration and fellow Democrats "used the intelligence to come to the same conclusion that Saddam Hussein and his regime were a threat."

McClellan made his comments one day after Senate Democrats sprung a surprise, forcing a rare closed-door session to dramatize their charge that Bush relied on faulty intelligence in the run-up to war and congressional Republicans have failed to sufficiently investigate.

"They have repeatedly chosen to protect the Republican administration rather than get to the bottom of what happened and why," Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada said Tuesday in demanding that the Senate chamber be emptied of everyone but members and a few staffers.

The move allowed Democrats to refocus attention on the Iraq war at a time when Bush's nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court has taken the spotlight. It also heightened an already tense relationship between the two political parties in the Senate.

Taken off guard, Republicans angrily called the Democratic move a political stunt but agreed two hours later to have a bipartisan group review how the Senate Intelligence Committee is coming along in its investigation of prewar intelligence.

"The United States Senate has been hijacked by the Democratic leadership," said Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee.

Democrats sought assurances that Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kan., would complete the second phase of an investigation

[SmithL]

AP biased headline alert.

[new yorker 77]

This will echo outside the realm of no one cares.

[oceanview]

let's investigate where the forged documents discrediting the Niger yellowcake claim came from.

[GSWarrior]

Th White House ducks have returned.

[Cicero]

AP DUCKS TRUTH (As Usual)

[Tenacious 1]

White House Ducks what?

The article does not even mention the white house. Who Scott answering some stupid question about why dems had another walk out tantrum? What was he ducking?

Nice Catch!

[popdonnelly]

BS by AP.

[mainepatsfan]

There's not much difference these days between an AP story and a DNC press release.

[goldstategop]

The Democrats looked at the same intel the Administration did and came to the same conclusion. They weren't misled about anything and Harry "Dingy" Reid and Dick "Turban" Durbin know it.

("Denny Crane: Gun Control? For Communists. She's a liberal. Can't hunt.")

[marty60]

If Democrats want to talk about the threat that Saddam Hussein posed and the intelligence, they might want to start with looking at the previous administration and their own statements that they've made," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said.

I like the NEW thinking, time to start running the rats to ground. No more Mr. Nice Guy. Bring it on Baby.

[Ol' Dan Tucker]

"If Democrats want to talk about the threat that Saddam Hussein posed and the intelligence, they might want to start with looking at the previous administration and their own statements that they've made," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said.

The previous administration was full of corrupt liars who would say anything to further their agenda.

If I didn't believe what they said then, why on earth would I believe them now?

[BenLurkin]

"If Democrats want to talk about the threat that Saddam Hussein posed and the intelligence, they might want to start with looking at the previous administration and their own statements that they've made," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said.

Doesn't sound like ducking to me. Sounds like line drive into center field.

[texas_mrs]

"If Democrats want to talk about the threat that Saddam Hussein posed and the intelligence, they might want to start with looking at the previous administration and their own statements that they've made," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said. "

This is the most huevos I've seen Scotty show - ever. Time for the offensive, guys!

[NewMediaFan]

"AP Ducks Charges of Liberal Bias"

[carlr]

The move allowed Democrats to refocus attention on the Iraq war at a time when Bush's nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court has taken the spotlight

And the AP admits what the stunt was all about in the first place.

[new yorker 77]

Let me focus the Iraq War.

Democrats pushed the threat of Saddam Hussein and WMD in 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003 before the war.

We debated the Iraq War in 2002. WE WON! THEY LOST!

We debated the Iraq War in 2004. WE WON! THEY LOST!

We'll debate the Iraq War in 2006. WE WIN! THEY LOSE!

[ravingnutter]

As was said on TV last night, they are just mad that they didn't get the indictments they wanted. Speaking of ducks...

Fred Rustmann [co-worker of Valerie Plame]: "Well, I don't know that everybody knew. I do know that her cover began to erode the moment she started dating Joe Wilson. The thing that I said was that, you know, when you walk like a duck and quack like a duck and look like a duck, you're probably a duck.

Geez...why can't the Dems take their own advice and Moveon.org.

[San Jacinto]

AP DUCKS ANY PRETENSE OF INTEGRITY

[MonroeDNA]

Let's see if the surgeon and the first Harvard MBA pres are mad enough to start playing hardball.

The frustration I feel at lack of response by the pubs makes me gnash my teeth sometimes.

[KayEyeDoubleDee]

The Democrats looked at the same intel the Administration did and came to the same conclusion

Look, I'm as supportive of this war as anyone, but the Democratic talking points are that this intelligence was manipulated before they looked at it. You need to get you canned responses ready for that line of attack.