{"id":534,"date":"2007-08-19T07:31:56","date_gmt":"2007-08-19T14:31:56","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/montaraventures.com\/blog\/2007\/08\/19\/in-his-own-words-september-14-2003\/"},"modified":"2007-08-19T07:31:56","modified_gmt":"2007-08-19T14:31:56","slug":"in-his-own-words-september-14-2003","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/montaraventures.com\/blog\/2007\/08\/19\/in-his-own-words-september-14-2003\/","title":{"rendered":"In his own words: September 14, 2003"},"content":{"rendered":"

In this continuing series of hoisting the treacherous leadership of this country on their own petard, here is another in the series of Dick Cheney in his own words…You’d think they’d realize that this stuff is recorded, then again, we the public appear to be either too dumb or apathetic to care, so say what you’d like. No one will remember or hold you accountable.
\n
\nFrom NBC’s Meet the Press<\/a>. Again, Cheney was interviewed by Tim Russert. Transcript follows:
\n
\n[…]<\/p>\n

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?<\/p>\n

VICE PRES. CHENEY: No. I think it\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s not surprising that people make that connection.<\/p>\n

MR. RUSSERT: But is there a connection?<\/p>\n

VICE PRES. CHENEY: We don\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t 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\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t have any evidence of that. Subsequent to that, we\u00e2\u20ac\u2122ve 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 \u00e2\u20ac\u212290s, 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.<\/p>\n

We know, for example, in connection with the original World Trade Center bombing in \u00e2\u20ac\u212293 that one of the bombers was Iraqi, returned to Iraq after the attack of \u00e2\u20ac\u212293. And we\u00e2\u20ac\u2122ve 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.<\/p>\n

Now, is there a connection between the Iraqi government and the original World Trade Center bombing in \u00e2\u20ac\u212293? 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\u00e2\u20ac\u2122ve had the story that\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s 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\u00e2\u20ac\u2122ve never been able to develop anymore of that yet either in terms of confirming it or discrediting it. We just don\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t know.<\/p>\n

MR. RUSSERT: We could establish a direct link between the hijackers of September 11 and Saudi Arabia.<\/p>\n

VICE PRES. CHENEY: We know that many of the attackers were Saudi. There was also an Egyptian in the bunch. It doesn\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t mean those governments had anything to do with that attack. That\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s a different proposition than saying the Iraqi government and the Iraqi intelligent service has a relationship with al-Qaeda that developed throughout the decade of the \u00e2\u20ac\u212290s. That was clearly official policy.<\/p>\n

MR. RUSSERT: There are reports that the investigation Congress did does show a link between the Saudi government and the hijackers but that it will not be released to the public.<\/p>\n

VICE PRES. CHENEY: I don\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t know want to speculate on that, Tim, partly because I was involved in reviewing those pages. It was the judgment of our senior intelligence officials, both CIA and FBI that that material needed to remain classified. At some point, we may be able to declassify it, but there are ongoing investigations that might be affected by that release, and for that reason, we kept it classified. The committee knows what\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s in there. They helped to prepare it. So it hasn\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t been kept secret from the Congress, but from the standpoint of our ongoing investigations, we needed to do that.<\/p>\n

One of the things this points out that\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s important for us to understand\u00e2\u20ac\u201dso there\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s this great temptation to look at these events as discreet events. We got hit on 9\/11. So we can go and investigate it. It\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s over with now.<\/p>\n

It\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s done. It\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s history and put it behind us.<\/p>\n

[…]<\/p>\n

MR. RUSSERT: Vanity Fair magazine reports that about 140 Saudis were allowed to leave the United States the day after the 11th, allowed to leave our airspace and were never investigated by the FBI and that departure was approved by high-level administration figures. Do you know anything about that?<\/p>\n

VICE PRES. CHENEY: I don\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t, but a lot of folks from that part of the world left in the aftermath of 9\/11 because they were worried about public reaction here in the United States or that somehow they might be discriminated against. <\/p>\n

[…]<\/p>\n

MR. RUSSERT: Let me turn to the situation in Iraq. We all remember this picture from May 1. The president on the USS Lincoln on May 1; mission accomplished. Since that time, these are the rather haunting figures coming out of Iraq. We had lost 138 soldiers before May 1, and 685 wounded, injured. Since that time, since the president came on the carrier and said major combat was over, we\u00e2\u20ac\u2122ve lost 158, and 856 wounded and injured. Those numbers are pretty troubling.<\/p>\n

VICE PRES. CHENEY: Well, it\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s significant, Tim. Any loss of life or injuries suffered by American military personnel is significant. Everyone wishes that that weren\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t necessary. But from the standpoint of the activity we\u00e2\u20ac\u2122re engaged in over there and what we\u00e2\u20ac\u2122ve been able to accomplish over the last two years, I think it\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s important to keep all of this in perspective. I looked at some numbers yesterday. I had them run the numbers, for example, in terms of our casualties since we launched into Afghanistan, began the war on terror a little over two years ago now. And the number killed in combat, both in Afghanistan and Iraq, as of yesterday, was about 213. When you add in those from non-hostile causes\u00e2\u20ac\u201dthe plane crashes, helicopter goes down without hostile fire\u00e2\u20ac\u201dwe\u00e2\u20ac\u2122ve got a total of 372 fatalities since we started the war.<\/p>\n

[…]<\/p>\n

MR. RUSSERT: Joe Lieberman, the senator from Connecticut, running for president, had this to say: \u00e2\u20ac\u0153…what President Bush gave the American people on Sunday night was a price tag\u00e2\u20ac\u009d\u00e2\u20ac\u201d$87 billion\u00e2\u20ac\u201d\u00e2\u20ac\u009dnot a plan. And we in Congress must demand a plan.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d<\/p>\n

What is our plan for Iraq? How long will the 140,000 American soldiers be there? How many international troops will join them? And how much is this going to cost?<\/p>\n

VICE PRES. CHENEY: Well, some of those questions are unknowable at present, Tim. It\u00e2\u20ac\u2122ll depend on developments. It\u00e2\u20ac\u2122ll depend on how fast it takes us to achieve our objectives. Remember when we went there, that we went there specifically to take down the Saddam Hussein regime, to wrap up all WMD capability he had possessed or developed, to deal with the threat that his regime represented to the region, and the United States. Very significant challenge. But we have, in fact, I think, been very successful at achieving that.<\/p>\n

[…]<\/p>\n

MR. RUSSERT: Let\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s go through some of those things because there have been suggestions of misjudgments by the administration. When you were on the program in March, I asked you about troop levels. Let\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s watch:<\/p>\n

(Videotape, March 16, 2003):<\/p>\n

MR. RUSSERT: The army\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s top general said that we would have to have several hundred thousand troops there for several years in order to maintain stability.<\/p>\n

VICE PRES. CHENEY: I disagree. To suggest that we need several hundred thousand troops there after military operations cease, after the<\/p>\n

conflict ends, I don\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t think is accurate. I think that\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s an overstatement.<\/p>\n

(End videotape)<\/p>\n

MR. RUSSERT: We, in fact, have about 140,000 troops, 20,000 international troops, as well. Did you misjudge the number of troops necessary to secure Iraq after major combat operations?<\/p>\n

VICE PRES. CHENEY: Well, you\u00e2\u20ac\u2122re going to get into a debate here about\u00e2\u20ac\u201dtalking about several years, several hundred thousand troops for several years. I think that\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s a non-starter. I don\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t think we have any plan to do that, Tim. I don\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t think it\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s necessary to do that. There\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s no question but what we\u00e2\u20ac\u2122ve encountered resistance. But I don\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t think anybody expected the time we were there to be absolutely trouble-free. We knew there were holdover elements from the regime that would fight us and struggle. And we also knew al-Qaeda was there, and Ansar al-Islam, up in northeastern Iraq, which we\u00e2\u20ac\u2122ll come back to, talk about in a minute.<\/p>\n

So I don\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t think there was a serious misjudgment here. <\/p>\n

[…]<\/p>\n

MR. RUSSERT: The Congressional Budget Office said that: \u00e2\u20ac\u0153That the Army lacks sufficient active-duty forces to maintain its current level of nearly 150,000 troops in Iraq beyond next spring. In a report that underscores the stress being place on the military by the occupation of Iraq, the CBO said the Army\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s goals of keeping the same number of troops in Iraq and limiting tours of duty there to a year while maintaining its current presence elsewhere in the world were impossible to sustain without activating more National Guard or Reserve units.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d<\/p>\n

Can we keep 150,000 troops beyond next spring without, in effect, breaking the Army?<\/p>\n

VICE PRES. CHENEY: Tim, we can do what we have to do to prevail in this conflict. Failure\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s not an option. And go back again and think about what\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s involved here. This is not just about Iraq or just about the difficulties we might encounter in any one part of the country in terms of restoring security and stability. This is about a continuing operation on the war on terror. And it\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s very, very important we get it right. If we\u00e2\u20ac\u2122re successful in Iraq, 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\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s not pursuing weapons of mass destruction, so that it\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s 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\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s at stake here. That\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s one of the reasons they\u00e2\u20ac\u2122re putting up as much of a struggle as they have, is because they know if we succeed here, that that\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s going to strike a major blow at their capabilities.<\/p>\n

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

VICE PRES. CHENEY: No, I was careful not to say that. With respect to 9\/11, 9\/11, as I said at the beginning of the show, changed everything. And one of the things it changed is we recognized that time was not on our side, that in this part of the world, in particular, given the problems we\u00e2\u20ac\u2122ve encountered in Afghanistan, which forced us to go in and take action there, as well as in Iraq, that we, in fact, had to move on it. The relevance for 9\/11 is that what 9\/11 marked was the beginning of a struggle in which the terrorists come at us and strike us here on our home territory. <\/p>\n

[…]<\/p>\n

MR. RUSSERT: In terms of costs, Mr. Vice President, there are suggestions again\u00e2\u20ac\u201dit was a misjudgment by the administration or even misleading. \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Lawrence Lindsey, head of the White House\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s National Economic Council, projected the \u00e2\u20ac\u02dcupper bound\u00e2\u20ac\u2122 of war costs at $100 billion to $200 billion.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d<\/p>\n

We\u00e2\u20ac\u2122ve already spent $160 billion after this $87 billion is spent. The Pentagon predicted $50 billion: \u00e2\u20ac\u0153The administration\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s top budget official [Mitch Daniels] estimated that the cost of a war with Iraq could be in the range of $50 billion to $60 billion…he said…that earlier estimates of $100 billion to $200 billion in Iraq war costs by Lawrence Lindsey, Mr. Bush\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s former chief economic adviser, were too high.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d<\/p>\n

And Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy secretary of Defense, went before Congress and said this: \u00e2\u20ac\u0153We\u00e2\u20ac\u2122re dealing with a country that can really finance its own econstruction, and relatively soon. The oil revenues of that country could bring between $50 and $100 billion over the course of the next two or three years.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d It looked like the administrations truly misjudged the cost of this operation.<\/p>\n

VICE PRES. CHENEY: No, I didn\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t see a one-point estimate there that you could say that this is the administration\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s estimate. We didn\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t know. And if you ask Secretary Rumsfeld, for example\u00e2\u20ac\u201dI can remember from his briefings, he said repeatedly he didn\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t know. And when you and I talked about it, I couldn\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t put a dollar figure on it.<\/p>\n

MR. RUSSERT: But Daniels did say $50 billion.<\/p>\n

VICE PRES. CHENEY: Well, that might have been, but I don\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t know what is basis was for making that judgment. We do know that we are prepared and need to be prepared to do whatever it takes to make it work. But this is not a situation where, you know, it\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s only a matter of us writing a check to solve the problem. Iraq sits on top of 10 percent of the world\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s oil reserves, very significant reserves, second only to Saudi Arabia.<\/p>\n

[…]<\/p>\n

MR. RUSSERT: Democrats have written you letters and are suggesting profiteering by your former company Halliburton and this is how it was reported: \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Halliburton, the company formerly headed by Vice President Cheney, has won contrast worth more than $1.7 billion under Operation Iraqi Freedom and stands to make hundreds of millions more dollars under a no-bid contract awarded by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, according to newly available documents. The size and scope of the government contracts awarded to Halliburton in connection with the war in Iraq are significantly greater than was previously disclosed and demonstrate the U.S. military\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s increasing reliance on for-profit corporations to run its logistical operations.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Were you involved in any way in the awarding of those contracts?<\/p>\n

VICE PRES. CHENEY: Of course not, Tim. Tim, when I was secretary of Defense, I was not involved in awarding contracts. That\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s done at a far lower level. Secondly, when I ran Halliburton for five years and they were doing work for the Defense Department, which frankly they\u00e2\u20ac\u2122ve been doing for 60 or 70 years, I never went near the Defense Department. I never lobbied the Defense Department on behalf of Halliburton. The only time I went back to the department during those eight years was to have my portrait hung which is a traditional service rendered for former secretaries of Defense. And since I left Halliburton to become George Bush\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s vice president, I\u00e2\u20ac\u2122ve severed all my ties with the company, gotten rid of all my financial interests. I have no financial interest in Halliburton of any kind and haven\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t had now for over three years. And as vice president, I have absolutely no influence of, involvement of, knowledge of in any way, shape or form of contracts led by the Corps of Engineers or anybody else in the federal government, so…<\/p>\n

MR. RUSSERT: Why is there no bidding?<\/p>\n

VICE PRES. CHENEY: I have no idea. Go ask the Corps of Engineers. One of the things to keep in mind is that Halliburton is a unique kind of company. There are very few companies out there that have the combination of the very large engineering construction capability and significant oil field services, the first- or second-largest oil field service company in the world, and they\u00e2\u20ac\u2122ve traditionally done a lot of work for the U.S. government and the U.S. military. That expertise has stood the military in good stead over the years, but it\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s a great company. There are fine people working for it.<\/p>\n

I also have a lot of confidence in the people in the Department of Defense. Nobody has produced one single shred of evidence that there\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s anything wrong or inappropriate here, nothing but innuendo, and\u00e2\u20ac\u201dbasically they\u00e2\u20ac\u2122re political cheap shots is the way I would describe it. I don\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t know any of the details of the contract because I deliberately stayed away from any information on that, but Halliburton is a fine company. And as I say\u00e2\u20ac\u201dand I have no reason to believe that anybody\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s done anything wrong or inappropriate here.<\/p>\n

[…]<\/p>\n

MR. RUSSERT: Let me turn to one of the most quoted passages from MEET THE PRESS when you were on in March, and that was trying to anticipate the reaction we would receive from the Iraqi people. Let\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s watch:<\/p>\n

(Videotape, March 16, 2003):<\/p>\n

VICE PRES. CHENEY: I think things have gotten so bad inside Iraq from the standpoint of the Iraqi people, my belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators.<\/p>\n

MR. RUSSERT: If your analysis is not correct and we\u00e2\u20ac\u2122re not treated as liberators but as conquerors and the Iraqis begin to resist particularly in Baghdad, do you think the American people are prepared for a long, costly and bloody battle with significant American casualties?<\/p>\n

VICE PRES. CHENEY: Well, I don\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t think it\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s unlikely to unfold that way, Tim, because I really do believe we will be greeted as liberators. I\u00e2\u20ac\u2122ve talked with a lot of Iraqis in the last several months myself, had them to the White House. The president and I have met with various groups and individuals, people who\u00e2\u20ac\u2122ve devoted their lives from the outside to try and change things inside of Iraq.<\/p>\n

The read we get on the people of Iraq is there\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s no question but what they want to get rid of Saddam Hussein and they will welcome as liberators the United States when we come to do that.<\/p>\n

(End videotape)<\/p>\n

MR. RUSSERT: We have not been greeted as liberated.<\/p>\n

VICE PRES. CHENEY: Well, I think we have by most Iraqis. I think the majority of Iraqis are thankful for the fact that the United States is there, that we came and we took down the Saddam Hussein government. And I think if you go in vast areas of the country, the Shia in the south, which are about 60 percent of the population, 20-plus percent in the north, in the Kurdish areas, and in some of the Sunni areas, you\u00e2\u20ac\u2122ll find that, for the most part, a majority of Iraqis support what we did.<\/p>\n

[…]<\/p>\n

MR. RUSSERT: Let me turn to weapons of mass destruction. I asked you back in March what you thought was the most important rationale for going to war with Iraq. There\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s the question, and here is your answer:<\/p>\n

\u00e2\u20ac\u0153…the combination of [Saddam\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s] development and use of chemical weapons, his development of biological weapons, his pursuit of nuclear weapons.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d<\/p>\n

VICE PRES. CHENEY: And the tie to terror.<\/p>\n

MR. RUSSERT: Where are they?<\/p>\n

VICE PRES. CHENEY: Well, I think that the jury is still out in terms of trying to get everything pulled together with respect to what we know. But we\u00e2\u20ac\u2122ve got a very good man now in charge of the operation, David Kay. He used to run UNSCOM, a highly qualified, technically qualified and able individual. He\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s in charge of the operation now. And I also think, Tim, that if you go back and look at what we found to date, that we\u00e2\u20ac\u201dthere\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s no doubt in my mind but what Saddam Hussein had these capabilities. <\/p>\n

[…]<\/p>\n

MR. RUSSERT: There\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s real debate about those labs. But I want to talk about something very specific. And that was the president\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s State of the Union message when he said that the British had learned that Saddam was acquiring uranium from Africa. That was in January. In March the head of the International Energy Atomic Agency, ElBaradei, issued this statement: \u00e2\u20ac\u0153A key piece of evidence linking Iraq to a nuclear weapons program appears to have been fabricated, the United Nations\u00e2\u20ac\u2122 chief nuclear inspector said in a report…Documents that purportedly showed Iraqi officials shopping for uranium in Africa two years ago were deemed \u00e2\u20ac\u02dcnot authentic\u00e2\u20ac\u2122 after carefully scrutiny by U.N. and independent experts, Mohamed ElBaradei, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, told the U.N. Security Council. Also, ElBaradei reported finding no evidence of banned weapons or nuclear material in an extensive sweep of Iraq using advanced radiation detectors. \u00e2\u20ac\u02dcThere is no indication of resumed nuclear activities,\u00e2\u20ac\u2122 ElBaradei said.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d<\/p>\n

Eight days after that, you were on MEET THE PRESS, and we…<\/p>\n

VICE PRES. CHENEY: Right.<\/p>\n

MR. RUSSERT: …talked about that specifically. Let\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s watch:<\/p>\n

(Videotape, March 16, 2003):<\/p>\n

MR. RUSSERT: And even though the International Atomic Energy Agency said he does not have a nuclear program, we disagree.<\/p>\n

VICE PRES. CHENEY: I disagree, yes. And you\u00e2\u20ac\u2122ll find the CIA, for example, and other key parts of our intelligence community, disagree.<\/p>\n

And we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons. I think Mr. ElBaradei, frankly, is wrong. And I think if you look at the track record of the International Atomic Energy Agency and this kind of issue, especially where Iraq is concerned, they have consistently underestimated or missed what it was Saddam Hussein was doing. I don\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t have any reason to believe they\u00e2\u20ac\u2122re any more valid this time than they\u00e2\u20ac\u2122ve been in the past.<\/p>\n

(End videotape)<\/p>\n

MR. RUSSERT: Reconstituted nuclear weapons. You misspoke.<\/p>\n

VICE PRES. CHENEY: Yeah. I did misspeak. I said repeatedly during the show weapons capability. We never had any evidence that he had acquired a nuclear weapon.<\/p>\n

[…]<\/p>\n

MR. RUSSERT: Now, Ambassador Joe Wilson, a year before that, was sent over by the CIA because you raised the question about uranium from Africa. He says he came back from Niger and said that, in fact, he could not find any documentation that, in fact, Niger had sent uranium to Iraq or engaged in that activity and reported it back to the proper channels. Were you briefed on his findings in February, March of 2002?<\/p>\n

VICE PRES. CHENEY: No. I don\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t know Joe Wilson. I\u00e2\u20ac\u2122ve never met Joe Wilson. A question had arisen. I\u00e2\u20ac\u2122d heard a report that the Iraqis had been trying to acquire uranium in Africa, Niger in particular. I get a daily brief on my own each day before I meet with the president to go through the intel. And I ask lots of question. One of the questions I asked at that particular time about this, I said, \u00e2\u20ac\u0153What do we know about this?\u00e2\u20ac\u009d They take the question. He came back within a day or two and said, \u00e2\u20ac\u0153This is all we know. There\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s a lot we don\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t know,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d end of statement. And Joe Wilson\u00e2\u20ac\u201dI don\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t who sent Joe Wilson. He never submitted a report that I ever saw when he came back.<\/p>\n

I guess the intriguing thing, Tim, on the whole thing, this question of whether or not the Iraqis were trying to acquire uranium in Africa. In the British report, this week, the Committee of the British Parliament, which just spent 90 days investigating all of this, revalidated their British claim that Saddam was, in fact, trying to acquire uranium in Africa. What was in the State of the Union speech and what was in the original British White papers. So there may be difference of opinion there. I don\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t know what the truth is on the ground with respect to that, but I guess\u00e2\u20ac\u201dlike I say, I don\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t know Mr. Wilson. I probably shouldn\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t judge him. I have no idea who hired him and it never came…<\/p>\n

MR. RUSSERT: The CIA did.<\/p>\n

VICE PRES. CHENEY: Who in the CIA, I don\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t know.<\/p>\n

[…]<\/p>\n

MR. RUSSERT: If they were wrong, Mr. Vice President, shouldn\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t we have a wholesale investigation into the intelligence failure that they predicted…<\/p>\n

VICE PRES. CHENEY: What failure?<\/p>\n

MR. RUSSERT: That Saddam had biological, chemical and is developing a nuclear program.<\/p>\n

VICE PRES. CHENEY: My guess is in the end, they\u00e2\u20ac\u2122ll be proven right, Tim. On the intelligence business, first of all, it\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s intelligence. There are judgments involved in all of this. But we\u00e2\u20ac\u2122ve got, I think, some very able people in the intelligence business that review the material here. This was a crucial subject. It was extensively covered for years. We\u00e2\u20ac\u2122re very good at it. As I say, the British just revalidated their claim. So I\u00e2\u20ac\u2122m not sure what the argument is about here. I think in the final analysis, we will find that the Iraqis did have a robust program.<\/p>\n

[…]<\/p>\n

MR. RUSSERT: If you froze the tax cut for the top 1 percent of Americans, it would generate enough money to pay for the $87 billion for the war, if you did it for just one year. Would you consider that?<\/p>\n

VICE PRES. CHENEY: I think it\u00e2\u20ac\u2122d be a mistake, because you can\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t look at that without considering what its impact would be on the economy. An awful lot of the returns in that top bracket are small businesses, and they provide an awful lot of the job growth in this economy. If you\u00e2\u20ac\u2122re going to go increase taxes on small businesses, you\u00e2\u20ac\u2122re going to slow down the extent to which we\u00e2\u20ac\u2122re able to reduce unemployment. So I think it\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s a serious mistake; the wrong time to raise taxes.<\/p>\n

[…]<\/p>\n

MR. RUSSERT: Do you think the president is betting his presidency on the war in Iraq?<\/p>\n

VICE PRES. CHENEY: This president is betting his presidency on the importance of fighting the war on terror, of recognizing that 9\/11 changed everything, of adopting a strategy that\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s going to make this nation safer and more secure for our kids and grandkids. And it takes a president willing to take a risk, willing to use the power of the United States, to make that happen. And this president\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s done it.<\/p>\n

End Transcript.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In this continuing series of hoisting the treacherous leadership of this country on their own petard, here is another in the series of Dick Cheney in his own words…You’d think they’d realize that this stuff is recorded, then again, we the public appear to be either too dumb or apathetic to care, so say what […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[24],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/montaraventures.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/534"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/montaraventures.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/montaraventures.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/montaraventures.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/montaraventures.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=534"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/montaraventures.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/534\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/montaraventures.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=534"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/montaraventures.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=534"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/montaraventures.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=534"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}