Crispy Rice Treats - Part V
From the Ben-Veniste Segment of the Rice Testimony:BEN-VENISTE: Good morning, Dr. Rice.This guy is SMOOTH... (and for the record, in this instance, that is NOT a compliment.) The transcript looks pretty vanilla, but this guys mannerisms are something to behold. If I were Dr. Rice (and thank God, I'm not), I'd have replied, "Let's dispense with the pleasantries; I am under oath, you are not and I think you're a politically motivated hack." Let's get to the meat of it, shall we?
RICE: Good morning.
BEN-VENISTE: Nice to see you again.
RICE: Nice to see you.
BEN-VENISTE: I want to ask you some questions about the August 6, 2001, PDB. We had been advised in writing by CIA on March 19, 2004, that the August 6th PDB was prepared and self-generated by a CIA employee. Following Director Tenet's testimony on March 26th before us, the CIA clarified its version of events, saying that questions by the president prompted them to prepare the August 6th PDB.First clue that this guy is politically motivated is that he plays to the anti-Bush crowd in the room. That applause is out of place in a serious discussion and Ben-Veniste, nor the chairs, address it. I believe they should have. This isn't the British House of Commons, it is a serious hearing about a serious matter.
Now, you have said to us in our meeting together earlier in February, that the president directed the CIA to prepare the August 6th PDB.
The extraordinary high terrorist attack threat level in the summer of 2001 is well-documented. And Richard Clarke's testimony about the possibility of an attack against the United States homeland was repeatedly discussed from May to August within the intelligence community, and that is well-documented.
You acknowledged to us in your interview of February 7, 2004, that Richard Clarke told you that al-Qaida cells were in the United States.
BEN-VENISTE: Did you tell the president, at any time prior to August 6th, of the existence of al-Qaida cells in the United States?
RICE: First, let me just make certain ...
BEN-VENISTE: If you could just answer that question, because I only have a very limited ...
RICE: I understand, Commissioner, but it's important ...
BEN-VENISTE: Did you tell the president ...
RICE: ... that I also address ...
(APPLAUSE)
It's also important that, Commissioner, that I address the other issues that you have raised. So I will do it quickly, but if you'll just give me a moment.
BEN-VENISTE: Well, my only question to you is whether you ...
RICE: I understand, Commissioner, but I will ...
BEN-VENISTE: ... told the president.
RICE: If you'll just give me a moment, I will address fully the questions that you've asked.
First of all, yes, the August 6th PDB was in response to questions of the president _ and that since he asked that this be done. It was not a particular threat report. And there was historical information in there about various aspects of al-Qaida's operations.
Dick Clarke had told me, I think in a memorandum _ I remember it as being only a line or two _ that there were al-Qaida cells in the United States.
Now, the question is, what did we need to do about that?
And I also understood that that was what the FBI was doing, that the FBI was pursuing these al-Qaida cells. I believe in the August 6th memorandum it says that there were 70 full field investigations under way of these cells. And so there was no recommendation that we do something about this; the FBI was pursuing it.
I really don't remember, Commissioner, whether I discussed this with the president.
BEN-VENISTE: Thank you.
RICE: I remember very well that the president was aware that there were issues inside the United States. He talked to people about this. But I don't remember the al-Qaida cells as being something that we were told we needed to do something about.
Ben-Veniste starts to spin a tale that he hopes you are going to buy. He is hoping, as Hamilton did earlier, that Rice will let him get away with a few details. And he is going to attempt to play "Gotcha Politics" with Dr. Rice. Fortunately, Rice isn't going to let him get away with it. Numerous times, throughout Rice's testimony, Ben-Veniste tries to shout Rice down. It doesn't work.
Rice stands up to Ben-Veniste and it is clear when you watch the testimony that Rice got the better of it. By the end of the segment, Ben-Veniste can't even look at Rice and spends a lot of time looking down and/or away.
More on the content after this next clip:
BEN-VENISTE: Isn't it a fact, Dr. Rice, that the August 6th PDB warned against possible attacks in this country? And I ask you whether you recall the title of that PDB?Let me explain what Ben-Veniste is trying to do: he is trying to create the illusion that this memo gave a warning to the President and that the President didn't act on it. That is not what the memo is about. Rice doesn't let him get away with it and talks about the CONTENT of the memo at which point Ben-Veniste unsuccessfully tries to change the subject.
RICE: I believe the title was, Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States.
Now, the ...
BEN-VENISTE: Thank you.
RICE: No, Mr. Ben-Veniste ...
BEN-VENISTE: I will get into the ...
RICE: I would like to finish my point here.
BEN-VENISTE: I didn't know there was a point.
RICE: Given that _ you asked me whether or not it warned of attacks.
BEN-VENISTE: I asked you what the title was.
RICE: You said, did it not warn of attacks. It did not warn of attacks inside the United States. It was historical information based on old reporting. There was no new threat information. And it did not, in fact, warn of any coming attacks inside the United States.
BEN-VENISTE: Now, you knew by August 2001 of al-Qaida involvement in the first World Trade Center bombing, is that correct?
You knew that in 1999, late '99, in the millennium threat period, that we had thwarted an al-Qaida attempt to blow up Los Angeles International Airport and thwarted cells operating in Brooklyn, New York, and Boston, Massachusetts.
As of the August 6th briefing, you learned that al-Qaida members have resided or traveled to the United States for years and maintained a support system in the United States.
And you learned that FBI information since the 1998 blind sheik warning of hijackings to free the blind sheik indicated a pattern of suspicious activity in the country up until August 6th consistent with preparation for hijackings. Isn't that so?
RICE: Do you have other questions that you want me to answer as a part of the sequence?
BEN-VENISTE: Well, did you not _ you have indicated here that this was some historical document. And I am asking you whether it is not the case that you learned in the PDB memo of August 6th that the FBI was saying that it had information suggesting that preparations _ not historically, but ongoing, along with these numerous full field investigations against al-Qaida cells, that preparations were being made consistent with hijackings within the United States?
RICE: What the August 6th PDB said, and perhaps I should read it to you...
BEN-VENISTE: We would be happy to have it declassified in full at this time, including its title.
(APPLAUSE)
RICE: I believe, Mr. Ben-Veniste, that you've had access to this PDB. But let me just...
BEN-VENISTE: But we have not had it declassified so that it can be shown publicly, as you know.
RICE: I believe you've had access to this PDB _ exceptional access. But let me address your question.
BEN-VENISTE: Nor could we, prior to today, reveal the title of that PDB.
RICE: May I address the question, sir?
The fact is that this August 6th PDB was in response to the president's questions about whether or not something might happen or something might be planned by al-Qaida inside the United States. He asked because all of the threat reporting or the threat reporting that was actionable was about the threats abroad, not about the United States.
This particular PDB had a long section on what bin Laden had wanted to do _ speculative, much of it _ in '97, '98; that he had, in fact, liked the results of the 1993 bombing.
RICE: It had a number of discussions of _ it had a discussion of whether or not they might use hijacking to try and free a prisoner who was being held in the United States _ Ressam. It reported that the FBI had full field investigations under way.
And we checked on the issue of whether or not there was something going on with surveillance of buildings, and we were told, I believe, that the issue was the courthouse in which this might take place.
Commissioner, this was not a warning. This was a historic memo -- historical memo prepared by the agency because the president was asking questions about what we knew about the inside.
BEN-VENISTE: Well, if you are willing ...
RICE: Now, we had already taken ...
BEN-VENISTE: If you are willing to declassify that document, then others can make up their minds about it.
Let me ask you a general matter, beyond the fact that this memorandum provided information, not speculative, but based on intelligence information, that bin Laden had threatened to attack the United States and specifically Washington, D.C.
There was nothing reassuring, was there, in that PDB?
RICE: Certainly not. There was nothing reassuring.
But I can also tell you that there was nothing in this memo that suggested that an attack was coming on New York or Washington, D.C. There was nothing in this memo as to time, place, how or where. This was not a threat report to the president or a threat report to me.
BEN-VENISTE: We agree that there were no specifics. Let me move on, if I may.
RICE: There were no specifics, and, in fact, the country had already taken steps through the FAA to warn of potential hijackings. The country had already taken steps through the FBI to task their 56 field offices to increase their activity. The country had taken the steps that it could given that there was no threat reporting about what might happen inside the United States.
This is nothing more than partisan politics. If John Kerry thinks the Bush/Cheney re-election campaign, Rush Limbaugh, and Sean Hannity are the Republican Attack Squad (tm), we certainly can identify a non-comm in the Democrat Attack Squad (tm). Fortunately, this guy is not all that competent in dealing with Rice.
Here is more:
BEN-VENISTE: We have explored that and we will continue to with respect to the muscularity and the specifics of those efforts.Here, Ben-Veniste tries to paint the picture that the President was not taking his job seriously while vacationing in Texas. This is an old tactic that just doesn't work if you know anything at all about the Presidency. A President is NEVER off-duty. NEVER. The President is equally capable of running the government from his ranch in Crawford as he is at the White House. Wherever the President goes, all the resources of the White House go with him. Every time I hear this argument, I know I'm dealing with partisan political hack. And apparently, so did Dr. Rice.
The president was in Crawford, Texas, at the time he received the PDB, you were not with him, correct?
RICE: That is correct.
BEN-VENISTE: Now, was the president, in words or substance, alarmed or in any way motivated to take any action, such as meeting with the director of the FBI, meeting with the attorney general, as a result of receiving the information contained in the PDB?
RICE: I want to repeat that when this document was presented, it was presented as, yes, there were some frightening things _ and by the way, I was not at Crawford, but the president and I were in contact and I might have even been, though I can't remember, with him by video link during that time.
The president was told this is historical information. I'm told he was told this is historical information and there was nothing actionable in this. The president knew that the FBI was pursuing this issue. The president knew that the director of central intelligence was pursuing this issue. And there was no new threat information in this document to pursue.
Mark's Remarks
If after reading the transcript of this commissioner's questions and viewing the testimony on video, you still think that this guy is not a hack and this commission has not become merely a headhunting exercise; there is something wrong with you.
Why is this guy on the commission? He represents everything wrong with Washington. He is a hack who has never served the nation in elected office, he is not a terror expert, he is nothing more than a self-promoting scandal seeker with orders to attack. But, once you realize that the mightily non-partisan (NOT!) Tom Daschole named him to this commission, you begin to realize why he is here.....on to the testimony, or should I say badgering.....
1. Notice first, that Bin Vineste is trying to badger Dr. Rice into short answers without explanation so he can spin them....Notice the agitation as Dr. Rice refuses to give in....and notice how Dr. Rice is able to win the day....
2. Bin Vineste is trying to create a fantastical view that Bush knew the attack was going to happen and did nothing. That comes straight out of black helicopter theories 101. It is shameful that someone who is charged with seeking the truth is instead trying to invent a scenario simply for partisan politics. Again, I ask, why is THIS MORON on this commission other than to attack the President?
Notice everytime Dr. Rice goes into disproving his little theories that Bin Vinest tries to change the subject or interrupt her. Not only is it rude and uncouth, but it also reveals that HE DOES NOT WANT TO HEAR THE TRUTH OR HER TESTIMONY, HE ONLY WANTS SMEAR MATERIAL. This commission is nothing more than a farce because of the likes and tactics of Bin Vineste.
3. Like other hamsters, including John "the F stand for Flip Flop" Kerry, they try to bring in the President being in Texas, like he is snoozing. Just yesterday, Kerry tried to use this in a town hall meeting. Well, isn't it better to be in Texas with your advisors at the ready than to go skiiing in Idaho during the first anniversary of the Iraq War? Just a thought. Back to point. Bin Vineste here tries to paint the myth that the President goes and doesn't do anything. Even on vacation, the President is briefed every day. This is simply partisan spinning, not even based on fact; and it clues us in that Bin Vineste is nothing more than a deplorable hack out for blood.
Richard bin Vineste has helped hijack this commission from its purpose. Its purpose was to find facts and to offer recommendations into how we can better prepare. Under the influence of partisan, no-core, hatespewing hacks like bin Vineste, this commission has gone off purpose and is betraying the trust and mission given it by the American people through the government.
