Maddow Interviews Tom Ridge About Iraq Intelligence, Hurricane Katrina, Politicized Threat Levels (VIDEO)

***UPDATE*** TPM makes the good point that Maddow got Ridge to contradict what was written on the jacket of his book. After repeatedly denying that politics played any role in the decision to raise the nation's threat level for a terrorist attack, Maddow quoted to Ride from the jacket description of the book:

'He recounts episodes such as the pressure that the DHS received to raise the security alert on the eve of of the '04 presidential election.' That's wrong?

Ridge replies, "Those aren't my words. Read the book." As TPM wryly notes, "But not the book's jacket. That stuff just can't be trusted." (Watch the third video below.)

---

Rachel Maddow interviewed former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge tonight, who is out promoting his new book The Test of Our Times, and she confronted him over his statements linking domestic security to going to war in Iraq.

Ridge denied that any political considerations went into the decision, instead saying that it was all based on intelligence. Maddow replied:

When I look at your record, I feel like you didn't slip in a reference to the president and a reference to Iraq once in this mention in 2004. You were a crucial, authoritative part of making what turned out to be a false case to the American people abut Iraq being a threat and us needing to attack them.

Maddow then quoted back Ridge a statement of his from 2003, a month before the invasion of Iraq began, in which he stated that he agreed with Bush that Iraq has chemical and biological weapons, and is trying to develop nuclear ones, and has the "means of delivery." She asked Ridge if looking back, he regretted that statement. Ridge answered, "No." Does he still think it's true: "At the time I think it's true, and subsequent to that [Bush's] leadership and the things we've done have kept America safe."

Ridge insists, to a skeptical Maddow, that Iraq was an intelligence failure and not a politicized decision.

The interview covers a lot of ground and it's worth watching in full. It's split into three parts below.

Maddow discusses Iraq War intelligence with Ridge:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Ridge on what happened during Hurricane Katrina:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Ridge clarifies quote on politics being considered when raising the nation's threat level:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Comments

[catlover68]

I loved how Rachel handled TR in a serious matter!
On the funny side was that Bushie Nicole Wallace called Tom a wus....
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/08/23/nicolle-wallace-tom-ridge/

[Philosopher-king]

you cant hide now!

[Juan Dorantes]

It was kind of mean of her to lead him on as if she respected and admired him, then in the final segment she went hard at him. Nevertheless it was great that she confronted him and asked tough questions. The type of questions he wouldn't get on Fox News.

[GhostwriterDoF]

I saw no meanness, Juan. It was a discussion on principle, which is supposed to supersede politics but, is too often overwhelmed by chicanery, or emotion. These are the kinds of discussions we should be having. I give Tom credit for publicly facing the critique and analysis of his actions and role in the Administration. Rachel is really coming into her own, credible, professional, and unique in her presentation when addressing the issues.

[DenverGator]

I had to groan at this title; " Maddow discusses Iraq War intelligence with Ridge". Roaring oxymoron. There was no Iraq war intelligence, of either kind.
The interview with Ridge shows why republicans remain a party in spite of gross incompetence and corruption. They hang together like the simple fraternity that they are. Democrats think, conceive, debate, discuss and parse and ponder. They are more intelligent and more patriotic as a rule if you really look at history. But tight organization wins every time over mere good thinking.
Tom Ridge happened to slip up and mention in his book that there was political pressure of the crassest kind put on his agency to help nudge the election. Then he back tracks dutifully in the face of his party’s backlash and Rachael's point-on questions. Not only that, he has the bald faced audacity to say the Iraq was based on tons of bad intel from every spy agency in the world. To hear him sputter, you'd think that they saved the world by stopping one of Osama Bin laden's biggest allies from using his nuclear and chemical weapons. Never mind that it's a proven fact that Saddam had no nucs, no chemical weapons AND hated al quida. The man hasn't read anything or evolved one iota since 2001. But then, he is obviously a good republican, not a good leader.

[Poolorie]

Rachel don't play. KO is likely to club you to death.

Rachel is someone who kills you but you don't know you're dead. Then you body just drops in two.

Smart, witty, intelligent, on point..... I don't want to use anymore superlatives. She's great.

By the way, I'm a disappointed conservative. Tired of Republicans.

[Rfried]

First of all, from the standpoint of learning more about Mr. Ridge, the interview was worthwhile. He always struck me as a cartoonish figure, and now I see that he is much more substantial, and a veteran to boot. But you can't have it both ways--his position that his publisher is stoking the fires about politicization of the "threat level," but that the press (and probably his angry Washington colleagues that are looking for his head on a silver platter) are misinterpreting his musings, doesn't pass the smell test.

I think it is a true study in psychology to watch an intelligent man revert to the past tense when he is clearly discussing his present knowledge of Iraq intelligence. Tom Ridge is in denial about the blood on his hands. We don't need to wait until history writes the book on Iraq to know it was a fiasco (and there is already a well researched book by that name).

In his defense, I will need to read the book to make my final judgment. I am gonna take a look at it, and I guess that was the point.

Rachel Maddow is one of the premier journalists working today.

[MrTrueth]

In response to questions regarding the cost of The republican War Without End, many thanks to Tom Feeley and staff of Information Clearing House Newsletter (News You Won't Find On CNN).

Great quotes!

"If the misery of the poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin." : Charles Darwin


September 02, 2009

Number Of Iraqis Slaughtered Since The U.S. Invaded Iraq "1,339,771"

www.justforeignpolicy.org/iraq/iraqdeaths.html

Number of U.S. Military Personnel Sacrificed (Officially acknowledged) In America's War On Iraq: 4,336


Number Of International Occupation Force Troops Slaughtered In Afghanistan : 1355

http://icasualties.org/oef/


Cost of War in Iraq......­..........­..$679,074­,857,282

Cost of War in Afghanista­n......$22­5,847,133,­588


The cost in your community:

www.nationalpriorities.org/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=182

[irishwomanny]

I am watching Tom Ridge on Rachael show and I have to say how can we American's win when thoses who we elected or are in policial power lie with such conviction that they believe the lie.
I lived 911 I inhaled the dust and I am more afraid of the Tom Ridges and the Blue Dog Democrats who only interest is to be voted into power in 2010. If there is a God may he help us all for we are a nation that has lost it's way and it's people are so afraid that they would rather believe a lie then fight for the truth. Where are the people who stood in Grant Park on Election night who believed that change could happen, but the only thing that changed was the color of the president elect.

[Stevealmi]

It is nice to know the Iraqi war was nothing personal. Just 300 million dollars a day to dick's best buddies.

[democracy7]

The surprise is not that he lied and lied repeatedly, but that he still says and thinks that his book, now reputed to be a large piece of fiction, is somehow worth buying. I don't think so.
Rachel is once again brilliant, and a great example of what journalists should aspire to be.

[BigHound1]

Rachel made several excellent points but the knock-out punch is "If you go to war, you have an obligation to get it right. If you don't get it right and thousands of lives are wasted, an apology is the least the leadership that made these horrible calculations to go to war is in order."

Richard Clarke apologized when 9/11 happened under his watch but his administration would not. No one wanted 9/11 to happen but errors were made; likewise, the world only super-power started a war under false pretense. Many people throughout our government have apologized but we are still waiting on the ones that actually made the decision.

Rachel just made sure that Tom Ridge understood that an apology is still in order.

[Dondowolfe]

Ridge appeared to be shocked at the nerve of Maddow. He came off as an old fool shilling for the status-quo which was the Cheney/Bush crime syndicate, while simultaneously selling a book which seeks to disavow himself from his role in the deceit. Maddow was brilliant and stood firm.

How can anyone with reasonable cognitive abilities believe anything he said. I especially loved it when Maddow reminded Ridge why the Republican Party and its faux-leaders have no credibility. Thanks Rachel for doing what many in the MSM are afraid to do.

[jztherapist]

One thing that Rachel should have asked Ridge was whether anyone from the former Administration had contacted him regarding his allegations. He then would have either had to say "yes" and look as though he'd been coerced into backpedaling or "no" and look like a flat-out liar. This is the second time that Maddow has been sandbagged (the first by David Frum, who launched a vicious attack on the then-new talk show host) and now by Ridge, who tried to deny the undeniable. Both times, she handled the situation with grace and intelligence.

[jcfried]

I value what Rachel Maddow has done with this interview, however, i have one point of concern. While Rachel asked very carefully if the 4K+ American lives were worth it, she failed to mention the unknown number, but definitely in the 10s or 100s of thousands of Iraqi deaths and the greater number of those lives who have been terribly hurt. The US did not ask these innocents if they were willing to have their lives taken or families & property destroyed in the name of American imperialis­m/crusade.

I appreciate that this is not a popular view, but i believe it is fundamental to the problem. The Bush government viewed these people as "less than" us, merely pawns to American ends as Bush, et. el., viewed the world. This complete lack of empathy made it possible for American soldiers to kill with impunity and for a government to send machines, and soldiers, of death. We need to wake up to what we have done or it will happen again. We need a truth review to understand how all of this occurred and the complete ramifications of our choice to invade Iraq and what it means as we send more troops to Afganistan.

[KYlawyer]

You are so right. Most people have no idea of what has gone on in this war. I have a close friend who is an Army National Guard officer. He told me things that went on in the field that sounded more in line with what the Soviets would have done than US troops. He said the troops on the ground, many on their second and third tours and suffering from all sorts of pstd and stress, uniformly hate the Iraqi people.

For instance he related an incident where am Iraqi man in a truck cut off a tank barreling through an intersection. The tankers go p 0 ed and so then stop him and ran their tank over the poor man's vehicle. He also said when troops go into searching houses they just trash the furnishings in the home for no reason. He related many other incidents which I don't have the space to relate here. He said it wasn't like that at first, but as the stress from multiple deployments and as the ongoing insurgency took more casualties, the soldiers become brutal toward the indigenous population.

It is very tragic what has happened to the Iraqi people. I don;t know how this will play out in the long run for the US, but I have trouble seeing how the Iraqi people, caught in the crossfire, are better off now than they were even under the brutal Saddam.

[nighthawk808]

It looks like some American soldiers treat Iraqis pretty much the same way the police treat Americans. So maybe we've succeeded in spreading American values after all--just not the right ones.

[KYlawyer]

You are so right. Most people have no idea of what has gone on in this war. I have a close friend who is an Army National Guard officer. He told me things that went on in the field that sounded more in line with what the Soviets would have done than US troops. He said the troops on the ground, many on their second and third tours and suffering from all sorts of pstd and stress, uniformly hate the Iraqi people.

For instance he related an incident where am Iraqi man in a truck cut off a tank barreling through an intersection. The tankers go p 0 ed and so then stop him and ran their tank over the poor man's vehicle. He also said when troops go into searching houses they just trash the furnishings in the home for no reason. He related many other incidents which I don't have the space to relate here. He said it wasn't like that at first, but as the stress from multiple deployments and as the ongoing insurgency took more casualties, the soldiers become brutal toward the indigenous population.

It is very tragic what has happened to the Iraqi people. I don;t know how this will play out in the long run for the US, but I have trouble seeing how the Iraqi people, caught in the crossfire, are better off now than they were even under the brutal Saddam.

[Rfried]

And as we learn more about torture, we will come to understand that the sadistic rituals that were performed on these prisoners (a certain small percentage of whom may have been terrorists, but human beings nonetheless) were done out of hatred and a disregard for human life, and not to gain useful intelligence. It was often for the mere satisfaction of getting someone to admit to something somebody thought they did--even though they never did it. This is part of the power balance between interrogators and the prisoners. Once the prisoner admits to the allegation, the interrogator can pat him/herself on the back, knowing that what they did to the other human being cowering on the floor was all worth it, and morally appropriate. This is not to give a pass to those who wrote the legal briefs allowing the torture, nor to those in the leadership who relied on those briefs. They all bare responsibility to differing degrees.

Interestingly, the sad truth about all the talk about Attorney General Holder and his decision about whether to hold the "higher-ups" accountable for torture is a subterfuge. We all know who was responsible, we know their motivations, but we apparently just can't pull the trigger as a Nation to do anything about it.

[KYlawyer]

You are so right. Most people have no idea of what has gone on in this war. I have a close friend who is an Army National Guard officer. He told me things that went on in the field that sounded more in line with what the Soviets would have done than US troops. He said the troops on the ground, many on their second and third tours and suffering from all sorts of pstd and stress, uniformly ha.te the Iraqi people.

For instance he related an incident where am Iraqi man in a truck cut off a tank barreling through an intersection. The tankers go p 0 ed and so then stop him and ran their tank over the poor man's vehicle. He also said when troops go into searching houses they just trash the furnishings in the home for no reason, and they will strip search Iraqi women and teenage girls when not required for security. He related other incidents I don't have the space to relate. He said it wasn't like that at first, but as the stress from multiple deployments and as the ongoing insurgency took more casualties, the soldiers become brutal toward the indigenous population.

It is very tragic what has happened to the Iraqi people. I don't know how history will judge it for the US, but I have trouble seeing how the Iraqi people, caught in the crossfire, are better off now than they were even under the brutal Saddam.

[KYlawyer]

You are so right. Most people have no idea of what has gone on in this war. I have a close friend who is an Army National Guard officer. He told me things that went on in the field that sounded more in line with what the Soviets would have done than US troops. He said the troops on the ground, many on their second and third tours and suffering from all sorts of pstd and stress, uniformly ha.te the Iraqi people.

For instance he related an incident where am Iraqi man in a truck cut off a tank barreling through an intersection. The tankers go p 0 ed and so then stop him and ran their tank over the poor man's vehicle. He also said when troops go into searching houses they just trash the furnishings in the home for no reason. He related many other incidents which I don't have the space to relate here. He said it wasn't like that at first, but as the stress from multiple deployments and as the ongoing insurgency took more casualties, the soldiers become br.utal toward the indigenous population.

It is very tragic what has happened to the Iraqi people. I don;t know how this will play out in the long run for the US, but I have trouble seeing how the Iraqi people, caught in the crossfire, are better off now than they were even under the brut.al Saddam.

[roserage]

The news that our United States of America had absolutely NO reason to invade Iraq might not be the most startling news of the moment, but this is: Rachel Maddow's (my personal hero) interview with Mr. Ridge revealed the MIND of the Bush/Cheny machine. Watching Tom Ridge adamantly refuse to admit our aggression was a mistake--unwilling to accept the horrible truth that over 4,000 U.S. soldiers and countless Iraqi civilians died and continue to die for nothing--that the world is, indeed, more dangerous now than it was in 2000--should be all the warning Americans need: We MUST not EVER let this happen again. People like Tom Ridge are sociopaths. Thank you, Rachel!

[KUVVY]

This is how to do an interview,she got him to say that even though they got everything wrong he still believes it was the right thing to do. If I ever had any respect for Ridge its gone now. Great telling interview,it gives you an idea how totally corrupt the Cheney Bush administration was.