www.americablog.com
by John in DC - 8/30/2006 10:10:00 AM


I'm just finishing up Ron Suskind's excellent book, "The One Percent Doctrine." It contains lots of infuriating scoops, including the following on pp. 340-341:

"In mid November 2004, a few weeks after the President's reelection... Cheney wanted a portion of a particular CIA report declassified and made public. [CIA analytical chief Jami] Miscik knew the report ?- it was about the complex, often catalytic connections between the war in Iraq and the wider war against terrorism. The item the Vice President wanted declassified was a small part that might lead one to believe that the war was helping the broader campaign against violent Jihadists. The report, she knew, concluded nothing of the sort?. To release that small segment would be willfully misleading. She told the briefer to tell Cheney that she didn't think that was such a good idea. The Vice President expressed his outrage to Porter Goss."
Porter Goss then had one of his deputies call the analyst and tell her "Saying no to the Vice President is the wrong answer."


So many things at work here. First, Cheney is caught red handed trying to falsely link Iraq to the larger war on terror (something he'd done repeatedly). And second, when he gets caught doing it, Cheney still pushes ahead.

At what point will Dick Cheney be held responsible for intentionally misleading the American public about the war in Iraq and the overall war on terror? Is this nothing more than a propaganda war to the Bush White House?