[quote=“TCB”]Speaking about “lack of substantiation” I guess you haven’t noticed, or don’t care to comment on, the utter lack of 'substantiation in Mr. Suskinds book?
CNN, no Bush support there, is commenting that:
“if jumping to conclusions were an Olympic event, Suskind would be in Bejing right now…”
I suggest you familiarize yo self with the subtle differences between accusations and facts.Its going to be a real treat getting all those “off the records” comments into use as back-up for his ‘allegations.’
I, personally, do not think its a wise course to get all heated up about this ‘latest & greatest’ Bush expose’ tell all. Well…for this week at the least.[/quote]
Well, it depends whether Suskind’s claim that he has taped conversations with these CIA sources is accurate. At some point, he’s going to be asked to put up or shut up, so I’m inclined to believe him. I mean, Congress is holding hearings on this - they might very well ask him to produce those tapes as evidence.
Here’s a partial transcript of one conversation with Rob Richer, former associate deputy director of operations at the CIA:
[quote]Ron: The intent–the basic raison d’etre of this product is to get, is to create, here’s a letter with what’s in it. Okay, here’s what we want on the letter, we want it to be released as essentially a representation of something Habbush says. That’s all it says, that’s the one paragraph. And then you pass it to whomever to do it. To get it done.
Rob: It probably passed through five or six people. George probably showed it to me, but then passed it probably to Jim Pavitt, the DDO, who then passed it down to his chief of staff who passed it to me. Cause that’s how–you know, so I saw the original. I got a copy of it. But it was, there probably was–
Ron: Right. You saw the original with the White House stationery, but you didn’t–down the ranks, then it creates other paper.
Rob: Yeah, no, exactly. But I couldn’t tell you–again: I remember it happening, I remember a terrible brief kinda joking dialogue about it, but that was it.
. . .
Ron: Now this is from the Vice President’s Office is how you remembered it–not from the president?
Rob: No, no, no. What I remember is George saying, ‘we got this from’–basically, from what George said was ‘downtown.’
Ron: Which is the White House?
Rob: Yes. But he did not–in my memory–never said president, vice president, or NSC. Okay? But now–he may have hinted–just by the way he said it, it would have–cause almost all that stuff came from one place only: Scooter Libby and the shop around the vice president.
Ron: Yeah, right.
Rob: But he didn’t say that specifically. I would naturally–I would probably stand on my, basically, my reputation and say it came from the vice president.
Ron: Right, I’m with you, I’m with you. But there wasn’t anything in the writing that you remember saying the vice president.
Rob: Nope.
Ron: It just had the White House stationery.
Rob: Exactly right.[/quote]
ronsuskind.com/thewayoftheworld/transcripts/
I can’t believe people who are supposed to be literate Americans actually talk like this, but it does back up his book’s most controversial claim once you suss out what the hell they’re saying. And I think the Times’ review was overly harsh. Some claims were un-substantiated, but overall he did a pretty damn good job of backing things up.