Here’s another one that I’m a little behind on, but wanted to mention anyway. (Sometimes I use this site as a notepad for things I might want to reference again later…)
We already know Dick Cheney has been the worst abuser of the myth surrounding the “link” between al Queda and Saddam Hussein. When a 9/11 Commission staff report explained that there was no connection between the two, Cheney not only lashed out at the media for reporting this inconvenient fact, he suggested that he knows more than the Commission does.
In an interview on CNBC, Cheney was asked if knows information that the 9/11 panel does not know. Cheney replied, “Probably.”
It seemed, at first, like typical White House arrogance, but the problem is far worse. Cheney spoke to Commission members (with Bush at his side) and was supposed to share relevant information. His “probably” answer suggests he may have held back a bit. As the Center for American Progress put it:
The 9/11 Commission did a thorough investigation and specifically and definitively found there was no evidence of a cooperation, end of story. However, if he does have additional information to back his claims, that means he deliberately withheld vital evidence from the national investigation into 9/11, which was supposed to have total access to all relevant information. What does Cheney know?
It’s not an unreasonable question. In fact, lots of people are asking it right now, including Commission members. As panelist Richard Ben-Veniste said yesterday:
“[I]n terms of collaborative relationship in operations targeting the United States, we have come to the conclusion that there is no evidence that we have seen to support that. If there is additional information, we’re happy to look at it, and we think we should get it.”
Cheney, however, seems to believe differently.
It’s not that the VP is backing away from his claims about having more information; it’s that he’s feeling bashful about making that information available to those who need it (and have clearance to see it). This strategy is clearly not working. As the New York Times explained the other day:
Mr. Cheney said he had lots of documents to prove his claims. We have heard that before, but Mr. Cheney always seems too pressed for time or too concerned about secrets to share them. Last September, Mr. Cheney’s adviser, Mary Matalin, explained to The Washington Post that Mr. Cheney had access to lots of secret stuff. She said he had to “tiptoe through the land mines of what’s sayable and not sayable” to the public, but that “his job is to connect the dots.”
The message, if we hear it properly, is that when it comes to this critical issue, the vice president is not prepared to offer any evidence beyond the flimsy-to-nonexistent arguments he has used in the past, but he wants us to trust him when he says there’s more behind the screen. So far, when it comes to Iraq, blind faith in this administration has been a losing strategy.
In response to the controversy generated by the “probably” answer, Cheney’s office has crafted a wholly unpersuasive response to media questions.
“The administration has cooperated fully with the commission and given them unprecedented access to highly classified information,” Cheney spokesman Kevin Kellems said.
But that’s not really the point, now is it? I’m sure the Commission is thrilled to have access to classified materials to which they are entitled, but the point is whether Cheney showed panelists all of the information they need.
This apparently has not gone unnoticed.
The leaders of the Sept. 11 commission called on Vice President Dick Cheney on Friday to turn over any intelligence reports that would support the White House’s insistence that there was a close relationship between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda.
The commission’s chairman, Thomas H. Kean, and its vice chairman, Lee H. Hamilton, said they wanted to see any additional information in the administration’s possession….
[…]
Mr. Kean and Mr. Hamilton said that, in particular, they wanted any information available to back Mr. Cheney’s suggestion that one of the hijackers might have met in Prague in April 2001 with an Iraqi intelligence agent, a meeting that the panel’s staff believes did not take place.
[…]
“It sounds like the White House has evidence that we didn’t have,” Mr. Hamilton said in an phone interview. “I would like to see the evidence that Mr. Cheney is talking about.”
Wouldn’t we all.
So, how about it, Dick? Care to fully comply with the needs and requests of the 9/11 Commission? If not, why not? And if so, why weren’t you willing to cooperate in the first place?