The Obfuscation Report

On Monday, the Bush administration released the National Intelligence Estimate on Iran, which revealed that “in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program.” The revelation contradicted public statements from Bush administration officials over recent months warning that Iran was quickly developing a nuclear weapons program.

National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley said Bush was briefed last Wednesday on the NIE report, but had learned there was new information on Iran’s program sometime “in the last few months.” Bush claimed yesterday that he was told “in August” by DNI Mike McConnell that “we have some new information.” But Bush claimed McConnell didn’t tell him what the information was.

It has now been two days since the NIE was released, and the White House is still unable to answer the most basic question about when Bush first learned that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program. This morning, in a press briefing with reporters, White House spokesman Tony Fratto waffled on three direct questions about whether Bush knew that Iran had halted its nuclear weapons program months ago:

QUESTION: Just to clarify one point from the press conference yesterday, the President was — said that he was told by Mr. McConnell, just generally, that there had been some new intelligence and that people were taking another look at it. Did the President at that point ask any follow-up? Did Mr. McConnell offer any comments that, in fact, there might have to be a serious reevaluation of the whole intelligence?

FRATTO: What Director McConnell said is that we’re going to go back and do rigorous analysis of this intelligence, and when we can be certain of it, we’re going to come back and talk to you — and that’s what they did. […]

QUESTION: In that conversation did McConnell tell him that our previous intelligence could be all wrong? How — (inaudible) — was he about that?

FRATTO: I don’t have anything on that. […]

QUESTION: I just want to follow up on Mike’s question. Was there any indication from McConnell of the nature of the intelligence in the meeting in August?

FRATTO: I can’t give you more detail on what Director McConnell said to the President.

In an interview with CNN’s Rick Sanchez yesterday, former Bush administration official Flynt Leverett suggested the White House is being dishonest about what it knew. “I can’t imagine that McConnell…would tell the President about this and not tell him what the information actually said,” Leverett said.

On PBS’ Newshour with Jim Lehrer last night, Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) said, “I was really struck when the president said that he only got the final judgments on Tuesday,” adding that he “can’t believe” that McConnell’s indication of new information didn’t prevent the President from “talking about a nuclear holocaust.”

Transcript:

QUESTION: Just to clarify one point from the press conference yesterday, the President was — said that he was told by Mr. McConnell, just generally, that there had been some new intelligence and that people were taking another look at it. Did the President at that point ask any follow-up? Did Mr. McConnell offer any comments that, in fact, there might have to be a serious reevaluation of the whole intelligence?

FRATTO: What Director McConnell said is that we’re going to go back and do rigorous analysis of this intelligence, and when we can be certain of it, we’re going to come back and talk to you — and that’s what they did. I’ve seen some criticism of, number one, of the international — I mean, of the intelligence community in the last couple days, which I think is just incredibly misguided. The intelligence community is out there doing very difficult, courageous work to try to get the intelligence right. They’re doing it in some of the most hardened places to try to acquire this intelligence, and they’re doing an astounding job of it, under Director McConnell’s leadership. And then I’ve seen some criticism of the leadership of the intelligence community for not being more forthcoming, and I think this is also unfounded. It is important, if you’re going to tell the Congress and the American people and the President of the United States an important piece of intelligence information, that it be rigorously analyzed, that you have the highest degree of confidence. And that’s what they went back and did and they took the extra time to do that.

And then I’ve seen criticism that the President should have either changed his rhetoric or asked more. What he asked of his intelligence community was to tell him what was right when you know it’s right, and that’s what they did. In terms of rhetoric, there is no rhetoric to change when the facts on the ground still suggest to any reasonable observer that Iran poses a threat and is a destabilizing force, unless they change their activities.

QUESTION: In that conversation did McConnell tell him that our previous intelligence could be all wrong? How — (inaudible) — was he about that?

FRATTO: I don’t have anything on that.

[…]

QUESTION: I just want to follow up on Mike’s question. Was there any indication from McConnell of the nature of the intelligence in the meeting in August?

FRATTO: I can’t give you more detail on what Director McConnell said to the President.

# posted by David @ Wednesday, December 05, 2007