Fox pundit lashes out at Brit Hume

U.S. News- Washington Whispers ^ | 06/21/03 | Paul Bedard

[Pokey78]

The resignation of Rand Beers from the National Security Council is giving off plenty of sparks. Just before the Iraq war began, Beers quit as one of the government's top counterterrorism officials. He's now joined John Kerry's presidential campaign and went public this Monday in a Washington Post page-one profile, in which he branded the White House's Iraq policy an "ill-conceived and poorly executed strategy." That, apparently, was too much for Fox News Channel anchor Brit Hume, who on air accused Beers of having falsely testified under oath about Colombian terrorists training at al Qaeda's Afghan camps, reports our David E. Kaplan. Now Hume is the one being attacked–by former Fox analyst Larry Johnson, who served with Beers at the State Department and insists Beers acted with the best intelligence then available. "You impugned Rand's integrity on your show by suggesting that he lied and had to correct his lie," Johnson wrote Hume in an E-mail titled "Reprehensible." He added, "Have you no shame?" In his response, Hume suggested that Johnson be "more careful in writing late-night messages based on what you imagine someone to have said." Johnson replied by citing the transcript and sending the exchange around town. "You are starting to sound like Bill Clinton trying to define 'sex'," wrote Johnson. Read it all here, in reverse order:

Larry Johnson's 1st email

From: LCJohnson
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 11:22 PM
To: Brit Hume
Cc: Carl Cameron; Tony Snow; Executive Group Email; Andrea Mackris
Subject: Reprehensible

Brit,

Your comment this evening relevant to Rand Beer's decision to align himself with John Kerry's campaign because of his disgust with the misrepresentation of evidence by the Bush Administration was reprehensible. Someone of your stature participating in a smear is disgusting. Rand is an honorable man who always has conducted himself with integrity. That is why he refused to talk to the press when he resigned on the eve of the start of the war in Iraq. He was a professional, not a partisan during his entire tenure as a civil servant. He faithfully served Republican and Democratic administrations. The "lie" you accuse him of confessing to was nothing of the sort. Colombian police sources had informed US authorities that al-Qaeda/Taliban personnel had trained members of the FARC in the art of heroin production. CIA went back later to try to corroborate this info. They could not and Rand corrected the record. You impugned Rand's integrity on your show by suggesting that he lied and had to correct his lie. Have you no shame? Like it or not the Bush Administration did misrepresent the intel on the weapons of mass distraction. Rather then deal with the substance of what Rand had to say you chose to raise unfounded, unwarranted questions about his integrity. Shameful!

Larry Johnson

The quote from Sept. 2002 press accounts is as follows: "Rand Beers, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement, said in late 2001 that the al-Qaeda network had trained members of the FARC. But in August he acknowledged that reports from U.S. intelligence agencies showed no evidence for this.

Beers told the media that he wanted to erase what he had said. "When I said it, I believed that it was true and correct."

Brit Hume's response

From: Hume, Brit
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 8:44 AM
To: 'lcjohnson; Hume, Brit
Cc: Cameron, Carl; Snow, Tony; 32 -Terror News; Mackris, Andrea
Subject: RE: Reprehensible

Larry,

Every word of our brief item about Rand Beers was true. What's more, the word "lie" was never used. Your problem seems not to be what I actually reported, but what you think I was "suggesting." That makes a pretty thin basis for an intemperate e-mail sent not only to me, but to a range of other recipients. I think you should be more careful in writing late-night messages based on what you imagine someone to have said. It might have been wiser to sleep on it and think about it in the morning.

Brit

Larry Johnson's 2nd email

From: LCJohnson
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 9:05 AM
To: 'Hume, Brit'
Cc: 'Cameron, Carl'; 'Snow, Tony'; '32 -Terror News'; 'Mackris, Andrea'
Subject: RE: Reprehensible

Brit,

You are starting to sound like Bill Clinton trying to define "sex". Here is what you said:

"Not mentioned in the "Post" story is that two years ago, Beers himself falsely testified under oath that Colombian terrorists received training from al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan. A year later, he had to publicly rescind the statement because he said, quote, "there doesn't seem to be any evidence to support it," end quote."

You did not use the word "lie", but you say he committed perjury without using the word perjury. Last time I checked you commit perjury if you testify falsely under oath. Rand did not commit perjury. He presented the info based on uncorroborated intel they had received from Colombian sources. When the CIA was unable to corroborate the info Rand then did the honorable and proper thing of correcting the record. To testify falsely implies he knew it was a lie and chose to dissemble.

Like I said in my previous "intemperate" email, you are too smart and too experienced to take a cheap shot like this against a man like Rand Beers. It is shameful. At core I believe you are an honorable person. But you are flat out wrong on this one.

Best
Larry Johnson

[Pokey78]

Actually, these are NOT in reverse order. I switched them around.

[The Hon. Galahad Threepwood]

Doesn't Brit know you're not allowed to tell an unpleasant truth about a liberal? You simply can't use the words "falsely testified" to describe the actions of a liberal who testified falsely.

[sinkspur]

I've noticed that all of these ex-spooks are a bit unhinged. Johnson is the most notable; even Bob Bevilacqua gets cross-ways with hosts (like Shepherd Smith) pretty regularly.

They're unaccustomed to close scrutiny. In addition, the testiest of the bunch are all connected, however tenuously, to the failed Clinton security apparatus.

Maybe that's what they're testy about.

[america-rules]

Let me get this straight.

When a lefty says something based on bad intel he's telling the truth as he knows it. OK, I get this. But, if Bush says something based on intel and what the rest of the world says he's "lying" to us ?

Any intel guy who aligns himself with Kerry is dangerous anyway !

[america-rules]

"In addition, the testiest of the bunch are all connected, however tenuously, to the failed Clinton security apparatus. "

Yes and they have to pin it on Bush because they look like failures !

Liberal 101 - project blame on others !

[Cicero]

Brit Hume is a real pro.

[McGavin999]

LOL, the guy sounds desperate, trying to put words into Brit's mouth. Even when he has to quote the transcript he trys to make it into something it wasn't. This guy really shouldn't be in a duel of wits with Brit Hume, the poor guy is obviously unarmed.

[The_Pickle]

Geez this guy sure like to put words in peoples mouths doesn't he? Brit didn't say he "lied" and he didn't say he commited "perjury" yet this yahoos extire tiraid is presupposed on Brit calling the guy a liar and perjurer.

And when exposed to the facts, like most liberals, he withers and resorts to name calling. Good argument dimwit.

[jwfiv]

I agree about anyone lining up with Kerry...he's a hateful and delusional sort...just another guy so in love with himself that reality never makes it through his mirror.

[grapeape]

We all know that if a Bush administration official had said this then It would have been big oils fault that all this had happened because they, of course, and without a doubt, pull his strings!!!

[dixiechick2000]

Since he had to rescind the statement, it would appear he testified falsely.

Brit didn't say he committed perjury.

Why would Beers say such a thing if there was no evidence to support it? Bad intel? If so, lay that directly on Clinton's intel operatives.

Larry Johnson sounds like the one parsing to me.

[america-rules]

"I agree about anyone lining up with Kerry...he's a hateful and delusional sort...just another guy so in love with himself that reality never makes it through his mirror."

If Kerry gets the Dem Nod he'll make Mondale look moderate. His chance of beating Bush is about 30% so it has to be a Clinton set up for 2008 !

[JulieRNR21]

Doesn't Brit know you're not allowed to tell an unpleasant truth about a liberal? You simply can't use the words "falsely testified" to describe the actions of a liberal who testified falsely.

Exactly.....the rule now seems to be that a liberal Dem can get away with lying about anything since BJ Clinton got away with perjury!

BTW.....Beers did testify falsely even if he didn't know at the time that the intel was false. That's what Brit reported but it appears the the Dems don't want anyone to know that about Beers!

However, if he was still with the Bush Administration...it would be just fine to report it.

[rs79bm]

Larry Johnson needs to go to Hell and quickly. Do you get that Mr. Johnson? Go to Hell. You are obviously disturbed about something, or maybe, simply know that Brit was on to something and you couldn't handle it. Nonetheless, you have acted like a typical liberal in a shameful flameback to a very well respected journalist. For whatever reason, you found it necessary to defend the subject in question. In your defense, you sounded so disrespectful that I have no doubt Brit was speaking the truth, and you were simply spewing out damage control. Shameful Mr. Johnson. Good luck working at CNN.

[dark_lord]

Semantics again. Brit said the guy testified "falsely" about this. But that can be defined two ways. One way means he knowingly told an untruth -- in which case he did perjure himself. That is what Brit's detractor assumes Brit meant. But the other meaning is that the guy unknowingly told an untruth. Which is not perjury. It just means the guy testified to something based on intel at the time, that later turned out to be not the case. If Brit meant this, then he didn't accuse the guy of being a liar or a perjurer. Brit is slick though, he is a professional wordsmith. He may have framed it in such a way as to get the liberals excited without crossing the line by making an outright accusation. Heh heh.

[dixiechick2000]

"Brit Hume is a real pro."

Absolutely. Ol' Lar is silly.

[rs79bm]

This from Mr. Johnson's profile:

"Mr. Johnson has analyzed terrorist incidents for a variety of media including the Jim Lehrer News Hour, National Public Radio, ABC's Nightline, NBC's Today Show, the New York Times, CNN and the BBC."

I THINK THAT SAYS IT ALL, FOLKS.

[FairOpinion]

"former Fox analyst Larry Johnson"
---


I like the word "FORMER".

I read Larry Johnson wrote some horrible anti-US, anti-Bush articles, I couldn't believe Fox was still keeping him, and apparently not, good for FoxNews! So now Larry Johnson whines and attacks, so who cares.

Here is what Johnson was saying:

http://www.sundayherald.com/34491

"The OSP was set up by Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to gather intelligence which would prove the case for war. In a staggering attack on the OSP, former CIA officer Larry Johnson told the Sunday Herald the OSP was 'dangerous for US national security and a threat to world peace', adding that it 'lied and manipulated intelligence to further its agenda of removing Saddam'.

He added: 'It's a group of ideologues with pre-determined notions of truth and reality. They take bits of intelligence to support their agenda and ignore anything contrary. They should be eliminated.'

Johnson said that to describe Saddam as an 'imminent threat' to the West was 'laughable and idiotic'. He said many CIA officers were in 'great distress' over the way intelligence had been treated. 'We've entered the world of George Orwell,' Johnson added. 'I'm disgusted. The truth has to be told. We can't allow our leaders to use bogus information to justify war.'

[TomGuy]

Shep is usually the jolly, happy-go-lucky type, who seems to be having a good time on air. But, when he is interviewing some, he can "cut to the chase" and rip them pretty good. I'd like to see Shep do more "real" interviews and less of his "G-Block" newsertainment.