Yeah, yeah, I know Foley's Follies are the most interesting thing going on now, but I can't let this pass (although, if I dont want this being ignored I have no idea what I am doing up at 1 am posting it...)
I have seen a few diaries about Woodward's new book but I haven't seen any with this angle yet. Peter Baker at the Washington Post has a new story up with more information about "State of Denial" by Bob Woodward including an explosive charge that the CIA was extremely concerned about Bin Laden in the summer of 2001 but were shrugged off by administration officials...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
First off, a little of what we already new. According to Woodward, many high ranking administration officials lobbied the President to dump Rumsfeld in 2004 and 2005. Bush was persuaded instead by Cheney and Rove who wanted to keep Rumsfeld in place.
The book reports that then-White House Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card Jr. twice suggested that Bush fire Rumsfeld and replace him with former secretary of state James A. Baker III, first after the November 2004 election and again around Thanksgiving 2005. Card had the support of then-Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and his successor, Condoleezza Rice, as well as national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley and senior White House adviser Michael J. Gerson, according to the book.
It goes on to say that even Laura wanted Bush to dump Rumsfeld. Many administration officials involved who were contacted to confirm this story "played it down" by stating that Woodward over exaggerated.
But why did they want to get rid of Rumsfeld? He wouldn't return Rice's phone calls, refused to listen to Card when he told Rumsfeld to send National Guard troops to New Orleans, and incompetent planning of the Iraq War.
Another juicy tid bit the article offers is our internal opinion on the prospect of Iraq's near future. Rather than improving as most Republican Rhetoric would have you believe, it appears things are supposed to get worse. Ouch.
It also reports on ultimately futile attempts by civilian officials to persuade the Bush team to send more troops to Iraq and outlines secret government findings about escalating attacks on U.S. troops and dire forecasts about the war worsening over the next year rather than improving.
By far the most damaging criticism though is the charge that CIA director George Tenet was extremely worried about Bin Laden in the summer of 2001.
The book also reports that then-CIA Director George J. Tenet and his counterterrorism chief, J. Cofer Black, grew so concerned in the summer of 2001 about a possible al-Qaeda attack that they drove straight to the White House to get high-level attention.
Tenet called Rice, then the national security adviser, from his car to ask to see her, in hopes that the surprise appearance would make an impression. But the meeting on July 10, 2001, left Tenet and Black frustrated and feeling brushed off, Woodward reported. Rice, they thought, did not seem to feel the same sense of urgency about the threat and was content to wait for an ongoing policy review.
This is definately an explosive charge against Bush in lieu of the recent Clinton-did-it/ Bush-did-it argument going on. Hopefully some Independents will pick up this book or at least read enough about it to influence their vote this fall.
Lastly, the article reports the White House will settle on a strategy of denying the most damaging charges and playing down the story by insisting it is mostly old news! Don't let them fool you!
Great article, I encourage everyone to read it!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...