Dick Cheney

Obama gives Iran hawks the smackdown they so richly deserve: They bungled Iraq, and they’ve learned nothing

Obama gives Iran hawks the smackdown they so richly deserve: They bungled Iraq, and they've learned nothing

Tom Cotton, Barack Obama, Dick Cheney (Credit: AP/Reuters/Danny Johnston/Jonathan Ernst/Luis Alvarez/Photo montage by Salon

SALON

President Obama argues for diplomacy with Iran by reminding everyone of his detractors’ biggest failure

President Obama has not exactly been patient with Congress when it comes to the multilateral diplomatic framework with Iran over its nuclear ambitions. After the agreement was announced last week, Obama called a press conference and used the event to methodically rip apart each argument critics have deployed against the deal. Time and again he challenged Republicans, conservatives and hand-wringing Democrats to put up or shut up: to lay out their alternative plans for keeping Iran from going nuclear. He promised to veto any measures the Republican-controlled Congress might send to him blocking the easing of sanctions on Iran. He wasn’t making a sales pitch; he was defying Congress to get in the way of potentially one of the most important diplomatic breakthroughs since the end of the Cold War.

Of course, by using pointy words and a confrontational tone of voice, Obama upset some members of the press who seem to think that bipartisan consensus may still be achieved when it comes to Iran and nuclear weapons:

Ah yes, if there’s one thing Republicans in Congress have made their hallmark during the Obama years, it’s the “fair hearing.” We’ve already seen 47 members of the Senate Republican caucus attempt to preemptively sabotage the deal with a provocative letter to the government of Iran. Many of those senators are also running for president, and they’re trying to out-hawk one another by accusing the administration of engaging in Neville Chamberlain-like appeasement. Most Senate Republicans have been taking their Iran cues from Tom Cotton, who is already planning bombing runs against Iranian nuclear facilities. Sen. Mark Kirk, Republican of Illinois, said “this agreement condemns the next generation to cleaning up a nuclear war in the Persian Gulf.” He does not represent a minority viewpoint. Who exactly is going to give the “fair hearing” in this situation?

The reason Obama’s not banging his head against the wall and trying to get Congress to approve the deal is that he’s fairly confident Congress can’t actually do anything to stop it. The 60-day period for congressional review has already begun, and as the New York Times noted, “the numbers suggest Mr. Obama will prevail; if Congress rejects the Iran accord, he promised on Tuesday to veto the legislation, and he has enough Democrats to win that contest.” Instead of getting Congress on his side, Obama’s working to convince the public that the Iran deal is the right course of action, and that his critics are wrong.

To make that case, he’s deploying a simple and effective argument. “The same politicians and pundits that are so quick to reject the possibility of a diplomatic solution to Iran’s nuclear program are the same folks who were so quick to go to war in Iraq and said it would only take a few months,” Obama said yesterday at the Veterans of Foreign Wars national convention.

He’s absolutely correct. Conservatives who backed the Iraq War and also complain that the nuclear deal does nothing to curb Iranian meddling in the Middle East don’t really have too much credibility on this score. Nothing has done more to bolster Iran’s influence across the region than the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Before the war, the hawks theorized that a swift and decisive war against Saddam Hussein would either scare the Iranians into better behavior or spark an internal uprising that would topple the regime. Instead, we eliminated one of Iran’s regional counterweights and in its place we set up a chaotic power vacuum that Iran filled with money, political influence, and weapons. Put simply, if you backed the neocon adventure in the Middle East, you don’t get to claim expertise when it comes to reining Iranian influence.

And when you look at some of the more prominent critics of the Iran deal – particularly those running for the Republican presidential nomination – you see a lot of people who still argue that the Iraq war and justified and a terrific idea overall. For most of them, the preferred alternative to diplomacy with Iran is “crippling” sanctions, bellicose posturing, and the “credible threat” of military action – a policy smorgasbord that hasn’t succeeded in curbing Iran’s nuclear ambitions and will almost certainly lead to war. A good number of hawks, represented John Bolton, want to start bombing Iran yesterday.

The lesson of the Iraq War is, as Conor Friedersdorf wrote earlier this year, that “Americans vastly overestimate their ability to develop grand strategies and to predict how foreign interventions of choice will play out over time.” Obama is completely justified in pointing out that his most prominent critics have stubbornly refused to learn this lesson. And the president’s cause is better served by reminding the public of their failure than by trying to convince some incorrigible warmongers that diplomacy should be given a chance.

If It Wasn’t For 9/11, Republicans Would Be Obsolete

Mike Meehan, a St. Cloud, Florida, businessman who paid to post the billboards in the Orlando area, said former President Clinton should have put a stop to Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda before 9/11. He said a Republican president would have done so. | CNN

Addicting Info

Consider George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Rudy Giuliani, and Ann Coulter. What do they all have in common, besides the fact they are rabid conservatives who have contributed nothing positive to our country? They all became more prominent, and held higher power and prestige after the September 11, 2001 attacks. While America picked up the pieces of that terrible day, they rose above it all to become the mitochondria of the right.

Because of those horrific attacks (which were the result of Republican-led negligence):

1. George W. Bush’s popularity soared to 90%, setting the stage for two wars and a re-election, which was centered around combating global terrorism to prevent “another 9/11.”

2. Dick Cheney launched a war on morality and international law with the use of torture, all in the name of preventing another 9/11. Now our national standing is forever stained.

3. Rudy Giuliani “united” New York City after 9/11, catapulting him into the national spotlight as a conservative hero against terrorism. Now, Giuliani has rendered himself irrelevant with his race-baiting and paranoia. Because of his fame from 9/11, we will be stuck with him until the day he dies.

4. Ann Coulter became internationally “relevant” with her “invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity” comments regarding Muslims. She also took it upon herself to make fun of the 9/11 widows who she thinks are “enjoying their husband’s deaths so much.” Like Giuliani, she has rendered herself irrelevant.

All of these Republicans rose in the ranks of national prominence because of 9/11. Their careers benefited because they kept a tight grip on America with constant fear-mongering and rising nationalism. In their mantra, if you dissented against them, you were a traitor and a terrorist sympathizer. They kept getting elected and they kept getting their spots on TV because people were frightened. The American people wanted to be reassured that 9/11 would never happen again, and the ones who were the best at post-9/11 propaganda were the Republicans.

Because of 9/11, Republicans were back in business, and for a long time. As the United States naturally becomes more progressive with a younger population and an influx of forward-thinking immigrants, the GOP would virtually be obsolete if it wasn’t for that terrible September day.

Speaking of immigrants, you can thank post-9/11 Republicans for our flawed and stagnated immigration system. Because of their propaganda surrounding foreigners, we needed to put more money in the border, send everyone back, and close our borders because of “terrorism.” Yes, the two middle aged parents with their three small children fleeing Mexico are in the same boat as ISIS and the cartels, according to the GOP. If they were brown, they weren’t welcome. If you’re not white, you might as well be a terrorist. This rise in latent racist nationalism continues today, even as President Obama uses his executive authority to fix our broken immigration system. It’s no wonder why so many conservative Americans are hostile to anyone foreign.

The events also beautifully lined the pockets of the GOP (and almost bankrupted the country) with their two wars to “fight” terrorism, which greatly benefited their political machine. And why wouldn’t you be for the war? If you weren’t for “getting the terrorists,” you supported 9/11. The Republicans actually had us convinced there for awhile. According to Gallup Polling, between March 2003 to July 2005, the majority of Americans supported sending our troops to Iraq. After that, America quickly grew war weary.

But now here we are, 14 years after those terrible attacks and the GOP thinks they’re making a comeback. Cheney and Giuliani are appearing on almost every Sunday show, spewing their “we gotta’ get the terrorists” talking points. People are still listening to them, even though they have been conclusively proven wrong.

September 11, 2001 was the worst day for our nation. But it was the best day for the Republican Party. It wasn’t the attack itself that ruined us. It was the response, and the fear, in the long run, that ruined us.

Germany Files War Crimes Against Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld And Other CIA Officials

(L to R) Donald Rumsfeld; George W. Bush and Dick Cheney

Addicting Info

If President Obama won’t do it, someone else will. Thankfully, a human rights group in Berlin, The European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights, has begun the process of indicting members of the Bush Administration by filing criminal complaints against the architects of the Admin’s torture program.

Calls for an immediate investigation by the German human rights group was started after outrage ensued on the case of a German citizen, Khalid El-Masri, who had been captured by CIA agents in 2004  because of a mistaken identity mix-up and was tortured at a secret prison in Afghanistan.

Wolfgang Kaleck, the general secretary of the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights, said:

“By investigating members of the Bush administration, Germany can help to ensure that those responsible for abduction, abuse and illegal detention do not go unpunished.”

In an interview with “Democracy Now,” Michael Ratner, president emeritus of the Center for Constitutional Rights and chairman of the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights, said that he believes Cheney, among others, have no defense for torturous actions and should be indicted:

“I strongly disagree that Bush, Cheney, et al., would have a defense. This wasn’t like these memos just appeared independently from the Justice Department. These memos were facilitated by the very people — Cheney, etc. — who we believe should be indicted. This was part of a conspiracy so they could get away with torture. But that’s not the subject here now.”

“Secondly, whatever we think of those memos, they’re of uselessness in Europe. Europe doesn’t accept this, quote, ‘golden shield’ of a legal defense. Either it’s torture or it’s not. Either you did it or you didn’t.And that’s one of the reasons, among others, why we’re going to Europe and why we went to Europe to bring these cases through the European Center.”

Ratner then hit the nail on the head regarding America’s dangerous exceptionalism path down the road:

“But, of course, you know, Cheney just showed us exactly why you have to — have to prosecute torture. Because if you don’t prosecute it, the next guy down the line is going to torture again. And that’s what Cheney said: ‘I would do it again.’”

Khalid El-Masri was on vacation in Skopje, in Macedonia, when he was pulled off of a bus by government agents, sodomized with a drug, and taken to the secret base that was identified only as Cobalt in the CIA torture report. After four months, and after the United States learned of the mistaken identity, they left him there and continued to torture him. They held him further because the U.S. realized they had been torturing the wrong man. Afterwards, they released him, dropping him off somewhere to resume his life.

El-Masri in his own words, in the same interview with “Democracy Now:”

[translated] I was the only one in this prison in Kabul who was actually treated slightly better than the other inmates. But it was known among the prisoners that other prisoners were constantly tortured with blasts of loud music, exposed to constant onslaughts of loud music. And they were—for up to five days, they were just sort of left hanging from the ceiling, completely naked in ice-cold conditions. The man from Tanzania, whom I mentioned before, had his arm broken in three places. He had injuries, trauma to the head, and his teeth had been damaged. They also locked him up in a suitcase for long periods of time, foul-smelling suitcase that made him vomit all the time. Other people experienced forms of torture whereby their heads were being pushed down and held under water.

He finished the interview with some pretty damning words that should make George Bush, Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice and Donald Rumsfeld shudder:

“And let me just say, Germany — whatever happened before, between the NSA spying on Germany and the fact that their citizen has now been revealed to have been kept in a torture place, when it was known that he was innocent, I’m pretty sure that Germany is going to take this very seriously.

Fact Checkers Dismantle Cheney’s Pro-Torture Press Appearances

Mediaite

Last week Former Vice President Dick Cheney volubly defended the CIA’s torture funplex enhanced interrogation techniques performed under his administration. In an interview with Fox’s Bret Baier and then more at length to Chuck Todd on Meet the Press he made numerous arguments in defense of the torture program, none of which are testing well with the fact checkers — not surprising, given that he hadn’t even read the Senate Intelligence Committee’s report for at least one of them.

First PolitiFact rated Cheney’s claim that terrorists were not covered by the Geneva Convention “mostly false,” writing:

Cheney has a point that unlawful combatants are not afforded as high a level of protection as prisoners of war or civilians. However, his comment glosses over the fact that unlawful combatants are still accorded a minimum degree of protection, including a ban on “violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture,” and “outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment,” both of which have been validated by the Supreme Court.

PunditFact (a related venture) next called Cheney’s claim that Saddam Hussein had a decade-long tie to al Qaida “entirely false,” just short of their worst rating of “Pants on Fire,” writing:

“Two comprehensive, high-level government reports largely refute that statement. That includes one Pentagon study that relied on a trove of secret Iraqi government documents that fell into American hands after the invasion.”

RELATED: What Cheney’s Refusal to Confront ‘Wrongfully Detained’ Prisoners Tells Us About the Torture Program

Cheney also refuted an argument of Todd’s — roughly that waterboarding sure was a crime when we prosecuted Japanese soldiers for it after World War II — by arguing that we actually pursued them for a bunch of other, worse atrocities.

Thursday morning Washington Post fact checker Glenn Kessler gave that argument three Pinocchios(out of four), calling it an “excellent example of political misdirection.” Kessler concluded:

“Cheney dismissed too cavalierly Todd’s question about the prosecution of Japanese soldiers for waterboarding. One could quibble about whether these practices were exactly like the techniques practiced by CIA interrogators. But Todd raised a legitimate question and, contrary to Cheney’s assertion, waterboarding was an important charge in a number of the lesser-profile cases. Moreover, waterboarding also resulted in at least one court martial during the Vietnam War.”

FWIW, none of these got into the true swamps of Cheney’s anti-logic, in which the acts committed failed to meet the standards of torture established specifically to allow the acts.

H/t: DB

Cheney Throws Bush Under The Bus On Torture Program

Tqfu0jmkzogjm2zgg5jf

Former VP Dick Cheney (R -Utah) | AP Photo – Manuel Balce Ceneta

TPM LiveWire

Fox News anchor Bret Baier asked the former vice president whether the agency deliberately kept Bush in the dark about its so-called enhanced interrogation techniques.

“Not true. Didn’t happen,” Cheney responded. “Read his book, he talks about it extensively in his memoirs. He was in fact an integral part of the program, he had to approve it before we went forward with it.”

Asked if there was ever a point where he knew more about the CIA’s activity than the President, Cheney said “I think he knew everything he needed to know and wanted to know about the program.”

Baier then asked if the former President knew about the “details” of the program. The report — which Cheney called “full of crap” — described brutal interrogation methods including waterboarding, extensive sleep deprivation, threats to harm detainees’ families and “rectal feeding.”

“I think he knew certainly the techniques, we did discuss the techniques,” Cheney said. “There was no effort on our part to keep him from that.”

“The notion that the committee’s trying to peddle, that somehow the agency was operating on a rogue basis, and we weren’t being told or the President wasn’t being told, is just a flat out lie,” he later added.

Conservative military charity faces serious allegations

Nidal Malik Hasan

Soldiers from Fort Hood march during the annual Veterans Day parade outside of Fort Hood in downtown Killeen, Texas, Wednesday, Nov. 11, 2009. Paul Sakuma/AP

Rachel Maddow

A Tea Party charity called “Move America Forward” is facing serious allegations of fraud — suggesting it may not be what it appears to be.  Complicating matters, the group has benefited from testimonials from Dick Cheney, Rick Perry, Rush Limbaugh and other high-profile Republicans.

Any time a charity is accused of fraud, it’s alarming, but especially during a war, there’s something even more outrageous about dubious charities that claim to be helping veterans and active-duty military personnel.
Last year, for example, Florida Gov. Rick Scott’s (R) lieutenant governor, Jennifer Carroll, was forced to abruptly resign over her connections to something called Allied Veterans of the World. The Florida-based non-profit was accused of trying to “defraud the public and governmental agencies by misrepresenting how much of its proceeds were donated to charities affiliated with Veterans Administration.”
This year, a Tea Party affiliated group called Move America Forward, is facing allegations every bit as serious. Kim Barker’s piece in The Daily Beast raises serious questions the charity will have to answer quickly.
Move America Forward calls itself the nation’s “largest grassroots pro-troop organization,” and has recruited a bevy of Republican luminaries, including former Presidents George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush and former Vice President Dick Cheney, to support its efforts.
Yet an examination of its fundraising appeals, tax records and other documents shows that Move America Forward has repeatedly misled donors and inflated its charitable accomplishments, while funneling millions of dollars in revenue to the men behind the group and their political consulting firms.
Barker’s report raises allegations that, if true, may point to illegalities, including the possible use the charity’s funds to subsidize conservative political action committees.
The driving force behind Move America Forward is Sal Russo, 67, the longtime political consultant who is listed on the 10-year-old charity’s tax returns as chief strategist.
Russo is better known for helping to form the Our Country Deserves Better PAC, also known as the Tea Party Express, one of the largest Tea Party groups in the country.  Consultants from his Sacramento-based firm, Russo, Marsh and Associates, also set up two other PACs, the Move America Forward Freedom PAC and the Conservative Campaign Committee, to aid conservative causes and candidates.
According to its tax returns, Move America Forward paid out more than $2.3 million – about 30% of the group’s overall expenditures – to Russo or his firm.
Barker talked to a former Tea Party Express consultant who said, “It was just so shady. With PACs, I know it’s dirty money – it’s politics. But this is a charity that’s supposed to be helping the troops.”
It’s not clear who, if anyone, is handling the day-to-day management of this charity. The organization’s former executive director left in 2012 “and does not seem to have been replaced.”
The same report goes on to detail instances in which Move America Forward falsely claimed to deliver care packages to troops, used photos in fundraising and promotional materials that belonged to other organizations, and even boasted to donors about a partnership with Walter Reed National Military Medical Center that never existed.
And yet, despite all of this, Dave Weigel notes that Move America Forward benefited from testimonials from Dick Cheney, Rick Perry, Rush Limbaugh and other high-profile Republicans.
Obviously, the charges raised in this investigatory piece remain in the realm of unproven allegations. But given the evidence and seriousness of the potential wrongdoing, it’s easy to imagine law enforcement taking a keen interest in Move America Forward’s records, bank accounts, and activities.

Bill Maher calls out all the debunked GOP lies on Obamacare

 

I missed this earlier because I was offline…

Daily Kos

Last night, Bill Maher ripped the Republicans for their repeated lies about Obamacare that they never bothered to apologize for, or show any shame.

You know, you just wanna go, wait, when did we switch over? What happened to yesterday’s lie? It’s still out there forever, like a plastic bag in a tree. But now we’re just using the new one?Yes, because what they do is they pass a zombie lie down to dumber and dumber people, who believe it more and more.

Hank Paulson may be over the one about climate change being a hoax, but it’s still good enough for Sean Hannity. Who then gets quoted by Michele Bachmann. Who forms the intellectual core of the thinking of Victoria Jackson. And when you think the zombie lie has finally gone to die at the idea hospice of the absolutely stupidest people on Earth, there it is being retweeted by Donald Trump.

Video and full transcript below:

And finally, New Rule: Now that there’s been an uproar over all the neocons who liedabout the Iraq War with no consequences, someone must tell me why there isn’t a similar uproar over all the Republicans who lied about Obamacare with no consequences.  (audience applause)  It’s been four years since the bill passed.  Has anybody come across even one death panel?  The next liberal to tell a Republican, “you’re entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts”, should really just admit they’ve never seen Fox News.  (audience cheering and applause)

Now, look, I get it that neither party has a monopoly on lying, and in fact they all do it so often, they’ve invented their own word for it — “I misspoke”.  But how come the rule for one party — the Republican Party — is that when they get caught in a lie, they don’t have to stop telling it?

They said Obamacare would use death panels.  It doesn’t.

They said it was a government takeover, and the insurance industry is making record profits.

They said it covered illegals.  It doesn’t.

They said it was a job killer.  It hasn’t been.

They said there were elves who bake cookies in trees.  Well, almost.  (audience laughter and applause)

Now for sure, Obama also told a lie when he said everybody who likes their health care plan can keep it.  And for about 2% of the population, that did turn out to be false.  The difference is, he stopped saying it!  He stepped up and said, you’re right, my bad, because he understands there’s this thing called observable reality.  (audience applause)

But on the Republican side, observable reality needs more study.  (audience laughter) Which is why their talking points that have been disproven, remain!  Like a guest who’s been asked to leave a party, but does not.

It reminds me of a horror movie where you think you’ve killed the lie, but it won’t stay dead.  Which is why I call them zombie lies.  (thunder crackles and camera shakes)

And finally, New Rule: Now that there’s been an uproar over all the neocons who liedabout the Iraq War with no consequences, someone must tell me why there isn’t a similar uproar over all the Republicans who lied about Obamacare with no consequences.  (audience applause)  It’s been four years since the bill passed.  Has anybody come across even one death panel?  The next liberal to tell a Republican, “you’re entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts”, should really just admit they’ve never seen Fox News.  (audience cheering and applause)

Now, look, I get it that neither party has a monopoly on lying, and in fact they all do it so often, they’ve invented their own word for it — “I misspoke”.  But how come the rule for one party — the Republican Party — is that when they get caught in a lie, they don’t have to stop telling it?

They said Obamacare would use death panels.  It doesn’t.

They said it was a government takeover, and the insurance industry is making record profits.

They said it covered illegals.  It doesn’t.

They said it was a job killer.  It hasn’t been.

They said there were elves who bake cookies in trees.  Well, almost.  (audience laughter and applause)

Now for sure, Obama also told a lie when he said everybody who likes their health care plan can keep it.  And for about 2% of the population, that did turn out to be false.  The difference is, he stopped saying it!  He stepped up and said, you’re right, my bad, because he understands there’s this thing called observable reality.  (audience applause)

But on the Republican side, observable reality needs more study.  (audience laughter) Which is why their talking points that have been disproven, remain!  Like a guest who’s been asked to leave a party, but does not.

It reminds me of a horror movie where you think you’ve killed the lie, but it won’t stay dead.  Which is why I call them zombie lies.  (thunder crackles and camera shakes)

Ooh, what an effect!  (audience laughter)  Excuse me, I have a weak heart.

Yes, zombie lies.  Remember “fracking doesn’t cause earthquakes”?  Zombie lie!  So stop saying it!

Voter fraud?  We studied it, it’s not an actual problem.  Stop zombie lying about it.

Their entire economic philosophy — cut taxes for the rich, and it trickles down — is a zombie lie!  (audience cheering and applause)

And all these zombie lies are still out there, roaming the countryside, neither alive nor dead.  Like Dick Cheney.  (audience laughter and applause)

Hungry for brains.  Like Dick Cheney.  (audience laughter)

I mean, we think we’ve eradicated one, but it turns out it’s just lying dormant in a cave full of bat blood, like the ebola virus.  Or Dick Cheney.  (audience laughter)

Dick Cheney, who did not even bother in his recent return from the dead to update the lies he told about Iraq the first time.  He’s still out there saying, “Well, Saddam was building a bomb, and he was working with al-Qaeda.”

What??  It’s like when Chuck Berry sings “Sweet Little Sixteen”.  You’re 90, man!

There is no shame in their game.  One week they’re out there saying, “No one will sign up for Obamacare.”

And the next week, “Oh, OK, they signed up?  Sure, OK, but they aren’t paying the premiums.”

“Oh they are?  OK, uh, well, they’re paying, but it’s not the young people.”

“Oh, it is?  It’s the young people?  OK.  Uh, OK, but it only covers you if you’re gay.”  (audience laughter)

You know, you just wanna go, wait, when did we switch over?  What happened to yesterday’s lie?  It’s still out there forever, like a plastic bag in a tree.  But now we’re just using the new one?

Yes, because what they do is they pass a zombie lie down to dumber and dumber people, who believe it more and more.

Hank Paulson may be over the one about climate change being a hoax, but it’s still good enough for Sean Hannity.  Who then gets quoted by Michele Bachmann.  Who forms the intellectual core of the thinking of Victoria Jackson.  And when you think the zombie lie has finally gone to die at the idea hospice of the absolutely stupidest people on Earth, there it is being retweeted by Donald Trump.

9 Times Dick Cheney and the Neocons Were Horrifically Wrong on Iraq

Cheney

Dick Cheney | no attribution

Just sayin’…

The Daily Banter

With former Bush administration officials and other such neoconservatives coming out of the woodwork to offer their super ideas on the situation in Iraq while slamming President Obama, it’s never been a better time for a Throwback Thursday post to remind everyone why Iraq is the mess it is right now. It’s important to know history, but when there’s a group of people intent on distorting it, things can get murky. So to prevent that, here’s a list of some of the Bushies’ greatest Iraq hits. It’s not comprehensive, as I have a finite lifespan and simply cannot dedicate the time necessary for documenting every falsehood about the Iraq war. So please settle for 9.

1. Donald Rumsfeld gives a cryptic answer when confronted with the reality of no link between Iraq and al Qaeda.

“There are known knowns. There are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns. That is to say there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns — the ones we don’t know we don’t know.”

 

2. Dick Cheney links Iraq and al Qaeda and then lies about it.

– Cheney, December 9, 2001:   “It’s been pretty well confirmed that [9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta] did go to Prague and he did meet with a senior official of the Iraqi intelligence service.”

–“No, I never said that.” Cheney, June 19, 2004

 

3. George W. Bush falsely claims Saddam Hussein tried to kill his father.

“After all, this is the guy that tried to kill my dad at one time.” (But it wasn’t true.)

 

4. Bill Kristol predicts the war will last 60 days.

“This is going to be a two month war, not an eight year war.”

 

5. Bush falsely claims Saddam tried to buy WMDs from “Africa.”

“The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein has recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.” (But Bush’s own envoy found nothing of the kind.”

 

6. John McCain says Iraq will pay for the war after Saddam is gone.

“Post-Saddam Hussein Iraq is going to be paid for by the Iraqis. They have billions of dollars of income. They have vast oil reserves, and I think they will pay for it.”

 

7. Bush says we’ve made progress in Iraq…repeatedly over the years.

“Those weapons of mass destruction gotta somewhere… Nope. No weapons over there. Maybe under here.”

 

9. Bush wants everyone to help stop the terrorists… and watch his golf shot.

“We must stop the terror. I call upon all nations to do everything they can to stop these terrorist killers. Thank you. Now watch this drive.”

 

Bonus item:
10. Cheney actually gets Iraq right… in 1994 when explaining why the U.S. didn’t overthrow Saddam in the Persian Gulf War.

“[I]f we had gone to Baghdad we would have been all alone. There wouldn’t have been anybody else with us. It would have been a U.S. occupation of Iraq. None of the Arab forces that were willing to fight with us in Kuwait were willing to invade Iraq. Once you got to Iraq and took it over and took down Saddam Hussein’s government, then what are you going to put in its place? That’s a very volatile part of the world.

And if you take down the central government in Iraq, you could easily end up seeing pieces of Iraq fly off. Part of it the Syrians would like to have, the west. Part of eastern Iraq the Iranians would like to claim. Fought over for eight years. In the north, you’ve got the Kurds. And if the Kurds spin loose and join with Kurds in Turkey, then you threaten the territorial integrity of Turkey.

It’s a quagmire if you go that far and try to take over Iraq. The other thing is casualties. Everyone was impressed with the fact that we were able to do our job with as few casualties as we had, but for the 146 Americans killed in action and for the families it wasn’t a cheap war. And the question for the president in terms of whether or not we went on to Baghdad and took additional casualties in an effort to get Saddam Hussein was, how many additional dead Americans is Saddam worth? And our judgment was not very many, and I think we got it right.”

(If only he had taken his own advice.)

Carney destroys Cheney and Bushies: “Which president was he talking about?”

Outgoing Press Secretary Jay Carney | Pool via Getty Images

Daily Kos

Writing from an alternate reality in the Wall Street Journal, liar, war criminal, and all around not-nice-person Dick Cheney had this to say about President Barack Obama’s strategy in Iraq, apparently without a hint of irony or self-awareness:

Rarely has a U.S. president been so wrong about so much at the expense of so many.

Ah, yes.  The Bush Administration’s rank incompetence and the consequencesthereof are rare indeed, but that’s not what Cheney was talking about.This fact was not lost on White House press secretary Jay Carney, who, at his last press briefing before stepping down, answered a question from ABC’s resident rightwing troll, Jonathan Karl.

Video is here, credit Tommy Christopher.  (Not sure how to embed DailyMotion videos, but I will if someone tells me how.)

KARL:  I wonder if you’ve had the chance to see this op-ed piece that former vice president Dick Cheney has written in the Wall Street Journal that has a rather critical tone to it toward the White House.  He says, “rarely has a U.S. president been so wrong about so much at theexpense of so many,” talking about the situation in Iraq and in the Middle East generally.CARNEY:  Which president was he talking about?

[laughter]

That’ll leave a mark.How nice of Carney to shove that quote back in Dick’s face during his last day as press secretary.  Oh, and rightwing troll and Benghazi fraudster Jonathan Karl as well.  They both got what they deserved.

Now if Cheney would just crawl back into his undisclosed location and shut up, we’d all be better off.

Megyn Kelly Confronts Dick Cheney: ‘History Has Proven’ You Were Wrong on Iraq

No attribution

Mediaite

Former Vice President Dick Cheney and his daughter Liz sat down with Megyn Kelly to talk about their joint column slamming President Obama on Iraq and a whole host of other foreign policy issues, but Kelly wasted no time in grilling Cheney on his role in the quagmire Iraq is in today.

She opened the interview by referring to Cheney as “the man who helped lead us into Iraq in the first place,” and told Cheney, in response to his claim that rarely has a president been so wrong about so much, “Time and time again, history has proven that you got it wrong as well in Iraq, sir.”

Kelly went down a laundry list of Dick Cheney quotes about Iraq that turned out to be monstrously wrong, but Cheney refuted all of that and kept focus on going after President Obama. He said the Obama administration “precipitated the current crisis” in Iraq, while Liz said they started their new group Alliance for a Strong America because “there’s a lot out there being said that’s frankly not true” where the Bush/Cheney administration is concerned.

Watch the video below, via Fox News: