Hillary Had No Questions on IWR. Thought "Dick Was Confused"

[K Gardner]

(there is a thread on this at GD, but I thought the fact that she asked no questions and "relied on her husband's advisors" was worthy of it's own post, edited to add more quoted text)

Aug. 25, 2007 Concord Monitor: In 2002, Clinton voted to authorize President Bush to go to war in Iraq. Unlike other Democratic presidential candidates who cast the same vote, Clinton has refused to renounce her decision, arguing that the fault lies solely with Bush for launching the conflict.


From the Concord Monitor Interview Dec 21,2007

Clinton: "No, it wasn't Colin Powell. it was Condi Rice. Condi Rice told me specifically when I was still weighing all of the evidence, and I had been to the White House one last time -- I think, if I'm not mistaken, it was Oct. 8 -- and I'd had the whole presentation by the CIA and others and I hadn't asked any questions, I had listened. And I went back to my office, and Condi Rice called me and said, You didn't ask any questions, do you have any questions? I said I only have one: Will you use this authorization to put inspectors back in, so that we can find out whether any of this is true, how much WMD he still has or has reconstituted? She said, Yes, that's what it's intended to do. I think Dick might have gotten confused."

Monitor: And you had no reason to doubt her?

Clinton: "I did not. Because -- certainly I didn't rely on the Bush administration. I did a lot of my own due diligence, I talked to a lot of people in my husband's administration, I talked to Tony Blair, I talked to a lot of sources, and I had the same question: Do you think he still has these kinds of capacities? And the rationale made sense to me."

http://www.yourconcord.com/primaryblog/clinton_rice_linked_iraq_vote_inspections

[MannyGoldstein]

1. People Who Don't Ask Questions Usually Have Their Minds Made Up

I guess it was a simple vote for her.

[K Gardner]

2. These 1:1 interviews just don't really go well for her! Too unscripted, no time to triangulate :-)

[TwilightZone]

3. The article clearly indicates that she did indeed have a question.

Will you use this authorization to put inspectors back in, so that we can find out whether any of this is true, how much WMD he still has or has reconstituted?"

A question, no?

[K Gardner]

4. Yes, after Rice called her back to ask her if she had A question, she did ask that.. and

the answer she got was this:

"She said, Yes, that's what it's intended to do. I think Dick might have gotten confused."

That raises MORE questions in my mind than I would initially have had. Dick might have gotten confused.. didn't raise another question, or hell, a plethora of them? Am I the only one who is aghast at this?

[TwilightZone]

7. You're misreading the article. Condi didn't make the Dick statement; Hillary did.

She is stating that Condi claimed that the administration's intent was to let the inspectors go back in. Hillary is pointing out that Cheney pursued a different course of action, so he "must have gotten confused."

It's sarcasm.

[K Gardner]

8. I don't read it that way, and I've read it several times. It's just a really bizarre statement,

either way.

[TwilightZone]

9. Not really. It's clearly sarcasm.

The confusion is because the Monitor didn't bother to put quotation marks around Condi's statement.

Had they included them, I suspect the meaning would be clearer:

"Will you use this authorization to put inspectors back in, so that we can find out whether any of this is true, how much WMD he still has or has reconstituted? She said, 'Yes, that's what it's intended to do.' I think Dick might have gotten confused."

It's the only way the statement makes sense. Condi Rice is never going to admit that anyone in the administration was ever confused about Iraq, especially Dick Cheney.

[K Gardner]

10. I'd like to see the Monitor correct it, if that's the case. And I still find it hard to imagine

HRC trying to include sarcasm in a serious discussion about ONE of the most controversial votes she has ever made. Hillary doesn't do sarcasm well. I hope to see some clarification on this at some point.

[TwilightZone]

12. Look at it from this perspective - would Condi Rice *ever* admit to confusion on Iraq?

No, of course. That leaves only one option.

[K Gardner]

13. Yes, that DOES make sense, but why would Hillary just out of the blue blurt out:

"I think Dick was confused". See, that makes no sense either. I've looked at dozens of responses to this on the other thread and still can't get a good sense of it. It may have just been bad reporting from the Monitor, a badly worded response.. but either way I think it warrants a followup :-) Thanks for your responses !

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2519659&mesg_id=2519659

[TwilightZone]

16. Actually, I think that it makes perfect sense, when viewed as sarcasm.

Obviously, a video of the interview would help, but I can definitely imagine Hillary making a statement exactly like that. It quite succinctly says, "the administration is full of crap, especially Dick Cheney. They lied to us."

Put a pause and an eye roll :eyes: just before the "Dick was confused" statement, and it works! ;)

[K Gardner]

17. I'm sending emoticons to The Monitor !! :-)

[TwilightZone]

20. Hehe...

As silly as they often seem, sometimes they are just too perfect for a given situation. In this one, I think that it fits quite well.

[JackORoses]

34. so your interpretation is not based off of video, yet you claim it as reality?

"but I can definitely imagine Hillary making a statement exactly like that"

I see, now I'm starting to get it. This is just your interpretation of a written text.
Have you stopped to think that maybe those extra quotes were not left out, but they actually didn't belong?

[TwilightZone]

18. Thanks for the link, but I am NOT getting into this again. Hehe....

:)

[Dems Will Win]

30. THe way I read it is that Cheney was making all sorts of we need to go to war noises

Hillary was asking if this meant inspectors or war and Condi replied "Dick must have gotten confused". Nowhere in the Monitor piece did it say Hillary added that. Condi said it.

What proves that is the reporter then asked "Did you have any reason to doubt that"? and Hillary replied "I did not".

do some homework first and read the whole link

[Tom Rinaldo]

5. It was even a good question actually

If that had been done in good faith there never would have been a war. The inspectors did go in, but they weren't allowed to finish their job to "find out whether any of this is true, how much WMD he still has or has reconstituted" Had inspectors been allowed to complete their mission we would have found out that Hussein had no WMD's left, and no then current nuclear program. Actually it was an important question to ask, but because the Bush Administration was inherently so untrustworthy the answer didn't matter. They could not be trusted. John Kerry fell into this trap also. There should never have been a blank check given to Bush no matter what he or Condi or Powell said.

But a lot of otherwise decent Democrats fell for that and I am angry about it to this day. Still I am confident that John Kerry would have made a good President, even so. Some Democrats were fooled even worse than Kerry, or than Clinton. Some defended the actual Iraq invasion at the time - the pulling out of U.N. inspectors and U.S. troops going into Iraq, but some give better apologies today.

[TwilightZone]

11. If memory serves, Bush further complicated the issue by briefly sending the inspectors back in.

So, in "Bush speak", Condi's statement is true in her very limited sense of the term. They did send them back in, but they never had an intent of letting them determine if Iraq had WMD or not.

[Tom Rinaldo]

19. Yes they went back in, and it wasn't even for that brief a period

The inspections kept "dragging on" from the Bush perspective because they never found anything. Bush always intended to invade Iraq before the hottest time of the year set in there, since he and most everyone else figured Hussein would at least use poison gas against our troops which if true meant CU.S. troops would need to put on special protective suits which they would almost literally roast inside of.

Bush was unwilling to allow U.N. inspectors to keep looking for WMD because if he waited any longer the invasion would have needed to be delayed for six more months - which was expensive among other things since all the troops were already waiting near Iraq's borders for the go ahead. So Bush accused U.N. inspectors of being infiltrated with Iraq informers (which is why he said they couldn't find the WMD's) and he told them to get out of his way, or risk being attacked themselves. End of U.N. inspections program.

[TwilightZone]

21. Agreed.

The entire Iraq WMD theater production was, of course, just a ruse. The plan was always the same. Little nuisances like the UN inspectors weren't about to stop War Boy.

In hindsight, it seems unfathomable, of course, when you put all the pieces together. It's difficult to comprehend the level of deception, greed, and blind ambition that led us into Iraq.

Even now, I'm not certain that I understand the motivation. Oil, power, greed? The trifecta?

[JackORoses]

33. it also states thatCondi wast he one who called Hillary and asked if she had questions

Why, if Hillary was doing her due diligence as sheclaims, was she not the one making the call in the first place?

She was doing a heckuva job investigating, all right.

[bahrbearian]

6. I talked to a Poodle and I think Barney was in the Room.

"I talked to Tony Blair"

[indimuse]

14. Desperate people post ...DESPERATE FALSITIES!!!

Do like the pic of Hillary though ...

[K Gardner]

15. Look, I didn't say it. She did. Sorry. I'm just trying to figure it out.

If you can help with that, please do instead of slinging an insult at me. Thanks :-)

[hayu_lol]

22. Hillary, and many other Senators voted for the proposal that BushCo gave them...

That included all the intelligence briefings(including those made up by the Iraq Study Group--a Wolfowitz, Pearl, Rummy, Cheney and Bush) group who changed the actual intelligence to what they wanted it to be from what it actually was. Rummy was questioned by the inspectors and asked where are these WMD? He replied(and there is video on this one)that the WMD were located north, south, west and east of Tikrit. Because supposedly BushCo knew exactly where the WMD were, the inspectors asked for their location. Both Blix and the other guy asked that question.

With that intelligence, who actually would question the President when he clearly said he would put the inspectors back in, work with the UN until there was no other way, and then, only then, would he use force and invade Iraq.

At that time, the streets of the world were filling up with protestors in the millions. Here in the states, the numbers every week of people taking to the streets were increasing tremendously.

I believe that BushCo decided to go immediately because he saw that the protests were having an effect on what his plans really were. This is confirmed by the fact that he immediately invaded...just a short bit of time after this briefing, approval vote(under the terms that Bush offered)and Bush's almost immediate act to get the inspectors out of Iraq.

Bush was undoubtedly pushed/rushed a bit by the protests which were making the news, both tv and the print media.

The rest is history. Once troops were engaged, it is really difficult to cut funding to those same troops. Think to yourself how harsh the opposition would publically flay anyone who tried to cut troop funding.

Thats the way I remember it. The net at that time was convinced that there were no WMD, but we probably had more time to access more sources than either the pols or the media did.

Both DU and democrats.com were convinced that there were none of these weapons. Colin Powell's lame presentations, Rummy's seemingly phony statements and answers didn't hold water.

Additionally, the Congress was solidly in lockstep with it's Republic majority.

To say that Hillary, all by herself voted for the war is more than just simple nonsense. None of them voted for a war. They voted for action with the inspectors and the UN with possible war as a last resort. Even the term war is incorrect. No war has been declared.

[K Gardner]

24. Your summary is relevant and spot-on, at least as I remember it. I wasn't

remotely implying that HRC more reponsible than anyone else, just really puzzled by the statement in The Monitor. It just seemed bizarre.

But back to your analysis of the run-up to the war: I certainly do remember there was virtually NO opposition to it from the MSM. Having disconnected a bit from my internet "sources" at that time, I felt something just very wrong about that. It didn't seem right, remembering the protests in the late 60s and even the protests at the 2001 Inauguration, that so many voices would be silenced. I think an overarching theme here (certainly a bit off the original OP but still) is the fact that protests have virtually gone uncovered and, with all the safeguards now in place with wiretapping, no habeas corpus and control of the MSM, it seems protests of the old variety have been rendered moot. Ah... but I digress ! I do that a lot. Thank you for your thoughtful response :-)

[Donna Zen]

23. What a strange focus

First, there was a group called "The Iraq Reconstruction Group" meeting openly at the request of the bush junta during the summer of 2002. Everyone knew what was going on. Don't believe me...read George Packer. WMD? How about imminent threat? Senator Clinton's husband had received the PNAC letter in 1998 advocating war with Saddam, and it was known by the Clintons that those signatories were now running the government. That should have provided a clue. Of course many of her advisers like Holbrooke and Lee Feinstein thought that taking care of Saddam once and for all, was a good idea. Anyway, if a senator wanted to be sure that this resolution was for inspections only then they had plenty of opportunity to vote "yes" on the Levin Amendment. Three of the four generals who testified to the congress advised them to not provide a "trigger" in the resolution. The Pentagon knew that bush wanted to go to war.

And yet all of this takes the focus of the real issue: was giving the president a green-light to go to war with Iraq the right thing to do? Was a war in Iraq strategically a good policy? Plenty of countries have bad leadership and a cache of dangerous weapons, since bush had already announced his policy of preemptive war, we needed leadership that understands how anti-American it is to randomly bomb people who pose no imminent threat.

I'm sorry, but reading Senator Clinton's statement is like hearing from someone who's been living on another planet.

[K Gardner]

25. One of the posters here on DU provided me with a copy of the 1998 letter to

Bill Clinton and I nearly fell over. It honestly made my stomach churn. All the more reason I was puzzled to read this interview today with HRC and have been trying to make sense of it. Thanks for the thoughtful response :-)

[Donna Zen]

26. Simple really

There were Democrats who believed that invading Iraq was the right thing to do. George Packer thinks that they just wanted to be sure that they received an invitation to the victory parade...I guess that's snark.

When I was at this year's Kos, Steve Clemons surprised me when he said that during the run-up to war, the very people who were advocating for war on teevee, were telling him privately that they didn't think it would work. These were people from within the administration.

I saw President Clinton the night before the senate vote. He'd come to speak in Maine. Anyway, right before Clinton took the stage, the announcement was made that both of our congressmen had voted "no." A cheer went up. The first thing that Clinton said after thanking the organizers, was that while he realized that presidents can't do everything they want (pause for a lip-biting chuckle) that a president can always take the country to war. I guess he didn't want us to get our hopes up. Anyway, he didn't say anything getting inspectors in; he said war. Everyone in that audience knew what was coming. That's why we tried to organize against first the vote, and then the invasion before it happened.

If Clinton is as smart as everyone claims (I believe she is) then her statement is insulting.

[K Gardner]

27. Wow.. just wow. That is really another stomach-churning story. And I'm really proud and

fortunate to have the freedom (at least today) to be part of a community like this with people who are 'in the know'. Because god knows, our here in the Homeland, we don't know jack. Except what we're allowed to know. Thank you again for your insight.

:yourock:

[Skittles]

28. she was fooled - by someone who STOLE THE ELECTION

all this "I was misled" shit - HRC and Edwards forever have BLOOD ON THEIR HANDS for their HIDEOUSLY POOR JUDGEMENT.

[zulchzulu]

29. Wow, that photo is classic!

Yeesh....

[K Gardner]

31. I thought so, too. Evidently, she'd given out candy canes to the reporters.

Or her staff had, or whatev. :-):shrug:

[Carrieyazel]

32. Hillary is still falling back on that Condo Rice "assurance".

That right there makes her absolutely unacceptable. That's her excuse.

[K Gardner]

35. Kicking for Christmas!

[ClarkUSA]

36. Gee, Hillary's amazing FP "experience" told her she had NO reason to DOUBT Condi Rice, eh?

And her FP "experience" also told her she didn't have to read the NIE or listen to her anti-IWR Senate colleagues' (i.e., Sens. Leahy, Graham)
and others' (Gen. Clark) warnings that voting for IWR would be a big mistake.

But somehow, SHE TRUSTED BUSH AND CONDI RICE. :crazy:

[no name no slogan]

37. ANYBODY who voted for the IWR should be immediately disqualified

If thousands of Americans were able to see through the IWR farce, so should any of our elected politicians.

[BootinUp]

38. Sometimes I wonder if people even read the OP nt

[Beacool]

39. I never expected nor wanted Hillary, Edwards or any other Democrat

to apologize for that vote. I don't blame them for the rush to war, I specially don't blame senators from NY, NJ, PA & CT who voted for the resolution. Instead, I place the responsibility where it should be, on the shoulders of Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld.

All this chest beating and pointing fingers at fellow Democrats is not productive. We should be concentrating on defeating our real political enemy, not each other.