Aug 28, 2007 at 6:49 PM by Political Chase
Do we have the slightest clue what the primary source of information will be that definitively specifies how successful (or not) the troop surge strategy has been? Based on the convoluted timing and origin of various reports it is hard to see how there will be anything but chaos and distorted reality at best, but that may be the ultimate objective of the White House. The more confusion and distortion the White House can create, the greater their September victory will be.
After announcing the troop surge in January, Bush declared numerous times the Petraeus Report would be the determining factor of success. But recently we learned there will be no Petraeus Report, instead the White House will issue a report. Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker will testify before Congress, but only as a result of a backlash of criticism when the White House said they would not testify publicly. That notwithstanding, will Congress and the public receive the testimony they are expecting?
Enter the twilight zone.
According to the Washington Post, Petraeus and Crocker will use the recently released NIE as the basis for their testimony to Congress. Separately, there will be two additional reports issued to Congress — a GAO report and an independent commission of military experts report — setting “a largely negative backdrop” for Petraeus and Crocker’s congressional testimony. Furthermore, the White House will not deliver its report to Congress until after Petraeus and Crocker testify.
So, according to the Post’s piece, this is how the reporting scenario will unfold: (1) Petraeus and Crocker will give the White House their report before testifying to Congress; (2) Congress will receive two reports from the GAO and an independent commission before Petraeus and Crocker testify; (3) Petraeus and Crocker will base their testimony to Congress on the NIE, which was developed by 16 intelligence agencies — not Petraeus – instead of the report they provided the White House; and (4) the White House will give Congress its report after Petraeus and Crocker testify, which will preclude Congress from asking them questions about the White House report.
How messed up is that? Bush has pulled the wool over Congress’s eyes again. Bush did not want Petraeus to testify about his (Petraeus) report and that is exactly what he is getting. Why not just send Petraeus and Crocker to the bar for several hours and let someone from the CIA or DIA testify about the NIE?
Obviously, I did not include the report the Joint Chiefs of Staff will give the president. I presume it will go to the president before the White House issues its report, but there is no reason to believe it will make it out of the White House.
Do we really think September will be the milestone it was set up to be?
Aug 28, 2007 at 4:03 PM by Political Chase
You can download a copy of the Larry Craig arrest report here (pdf). I suggest you begin reading at page four. Pages one through three are almost illegible.
Aug 28, 2007 at 3:43 PM by Political Chase
The United Transportation Union, an affiliate of the AFL-CIO representing 125,000 active and retired railroad and transit workers, endorsed Hillary Clinton. That’s bad news for John Edwards.
Aug 28, 2007 at 3:00 PM by Political Chase
I do not plan to bird-dog the the recent scandal surrounding Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID) for several reasons. Not to minimize the significance of the peripheral issues of the matter, I don’t see the specific incident as being a top priority when weighed against other issues in our national debate, such as the Bush administration’s disregard for the Constitution and the erosion of democracy in our country from many fronts.
If TPC had a slew of people to focus on the matter, then we would focus on the peripheral issues, such as why sex scandals dominate our national discourse for what seems like forever, and why some members of Craig’s political party demand his resignation, but not Sen. David Vitter (R-LA).
The public has a right to be informed about their representatives, and the media and responsible bloggers have a duty to make that information available in the proper perspective and priority.
This does not mean TPC will dismiss the matter completely. It just will not be a priority unless something changes. I suggest two excellent sites for accurate reporting and analysis: (1) TPM for all the muckraking details and related cause/effect; and (2) Glenn Greenwald for insight and analysis that includes a legal background. Glenn has already started the discussion on why the focus and demands regarding Larry Craig’s misbehavior is a different ball game than, for example, David Vitter’s misbehavior.
Aug 28, 2007 at 12:39 PM by Political Chase
Last week a new National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iraq was released, which in effect reported there were some recent, but not overwhelming, military successes, and no political reconciliation had been achieved nor were they likely to be achieved in the foreseeable future except under highly unlikely circumstances. Today, the Washington Post reveals General David Petraeus revised the NIE, which reflected the consensus of every U.S. government intelligence agency (approximately 16 agencies).
The NIE, requested by the White House Iraq coordinator, Lt. Gen. Douglas E. Lute, in preparation for the testimony, met with resistance from U.S. military officials in Baghdad, according to a senior U.S. military intelligence officer there. Presented with a draft of the conclusions, Petraeus succeeded in having the security judgments softened to reflect improvements in recent months, the official said.
This can only raise questions when the report’s first key judgment, the very first sentence of the report says there have been “measurable but uneven improvement in Iraq’s security situation.”
Why was Petraeus allowed to revise the report? What was “softened” and why? While it is understood Petraeus is by default knowledgeable about the circumstances in Iraq, his primary mission is not intelligence. Why then is his grasp of intelligence superior to the experts in 16 different agencies?
Aug 28, 2007 at 12:32 AM by Political Chase
According to a Roll Call August 13 article, there will be no recess appointment to replace Alberto Gonzales.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has quietly shelved plans to hold the Senate in pro forma session this month after the White House agreed to refrain from making any executive appointments during the Senators’ August break.
Sources in both parties said the two parties reached an understanding whereby Reid agreed to move a series of outstanding White House nominations — 42 in total — before the Senate left town on Aug. 3. The Bush administration, meanwhile, agreed to refrain from making any surprise recess appointments over the break.
