WAXMAN takes on the liars in the White House
fromthewilderness.com
Continued from last post...
Here is the story on Waxman's website:
July 29, 2003
More Questions for NSA Rice
Rep. Waxman asks National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice to answer questions about the extent of her knowledge of Iraq nuclear claims, whether there were White House efforts to mislead the public, and how the discredited uranium claim got into the NIE.
house.gov
The following is the text from a scanned version of the letter.
------------------------------------
July 29, 2003
The Honorable Condoleezza Rice
Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs
The White House
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Dr. Rice:
On June 10, 2003, I wrote to you to seek answers to basic questions regarding the Bush Administration's repeated claims that Iraq sought uranium from Africa. I asked why you claimed on national television that no White House officials "knew that there were doubts and suspicions" about these claims when both the CIA and the State Department's intelligence bureau had raised significant concerns with White House officials prior to the President's State of the Union address. I also wanted to know who in the Administration had expressed doubts about the information, who had been briefed on those concerns, and what role Vice President Cheney or his office played in this matter.
To date, I have received no response to these inquiries. Therefore, I am writing to renew my request that you answer these questions and provide the information requested.
In addition, since my June 10, 2003, letter to you, there have been a number of significant new developments. The conflict between your statements and those of your deputy, Stephen Hadey, raise new issues about what you knew about the discredited uranium claim and whether you and other White House officials have sought to mislead the public about this matter. Moreover, the newly released National Intelligence Estimate contains an inexplicable sentence about the uranium claim. I ask that you respond to additional questions about these developments.
Your Knowledge of the CIA Doubts about the Uranium Claim
One important new development is the conflict between your public statements and those of your primary deputy, Stephen Hadley, the Deputy National Security Advisor. You have asserted repeatedly that no doubts or suspicions about the uranium claims or the underlying documents were communicated to senior officials in the Bush Administration before the President's State of the Union address. For example, when you were asked about this issue on June 8, 2003, on Meet the Press, you made the following statement:
------------------------------------------------------------
The Honorable Condoleezza Rice July 29, 2003 Page 2
"We did not know at the time no one knew at the time, in our circles maybe someone knew down in the bowels of the agency, but no one in our circles knew that there were doubts and suspicions that this might be a forgery. Of course, it was information that was mistaken." 1
Similarly, when you appeared on This Week with George Stephanopoulos on the same day, you repeated this statement:
"George, somebody, somebody down may have known. But I will tell you that when this issue was raised with the intelligence community.. . [t]he intelligence community did not know at that time, or at levels that got to us, that this, that there was serious questions about this report." 2
You continued to make similar statements in the following weeks. On July 13, 2003, for example, you made this statement on Face the Nation:
"Had there been even a peep that the agency did not want that sentence in or that George Tenet did not want that sentence in.. . it would have been gone." 3
The next day, the President himself repeated this claim. At a press briefing on July 14, 2003, President Bush stated: "Subsequent to the speech, the CIA had some doubts. But when they talked about the speech and when they looked at the speech, it was cleared." 4
Your statements directly contradict those of your deputy, Stephen Hadley. On July 22, 2003, Mr. Hadley held a press conference in which he acknowledged receiving two memos from the CIA raising doubts about the uranium claim being included in the President's October 7 speech in Cincinnati over three months before the State of the Union address.5 According to Mr. Hadley, "the October 5 CIA memorandum asked that we remove the sentence." Mr. Hadley said the second memo was sent to the White House Situation Room on October 6 to "provide
-----------------------
1 Meet the Press, NBC News (June 8, 2003).
2 This Week with George Stephanopoulos, ABC News (June 8, 2003).
3 Face the Nation, CBS News (July 13, 2003).
4 President Defends Allegation on Iraq, Washington Post (July 15, 2003).
5 Dan Bartlett and Steve Hadley Hold Press Briefing on Iraq Weapons of MassDestruction and the State of the Union Speech, FDCH Political Transcripts (July 22, 2003).
------------------------------------------------------------
The Honorable Condoleezza Rice July 29, 2003 Page 3
some additional rationale for the removal of the uranium reference." According to Mr. Hadley, the memo "describes some weakness in the evidence" and "stated that the CIA had been telling Congress that the Africa story was one of two issues where we differed with the British intelligence."
According to Mr. Hadley, the October 6 memo was sent both to him and to you. When asked whether you read the memo, Mr. Hadley replied: "it's sent to Dr. Rice, it's sent and that's it. You know, I can't tell you she read it. I can't even tell you she received it. But in some sense, it doesn't matter. Memo sent, we're on notice."6
In addition to the two memos, Mr. Hadley confirmed that CIA Director Tenet personally called him on October 7 and asked him to remove the uranium reference from the speech. Mr. Hadley stated: "George Tenet had a brief telephone conversation with me during the clearance process for the October 7 Cincinnati speech. This was the one he asked that any reference to Iraq's attempt to purchase uranium from sources from Africa to be deleted from the speech."7
The obvious conflicts between your public explanations and Mr. Hadley's statements raise several questions about what you knew at important times. I therefore request answers to the following questions:
(1) Did you read the memo from the CIA addressed to you on October 6? If so, when did you read it? Did Mr. Hadley or other National Security Council staff brief you on the content of this memo? When did any such briefing occur?
(2) Did you read the memo from the CIA addressed to Mr. Hadley on October 5? If so, when did you read it? Did Mr. Hadley or other National Security Council staff brief you on the content of this memo? When did any such briefing occur?
(3) To support its assertions, the White House declassified and released portions of the NIB. Will you declassify and release the October 5 and October 6 memos? Alternatively, please provide the memos to me without declassification.
(4) Did Mr. Hadley or other National Security Council staff brief you regarding the content of the October 7 phone call between Mr. Tenet and Mr. Hadley? When did any such briefing occur?
-----------------------
6 Id.
7 Id.
Continues........ |
