« So Many Lies | Main | Videos from Current TV »


March 2, 2006

Bush Caught On Tape In Flat-Out Lie

-- by Dave Johnson

In case you missed the importance of the Katrina Video story, Video: Bush knew of levee risk, after the hurricane, when FEMA and the Bush administration were being criticized for their (lack of) performance, this was Bush's statement:

Bush, in post-hurricane comments, insisted that his administration had no warning that the levees were in danger.

"I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees,'' Bush said Sept. 1. "They did anticipate a serious storm. But these levees got breached. And, as a result, much of New Orleans is flooded.''

But the videotapes tell a very different story:
President Bush was warned about Hurricane Katrina's devastating impact on New Orleans' levees before the storm hit, according to transcripts of emergency briefings that Bush received. The transcripts appear to contradict his assertions that no one anticipated the failure of levees that flooded the city.

Transcripts of the briefings, first reported by the Associated Press and also obtained by Knight Ridder, show that Bush was told in stark detail about Katrina's potential deadly impact and that he heard a top hurricane expert express "grave concerns'' about the ability of the levees to withstand what turned out to be a catastrophic hurricane. They also show that Bush asked no questions.

Former FEMA Director Michael Brown said that before the storm slammed into the Gulf Coast, he and the nation's top hurricane scientist did all they could to convince Bush, the White House staff and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff that "the big one'' was about to happen.

"I don't know how he couldn't understand how bad it was or bad it could be,'' Brown said in an interview with Knight Ridder, referring to Bush.

National Hurricane Center Director Max Mayfield worried about breached levees, and Brown talked about how the Superdome, which was destined to be the home for thousands of evacuees, was below sea level and at risk of flooding. He also talked about trouble evacuating prisons and hospitals -- all before Katrina hit.

Bush, caught in a flat-out lie.

And with all those warnings, why didn't Bush or his administration do anything to prepare, to make sure everything was in oace, to get resources where they were needed, or to help the victims after the hurricane hit? Because Bush was on vacaton and was not paying any attention.

The news that Bush was warned in advance about Katrina's destructive power is another blow to an administration whose integrity and competence has come under fire for its response to the hurricane, the ill-fated Harriet Miers Supreme Court nomination, its handling of a transaction that would let a United Arab Emirates company manage cargo terminals at six major U.S. ports, and its conduct of the war in Iraq.

"It's devastating that the president would ask no questions,'' said David Gergen... "If he sat there mum in a full briefing . . . that will only confirm the suspicions of a lot of opponents.''

Yep.

Posted by Dave Johnson at March 2, 2006 11:33 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.seeingtheforest.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-t.fcgi/1665

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Bush Caught On Tape In Flat-Out Lie:

» Bush Administration Finds Replacing FEMA Director Difficult from Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator
Hurricane season is just around the corner and the Bush administration has yet to replace Michael Br [Read More]

Tracked on March 2, 2006 12:31 PM


Comments

Dave,

Although President Bush did declare four days after the storm, "I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees", he later clarified, saying officials believed, wrongly, after the storm passed that the levees had survived. He had to clarify his quote, because as usual, the media took it completely out of context. As everyone knows, the city did believe the levee system had held immediately following the storm. Even the the next day, headlines proclaimed that the worst had missed New Orleans.

President Bush's clarification came within days of the original quote, and long before these tapes were released. So why is the original quote used to show how Bush lied, but the clarification, which is 100% accurate is ignored. In today's cut and paste world, you can take any single sentence out of context. The longer I read your posts and links here, the more amazed I am that the Democratic Party has made the cut and paste illusion so much a part of your everyday reality. It's sad.

Posted by: HappyOD [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 2, 2006 12:37 PM

FEMA Director Brown says, and others confirm, that they knew THAT DAY that the levees had been breeched. Bush's "clarification" was a lie. From the article,

Brown said he told the White House and Chertoff in an early afternoon briefing Aug. 29, the day Katrina hit, that there was massive flooding. Chertoff's deputies testified before a Senate committee last month that they went home that Monday thinking New Orleans was still dry.
NO ONE was reporting that the Levees had held - because they hadn't held. EVERYONE else was reporting that they had given way.

The ONLY, repeat ONLY headline that said the worst had missed New Orleans was Scaife's far-right WorldNetDaily. See this on that.

Posted by: Dave Johnson [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 2, 2006 1:39 PM

ALSO, what about Bush's disengagement? The worst hurricane EVER bearing down on the country, and he's on vacation - and STAYED on vacation for days after it hit!

The videotapes show him not even asking a single question, just waiting to get the briefings over with!

It's JUST like the weeks before 9/11, with so many trying to get the Bush people to pay attention to bin Laden, and Bush even getting a DIRECT WARNING about the attack and leaving on vacation the next day!

Posted by: Dave Johnson [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 2, 2006 1:53 PM

Dave,

A simple google search of newspapers on August 30, 2005 shows that EVERY major daily led with a headline similar to this one from one of your favorite papers The New York Times.

You simply could not be more wrong when you say no one reported the levys had held. EVERYONE reported that New Orleans was going to be OK.

Dave, I'm beginning to believe that you guys actually believe everything you say. But again, believing in fairy tales won't win you any elections.

Just for fun, why don't you try to come up with one report of levy failure dated Aug 30.

Feel free to use this format from the New York Times:

HURRICANE KATRINA: NEW ORLEANS; Escaping Feared Knockout Punch, Barely, New Orleans Is One Lucky Big Mess
August 30, 2005, Tuesday
By JOSEPH B. TREASTER (NYT); National Desk

Posted by: HappyOD [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 2, 2006 3:01 PM

As to disengagement,

Your complaint doesn't mean anything. You try to make something from nothing. And nothing is exactly what most Americans feel your party has to offer.

You need to take a lesson from your most powerful president, FDR. He fought war to win. He did what it took. Including suffering massive casualties, interring American citizens, witholding US mail, etc, etc, etc. He was rewarded by the American people with the power to implement the broadest liberal agenda in our history. He was a Democratic success story. But it's as if you guys don't even know he existed. He'd be drummed out of your party today, even though you owe him a debt of gratitude for any success you've had since WWII. Here was a man with real issues and real solutions. Not this namby pamby "what about disengagement" stuff.

Posted by: HappyOD [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 2, 2006 3:15 PM

Here are the front pages Aug 30 the major newspapers following Katrina striking New Orleans. Here are more.

The ONLY one that said "New Orleans Didged a Bullet" which is what the White House was saying they say was WorldNetDaily.

According to the Katrina hearings, the first reports of leavee breaks were arriving at the White house about 9:27pm - too late for newspaper morning editions. But it was on the TV news very soon after that. THE WHITE HOUSE KNEW BEFORE THE NEWS. But when criticized claimed they did NOT know, and used a WorldNetDaily headline to justify their inaction on getting relief to the people there.

Posted by: Dave Johnson [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 2, 2006 4:30 PM

DAVE ARE YOU BLIND?????

Your links lead to 476 front pages, and I could only find one that even mentioned New Orleans in the headline, and that was a New Orleans paper.

How can you say only one paper said New Orleans dodged a bullet when I quoted and sourced the NY Times Headline "New Orleans, escaping feared knockout punch..."

Dave, your links prove MY assertion. But I can't take credit for the assertion, it's COMMON KNOWLEDGE to anyone who read the papers after Katrina.

I think the new Democratic Party slogan should be:

"Who are you going to believe, us, or your own lying eyes?"

Posted by: HappyOD [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 2, 2006 4:51 PM

EVERY paper was about the devestation that Katrina caused!

THAT NY Times was a morning edition paper. The levees were reported to the White House breeched at 9:27pm. (I don't know if that is N.O. time which is 10:27pm NY if so) The morning editions couldn't report that because they're already being printed. But the TV News DID. And the hearnings showed that WHITE HOUSE KNEW.

Let's get everything straight -

- There WERE WMD in Iraq
- Iraq WAS behind 9/11
- Bush DID make sure supplies reached the people of New Orleans
- No one in the White House leaked the identity of a covert CIA agent working on keeping nukes from Iran and terrorists
- Bush ordering the wiretapping of Americans without warrants is legal

- What am I missing here?

Posted by: Dave Johnson [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 2, 2006 5:39 PM

Dave,

So then we are in agreement that for the entire day Katrina hit, and up until 9:27pm that night, everyone thought the levees had held. That is the time frame President Bush is referring to in the original quote.

So when President Bush clarified his remarks, only days later, and under no pressure from any leaked video, it makes perfect sense that he was only stating the TRUTH about his original quote, which was taken out of context.

YES - there were WMD in Iraq. You may recall, he used them on his own people.

NO - Iraq was not behind 9/11, and President Bush never said they were. It is a weak attempt by the left to convince Americans that they can't believe their own ears. (By the way, it's not working.)

WHO KNOWS and WHO CARES - Maybe she was covert, maybe she wasn't. It's a typical case of the left identifying that month's most boring non-issue.

YES - It's legal if they are talking inter-nationally. As evidenced by the lack of any charges by your own party to the contrary. It's just a weak attempt to mislead by saying "spying on Americans" instead of saying "listening in on international calls". The left believes if they say their fantasy is real, everyone will go along. But it's only the ever shrinking fringe of your party that's willing to take the ride.

Posted by: HappyOD [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 2, 2006 6:41 PM

Dave,

AP just released a video of Gov Blanco assuring President Bush that the levees were intact hours after the hurricane had hit.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- In the hectic, confused hours after Hurricane Katrina lashed the Gulf Coast, Louisiana's governor hesitantly but mistakenly assured the Bush administration that New Orleans' protective levees were intact, according to a new video obtained by The Associated Press showing briefings that day with federal officials.

But what matters the truth? You will spin and parse and cut and paste and turn the facts into a meta-physical debate that leaves in question whether even reality exists.

Posted by: HappyOD [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 2, 2006 8:54 PM

Notice how that, when it's a Democrat (Gov. Blanco) making an erroneous statement, it's portrayed as an understandable mistake - the "hectic, confused" time caused poor beleagured Gov. Blanco to hesitantly but "mistakenly" report to the federal government that the levees held.

Contrast this kid-glove treatment with this AP "news" article which comes down hard on the federal response but - aside from a one-sentence zinger at Mayor Nagin - gives Blanco a free ride.
This "news" article describes the video as showing, "...a graphic display of a fatally inept bureaucracy at work..."
Nope, no opinions interjected there, huh?

Tell us again how the ENTIRE news media is so pro-Bush?

Posted by: tomaig [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 3, 2006 9:29 AM

Posted by: tomaig [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 3, 2006 9:31 AM

You know, yesterday when we were all posting to this thread, I considered it funny that I couldn't find the actual transcript of the video that was being quoted. But I thought nobody would actually lie about the transcript, thinking we wouldn't read it. How naive of me. The liberal press does and will lie blatantly, and now they've done it again. Here's the actual transcript of Mayfield on the tape, and his quote from an interview yesterday:

"I don’t think any model can tell you with any confidence right now whether the levees will be topped or not, but that’s obviously a very, very grave concern.”

Mayfield told NBC News on Thursday that he warned only that the levees might be topped – that is, the storm surge could push water over the top of the levees – not breached, and that on the many conference calls he monitored, "Nobody talked about the possibility of a levee breach or failure until after it happened.”

UNBELIEVABLE! I DON'T KNOW WHY I EVEN WASTE MY TIME POINTING OUT THE DISPICABLE LIE AFTER LIE AFTER LIE AFTER LIE THAT YOU PEOPLE LIVE.

Posted by: HappyOD [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 3, 2006 3:57 PM

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)


Remember me?



Email this entry to:


Your email address:


Message (optional):


Return to main page