« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
It's Richer vs. CIA on Suskind Charges
In the wake of the CIA's offical denial of Ron Suskind's explosive claim that the White Houe ordered the agency to fabricate a letter suggesting a Saddam- al Qaeda link, the blogger Laura Rozen makes a couple interesting points.
First, the CIA's statement seems to come close to contradicting Richer's own denial. According to the CIA statement, "our government considers Habbush [Saddam's former intelligence chief] to be a wanted man," implying that they don't know where he is. But Richer makes clear that the Bush administration was actively discussing how to use Habbush, writing of his conversations with Suskind: "I do speak to discussions regarding using Habbush, which were frequent during that period, but what I was talking about was the possibility of using him to tamp down the insurgency - not to influence western public opinion."
Richer also writes: "I was asked to respond to documents regarding the potential use of Habbush upon his defection ... I was also involved in many queries from elements of the Administration trying to document an Al-Qa'ida and Saddam government link." As Rozen notes, the Senate Intelligence Committee investigation doesn't appear to have seen these documents. Did the CIA fail to turn them over?
Looks like this is far from over...













CIA denials? Bah. As the Bard wrote: "False face must hide what the false heart doth know."
August 25, 2008 2:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Suskind needs to post the audio of Richer's interview, at least enough of it to truly establish the full context of question and answer, regarding the false documents supposedly requested from Bushco. Anything less, and the story dies a slow death.
Expecting Congress to do a timely and professional investigation/hearings is foolish at best.
August 25, 2008 3:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly. The controversy would be ended if there was actual audio. A transcript could be faked.
Suskind needs to man the fuck up and post the audio. If he was willing to post a transcript why not the actual interview???
It makes Suskind seem shady really.
August 25, 2008 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Barnacles have no right of executive privilege.
August 25, 2008 5:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Laura Rozen's point is a crucial one.
Those documents Rob Richer cites "regarding the potential use of Habbush" should have, if they existed, gone to the Senate committee.
If they did not, why not?
Also, his denial of the forgery is oddly -- in fact, lawyerly -- worded:
"An order such as the one outlined by Mr. Suskind would have been a huge event – and in my opinion illegal. An order to fabricate such a document would have been rejected out of hand and it is improbable to believe anyone would write such a request."
Let's accept Richer's assessment: such an order "would have been illegal" and "would have been rejected out of hand."
But as to whether anyone would write such a request, that in Richer's opinion is merely "improbable to believe."
Here's what I conclude: the illegal request was made, and at least formally rejected. Given its illegality, the paper trail should have disappeared, but Richer is unsure that it has.
So he's hedging his denial.
Note that what he finds improbable is that anyone would "write" such a request, not that it would be made.
August 26, 2008 3:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Richer would not want to implicate himself in illegal activity.
I think Cheney went through CIA to criminalize them as much as possible. And in one of those ironies that litter our broken Government's history, the telecoms were granted immunity for illegal actions that had nothing to do with defending the country, while the CIA will be hung out to dry despite following orders from the same Imperial source- and they are the proper channel for intel gathering.
Telecoms conducting psy ops on America, good. CIA doing the same thing, bad. And the final irony: It seems the Admin had to overturn the whole command structure of the CIA to force them to comply, while the telecoms were more than happy to make the American people the targets of Government malfeasance.
August 26, 2008 6:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
While some people question the details of Ron Suskind’s latest revelations the big picture is incontrovertible. As Ron has pointed out in three finely researched books now, George Bush and Dick Cheney have been dauntless in protecting the American people from harmful acts only they could imagine. If laws needed to be violated, rights suspended or the personal prerogatives of citizens sacrificed for the greater good they did it; and they did it for each and every one of us. In the perspective of time, Ron Suskind’s works will stand as an extraordinary journalistic testament to the eight years of unparalleled single-minded purpose of a historically distinct President and Vice President.
August 26, 2008 8:47 AM | Reply | Permalink