What's the Difference Between Dan Bartlett, Brian Williams and David Gregory? A Lot Less Than You Think

There's a difference between lying and dissembling. Dan Bartlett lied on Wednesday. Brian Williams and David Gregory merely dissembled. Yet the statements of all three are discredited by the same smoking gun, the one that has been hiding in plain sight for more than five years, and has been subject to a virtual news blackout at NBC News. This White House is beyond redemption. But it's time for NBC and other major networks to come clean.

The White House Lie:

"The fact of the matter was the weapons of mass destruction weren't there. The intelligence was wrong. But that doesn't make people out to be liars or manipulators or propagandists. It makes them wrong." Dan Bartlett on CNN, May 28, 2008

The Smoking Gun: Anyone who read the newspapers with an ounce of common sense could figure out that the case for WMD was a sham. On March 7, 2003, 11 days before Bush invaded, the nuclear weapons inspectors reported that there was zero evidence that Saddam had ever done anything to develop nuclear weapons since losing the Gulf War in 1991. Muhamed ElBaradei and the International Atomic Energy Agency went far beyond offering an alternative analysis of the notorious aluminum tubes or those "documents" from Niger. He categorically said that they found no evidence. The Bush administration's response: Nothing, or at least nothing substantive. (ElBaradei's findings were subsequently validated by Bush's own inspections team, headed up by Charles Deufler.)

ElBaradei's report put the world on notice that the case for nuclear WMD was fatally flawed. When Dan Bartlett, John McCain, and everyone else at the White House refused to acknowledge that the U.N. inspectors had punctured their case for war, they became, to use Bartlett's words, "liars or manipulators or propagandists."

The Smoking Gun That Discredits NBC: Because ElBaradei's report struck at the heart of the case for war, any reputable news organization would consider its substance to be extremely important. That evening, NBC Nightly News with Tom Brokaw reported nothing about ElBaradei's findings. On CNBC, The News with Brian Williams also reported nothing. NBC's virtual blackout of the story persisted, and thereby skewed its coverage of almost everything relating to WMD and the decision to go to war. (The most notable pre-war exceptions to the blackout were Tim Russert's defamatory smears against the nuclear inspectors.)

There are countless examples where NBC's reporting and commentary sidestepped the full import of ElBaradei's pre-war disclosure. Chris Matthews' remarks are typical:

"I mean, that was a critical part of a lot of people who supported this war -- regular people, journalists, et cetera, said, I don't like the idea of going to war, but if they've got nuclear weapons, I guess we have to. And that was a successful trump card and it was a deal maker for a lot of people who supported the war, middle of the road people." Chris Matthews on Hardball, October 19, 2005

NBC's blackout continues to this day, thereby extending Dan Bartlett a veneer of plausibility, and enabling Brian Williams and David Gregory to dissemble so freely, as they did on Wednesday:

"I think he [Scott McClellan] is wrong...I think the questions were asked. I think we pushed. I think we prodded. I think we challenged the president. I think not only those of us in the White House press corps did that, but others in the rest of the landscape of the media did that. If there wasn't a debate in this country, then maybe the American people should think about, why not? Where was Congress? Where was the House? Where was the Senate? Where was public opinion about the war? What did the former president believe about the pre-war intelligence? He agreed that -- in fact, Bill Clinton agreed that Saddam had WMD.

"The right questions were asked. I think there's a lot of critics -- and I guess we can count Scott McClellan as one -- who thinks that, if we did not debate the president, debate the policy in our role as journalists, if we did not stand up and say, this is bogus, and you're a liar, and why are you doing this, that we didn't do our job. And I respectfully disagree" David Gregory on Hardball, May 28, 2008 .

(Gregory's allusion to Bill Clinton is a standard smoke-and-mirrors ploy used by the right wing. Bill Clinton never believed that the pre-war intelligence was sufficiently reliable to support military action. Both he and Senator Clinton advocated the use of continued inspections instead of military action.)

"I've always put it this way. In Katrina, the evidence was right next to us. Sadly, we saw fellow Americans, in some cases, floating past face down. We knew what had just happened. We weren't allowed that kind of proximity with the weapons inspectors. I was in Kuwait for the buildup of the war. And yes, we heard from the Pentagon on my cell phone the minute they heard us report something that they didn't like. The tone of that time was quite extraordinary". Brian Williams on The Today Show, May 28, 2008

Andrea Mitchell was in the room when El Baradei gave his report to the U.N. and to the world. "We weren't allowed that kind of proximity with the weapons inspectors," is Williams' way of throwing sand in the face of NBC's viewers.

Here's the bottom line: Anyone (e.g. Colin Powell, George Tenet, Dan Bartlett) who says, "We relied on flawed intelligence," is speaking in bad faith, because after March 7, 2003 he acted in bad faith. And any journalist who accepts that rationalization at face value is not doing his job.

Comments

[shag11]

Maybe O'Reilly is right about getting rid of NBC...., naw, his network was worse than the latter at promoting that WMD bullshit. Couric said last week how their access was threaten, if they continue to pry. G.E. is part of the Military Industrial Complex, so what can we expect from it's "news" network.

[Jeradlangley]

"The founders of the United States were suspicious of the tendency of government, even the best intentioned government, to become tyrannical at times. Governments are composed of human beings, and human beings can and do commit wrongs.For this reason, the authors of the first amendment envisaged the press, despite all of its imperfections, as a kind of critic, with a role apart and distinct from that of government.
Clearly, there is nothing in the Bill of Rights that says that newspapers and government cannot cooperate on occasion.But the intent of the founders was that the press and the government should not become institutional partners. They are natural adversaries with different functions, and each must respect the role of the other.Sometimes a free press can be a distinct annoyance and an embarrassment to a particular government, but this is one of the prices of liberty. A free press is responsible to its readers and to them alone."

From Robert H. Estabrook and courtesy of the U.S. State Department International Information Program

[racom]

Exactly, the problem is, we no longer have a free press. It has been bought and paid for by corporate america. It answers only to the owners and most all the employees answer to the boss. We can get straight news reports from Amy Goodman, Sy Hersch, Robert Fisk, Greg Palast and more like them but the MSM employees, not journalist, capitulate to corporate interest. period.

[daleok]

About two years ago, at the National Press Corps dinner, David Gregory was acting as a backup "dancer" when Karl Rove was doing his idiotic rap routine. Gregory looked like a complete buffoon and I have never watched him since then. These reporters and anchor persons must keep their distance from the people they report and remain detached.

[albino]

When you are basically nothing more than an over-paid news reader, your salary depends on having friendly access to the people you cover. These people are not journalists or reporters in the traditional sense. They are merely corporate employees mouthing the corporate line. Thanks to the combining of these corporations in the media They all sing the same lines. There is no diversity here any longer and we are the poorer for it.

[DKLA]

AGREED!!, David Gregory loss all respect, dancing with the devil.

[murphysgirl]

PBS did a report on this last year I believe and the networks (and especially the New York Times) went ballistic. I think the media in a general sense was afraid to appear unpatriotic. Bush was re-elected based on the post-9/11 fears of terrorism on our home soil re-emerging. The White House did have a strong arm on the media coverage at that time as well. (Remember when NBC News a few years ago stated that Iraq was in the middle of a Civil War and the White House went ballistic?) And footage of the coffins coming home was forbidden by the White House as well. The Vietnam War was covered non-stop during that time. Now it's only snippets of suicide bombings, Veteran's Day and Memorial Day observance and Petraus hearings.

The White House has made us so complacent. What's breaking news nowadays?? Britney Spears having nervous breakdowns and George Bush telling us to go out and use our stimulus checks to go shopping with instead of paying the bills or trying to stop from our homes being foreclosed.

The evidence for the media to investigate was out there, but they chose not to seek it because at that time it was the patriotic thing to do. Instead of challenging the system the conformed to it.

[glesslib]

It's always about patriotism or religion. Nearly every b&*$ard in history has wrapped his dastardly acts in the cloak of patriotism or religion. The Bush administration managed to wrap up tightly in both.

The press let the country down badly. And now, in order to save face, it continues by never questioning McCain. He is the extension and personification of their guilt. He's just continuing the deceit that there is a win in the future.The press and the White House have been pushing that fairy tale since the day of the flight suit and "Mission Accomplished".

[DKLA]

Well said!!
This (selected) White House has ruled by threats & intimidation. We have lost our democracy.
It's ironic The Supreme Court did it to us.

[milo9]

After the confessions of Katie Couric and Jessica Yellin, it's time for the rest of the other so called journalists to have their "come to jesus moment." They should feel relieved to be free of their Corporate shackles.

[DKLA]

AGREED!!

[realpolitic]

The main difference between the three is several million dollars in compensation.

[GrammyinPA]

The Press is ABSOLUTELY as guilty as any Bush mouth -piece for NOT giving us the truth to the lead up to the Iraq war. NBC and MSNBC are the worst.

It was pathetic to watch Gregory on Hardball and his own program fumbling with his words to excuse any actions on his part. GUILTY GUILTY, it's time to accept responsibility NOW.

[LLAMASFOROBAMA]

I do think Bush and crew misled the country. Their motive was the stoke the fires for his election. But will anyone's mind be changed by all the time and effort to expose Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rove?

Wouldn't it be better for the Democrats, and specifically Barack Obama, to win over Republicans, Independents, and Hillary Democrats with his plans for all the rest that matters, including getting out of the war with as much care as possible, fixng the economy, creating as "Manhattan Project" that will eventually free us from the for foreign oil, protecting the environment and doing what he can to re-establish America's leadership in the free world?

[knighthowl]

NO. It would be better to do all those things which have been grossly neglected but to also pursue criminal actions against those who have so blatantly violated their oaths of office. We have time to it all and an obligation to our descendants.

[gerireig]

knighthowl: Hear hear!!

[rlthorn]

David Gregory, new darling of MSNBC, should just stop calling himself a reporter and just hold himself out as a questioner at the White House. Does he ever do any research the answers to his questions. His failure to bring up the IAEA report to the White House should be cause for transfer to Boise, Idaho.

[blindfish]

Good article. It's time to stop recycling the false argument that we were all misled by poor intelligence. Many of us understood already before the war began that there was no case for it. When France and Germany asked that the UN inspections be allowed to continue for two more days they were shouted down by the war hawks, who at that time always got their way by branding their critics as unpatriotic America-haters. Hans Blix, a Swedish diplomat with impeccable credentials, educated in Sweden, but also at both Oxford and Harvard universities, asked to be allowed to continue his WMD investiagtions in Iraq for the UN -- but he was told to pull his people out so "The Decider" could get his war going. BUSH DIDN'T WANT TO KNOW WHETHER THERE WERE WMDs IN IRAQ. HE JUST WANTED ANY EXCUSE HE COULD USE TO SELL THE INVASION OF IRAQ. AND HE WASN'T ABOUT TO ALLOW HANS BLIX TO DISPROVE HIS CASE FOR WAR. Anyone could see this. It's time to stop recycling the false argument that we were all misled by poor intelligence. We were shouted down by The Decider and his minions in the administration, and in the media.

[racom]

Facts are facts, good summation. Blix later argued that bush had committed an international criminal act by attacking & invading Iraq. As he put it, the UN resolutions were not open to be enforced by any of the member nations. The thinking was that if member nations began to take it upon themselves to enforce resolutions all hell could break loose, US, China, Russia and more each using their national military to fix problems in one country.
What fun that would be, only king george took such liberties.

[racom]

I should have included only king george would take 'unilateral' liberty to attack a sovereign nation.

[Hephaestion]

I have never been able to take David Gregory seriously as a journalist. He loves being called "Stretch" by George Bush a little too much. And he loves flirting with bimbos on the Today show a little too much. And I have never seen him act like a serious journalist.

I would trust my 12 year old niece to ask better questions than David Gregory.

[POINT84]

And his show is just awful

[VivaZapata]

Federer's article is long overdue. While they can try to dissemble, or as Bush says "disassemble," mainstream media is as responsible for the bogus war as Bush and Cheney. So is Colin Powell, who saw himself as a good soldier instead of the secretary of state. So are all the neocons, echoing the desires of AIPAC and other lobbyists who put interests of other countries and military contractors above the interests of the United States. NBC, or GE in reality, can run from the truth, but it will out, and they won't be able to hide from it. David Gregory, who did ask McClellen substantive questions later about Iraq, Katrina and other issues, knows how to be a good reporter, but he also knows when to be a good company man, instead of a true patriot.

[bushisguilty]

Any weapons Saddam had were supplied by the old USA (now NAU) to be used against Iran. They were supplied by Reagan/Bush. McClellen did well by exposing lies, now congress needs their job and bring Bush/Cheney up on charges. They violated their oath of office to uphold our constitution. Now congress has to remember their oath 'defend our laws from threats both foreign and domestic'. Bush/Cheney are the 4th Reich, looking for world domination, and must be stopped! The constitution must be defended and restored as well as the Bill of Rights! Charges should also be brought against the media for going along with the lies. They filed suit against the telecommunications companies for violating our rights, media should be next!! Enough is enough!

[fedupnburnin]

There is not one iota of truth or sincerity that can be found anywhere in the Bush administration. They were liars, thieves, and murderers far before they ripped off the presidency in 2000.

[littleblackcat]

You are correct as far as you go, fedup, but you need to extend the coverage to the entire republican party going back to Hoover. Someone with different ideas than those Lincoln had must have been on hand at Linclon's assassination and seized the opportunity to begin the restructuring of the party to begin the evolution into the imperialistic oligarchy we have today. Frankly, I wish the press and the people would get off the kick of how magnificent a President Abraham Lincoln was. If he had not been assassinated, I think it is doubtful that his presidency would rate much more than an examination of the civil war and its aftermath. Records from that time are handwritten and any police officer can tell you about eyewitness accounts, so we are taking everything on face value. What is known is the republican party was developed under Lincoln and his influence. It has become a treasonous disaster and will cause the demise of this country.

[knighthowl]

Don't blame Lincoln. Do you think W would have freed the slaves? If he were alive today, Lincoln would be a Democrat.

[billw8017]

The reasons for the war were obviously false from the start. Anybody who followed the news for as little as a couple years before the war knew that the inspectors had been pulled out as the United States prepared to bomb Iraq and the foorah about Hussein defying the UN by evicting them was an absurd lie though it was reported so everywhere.

Yet, I was sort of glad to see us go in. The sanctions were responsible for half a million deaths and the invasion meant an end to the cowardly bombing war that was no war and served no apparent cause except bluster. Of course, then we started to make Iraq into a neo con paradise: arresting union leader, censoring the press, selling off government services, distributing guns.

The whole war turned into a model of mission creep, also know as the quest for defeat. The perfected neo con society we see at the end is a model for the United States, and it will probably work much the same way.

[inwonderland]

I think Brian Wiliams is the finest anchor of all those on the major networks. Tim Russert, over time, has a stellar, even handed toughness on ALL he interviews.

I do believe that the above journalists and many more, were sucked into the Pro-war hype being sold by the Bush White House.

However, there were thousands of people and many major national and international leaders who, without insider facts, saw through the run-up to the war as bogus.

Barack Obama is the candidate for the Democrats mainly because, without insider information, he spoke out against the war based on all that was available to the country.

Hillary Clinton would have been the nominee if she had used the courage to not vote her political fortunes but based her vote on what she knew to be the truth: the war was a scam from the start.

In a zealous eagerness, in light of 9/11, to appear fully patriotic, many journalists and politicians, gave the Iraq war a thumbs up.

The media that was easily misguided, or worse, deserve their lumps..yes, even the best of them have to examine their inner voices.

The politicians who knew better, like Senator Clinton, already have felt the pain of political expedient decisions instead of moral ones.

If Barack Obama could stand for the truth under the waving flags..and still come out a winner, maybe that is an example for all...journalists, politicians, leaders, press secretaries, and all of us.

[tutmoo]

who are these many leaders who saw this as bogus. or did you make them up to boost you opinion. just the facts man

[menshadow]

Let's see.....there's Mohammed Al Baredi, Hans Blix, Dept. of Energy, McClatchy News, Senator Byrd. Of course, you have to be able to discern the difference between sound bites and in-depth investigation. You have to operate off of something besides hormones and fear. War is hellish, and should only be undertaken as a last resort. I don't think we got within bombing distance of last resort. Saddam had no nuclear submarines parked off the East Coast ready to fire. There was no threat. None. To be fair, the MSM was in the tank, they had a war to get viewers. People who care so little about the nation about to go to war as to get all their news from MSM, then pound their chest and call themselves patriots did not get all the facts, they had to dig for them. PATRIOTS go to war reluctantly. We should have said "OK, you want war, pass a draft (no exemptions), and pass a tax surcharge to pay for it.That would have killed it. As for Senator Clinton and all the others who voted for this war, how many took enough interest in our national welfare to read the NIE? It's time we recognize the folly of going to war in Iraq and just own it as the tragedy it is, and admit that we had all the information we needed to KNOW that it was not necessary.

[ARBOC2]

Why in the hell does just about every media person give Obama credit for being against the war from the beginning without mentioning what a fraud this alleged position of his really is. For God's sake the guy was nowhere near or serving in any body where his vote might have been taken or broadcast. He was serving in a safe state senatorial district in Illinois, which was reported to be an anti-war district when discussions and votes were being taken in our congress. Is there a media conspiracy to make this guy appear to be something he is not? There must be when no one botthers to mention that Obama's opinion, as expressed in a barber shop in south Chicago, hardly means doodly s..t in real life. All it really shows is that he and those who repeat his BS are full of it.

[racom]

I wasn't serving in any political position and all my friends know I was against the war from the get-go. What is your point? Do we have to be in politics to have an opinion or to be counted? Do you have any evidence that Obama is for the war? Do you have any reason to not believe him when he goes on record that he will end the war?
One thing is for sure, somebody is full of it!!!