I've been catching snippets of CNN's political commentator Jack Cafferty for quite some time now. Make no mistake, Cafferty's style is partisan, just as is Sean Hannity's and Keith Olbermann. Cafferty's basic stance is that George Bush and the Republicans are the bad guys. Fine. As long as he tells us what he is, he can slug it out with Hannity and the Republicans all he wants. When I listen to Cafferty, I know I am getting opinions as opposed to facts-same as when I listen to Hannity, Olbermann and Rush Limbaugh.
But what kind of reporting is his latest caper this week? Cafferty, on the CNN show, The Situation Room, has jumped on this latest book by Ron Suskind (The Way of the World) that alleges that Bush ordered the CIA under George Tenet to forge a letter establishing a link between Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaida in order to justify the war. (Both Tenet and the White House have issued statements calling the book's accusations "ridiculous." Two former CIA offials, Robert Richer and John McGuire, who are quoted by Suskind in the book, have also issued statements denying the story.)
So now, Cafferty throws out Suskind's accusation and asks his listeners to send him e-mails on the topic, which he reads on air. Of course, Cafferty's audience is overwhelmingly anti-Bush, so about 95% of the e-mails called Bush every name in the book, called for his impeachment and on and on and on. Jack proceeded to read several of these e-mails on the air including one that called for the president to be locked up and executed. This is journalism?
I personally have no idea whether Suskind's accusation is true or not. If true, then let's name the sources who told him these things. If there are folks in the CIA who have personal knowledge of this and told Suskind, let's bring them forth and put everybody under oath. It is a serious accusation. I am no admirer of George Tenet, but again, I don't know what the truth is.
I realize that I am inviting charges of hypocrisy because I have been criticizing the mainstream media for ignoring the John Edwards story put out by the National Enquirer. So, if I may rebut those charges ahead of time, let me say that the National Enquirer story about what happened at the Beverly Hilton Hotel two weeks ago is based on the personal observations of seven Enquirer reporters, two of whom are named in the story. There is also the Fox interview of the security guard who was involved in the incident (He is not been identified by name.)
I am willing to keep an open mind here on Suskind's book. The accusation is serious enough that Suskind's sources, if not named in the book, should be brought forth.
As for Jack Cafferty, reading an e-mail that calls for the execution of the President (if the charges are true, of course) is in poor taste to say the least.
Keith Olbermann must be proud.
6 comments:
Sounds like another crappy pundit show. But while it's not the same thing as forging a letter, didn't Richard Clarke also say that Bush was perhaps a bit over-eager to establish that Iraq/Al Quaeda link?
While a statement like this certainly requires proof to back it up, I wouldn't be too suprised. After all, they lied about the whole African yellow cake thing. They were told that was bogus, yet Bush went on TV and claimed it as truth anyway. Forging a letter would just be a shade away from that, in my opinion.
The British, whose intelligence service came up with that Niger yellow cake story still insist it was true. Just because Joe Wilson said it wasn't true doesn't mean anything to me. Wilson had an agenda.
But as to the Suskind book, I would like to see the CIA sources step forward.
Wilson had an agenda - okay, even if he did, what's the truth? You can have an agenda and be correct.
I'll take the word of British Intelligence over Joe Wilson any day. Wilson and his wife are a couple of self promoters.
Yeah, 'cause intelligence agencies couldn't possibly have agendas.
Sure they could, but in the case of Suskind's book, the CIA is prohibited from covert actions for the purpose of influencing US public opinion or policy, which is the allegation in the book. What Suskind is alleging seems to me to be criminal offense on the part of anyone who took part.
He told OReilly this morning that he has tapes of his interviews with ex CIA officials who are now denying Suskind's claims.
I think it is time for him to produce the tapes.
Post a Comment