Think Progress omits key facts

In "Sins of the Husband," I make the case that Clinton Inc. has been spending much of the past seven years rewriting Bill Clinton's record regarding Iraq and terrorism in order to boost Clinton's legacy and enhance Hillary Clinton's political future.

Think Progress, the blog of the Center for American Progress and a branch of Clinton Inc., gives us a few examples of this phenomenon today.

In one item, Think Progress attacks Kenneth Pollack, the author of "The Threatening Storm." Pollack's 2002 book arguably made a stronger case for removing Saddam from power than the Bush administration did. Pollack, incidentally, served as the National Security Council's principal working-level official responsible for implementation of U.S. policy towards Iraq during the Clinton years. Sandy Berger brought him into the Clinton administration specifically because of his belief that regime change was the only viable option for Iraq.

Now, here's what Think Progress won't tell you. Lawrence J. Korb, a Center for Progress fellow, helped make Pollack's book possible when he was at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). In the acknowledgements section of his book, Pollack demonstrated his appreciation for his CFR colleagues. “Leslie Gelb, Larry Korb, Patricia Dorff, and the Council on Foreign Relations have my deepest thanks for their support, encouragement, and assistance throughout the writing of this book,” Pollack wrote. “Les and Larry quite simply made the book possible by giving me the time to write with minimal distractions and the resources to get it done.”

Pollack noted that his book was written with the CFR'S imprimatur. Korb might argue today that the imprimatur does not mean that he and CFR agreed with Pollack's argument. However, there is no evidence that Korb and CFR placed their imprimatur on another author's book that argued against removing Saddam from power.

In my opinion, if WMD had been found in Iraq and things went more smoothly with the occupation, Korb would be arguing today that he was wise to make Pollack's book possible.

Another thing that Think Progress won't tell its readers is that Clinton Inc. still maintains ties to Pollack. In October 2007, Sandy Berger, Bill Clinton’s national security adviser, became an adviser to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. Berger also operates a consulting firm called Stonebridge International. According to Stonebridge's web site, Pollack is one of Berger's consultants. While the bio page for Pollack notes his authorship of "The Persian Puzzle," it makes no mention of "The Threatening Storm."

Another item on Think Progress' blog today attacks Richard Perle and his relationship with Ahmed Chalabi. This is not the first time that Think Progress has attacked the Bush administration's association with Chalabi. In November 2005, Think Progress included an item entitled, “Sleeping With the Enemy: Chalabi’s Sordid History.” In the item, Think Progress offered a “short rap sheet on the man who the administration used to provide justification for the Iraq war.” Like Al Gore before them, Think Progress noted that Chalabi had been convicted of embezzlement by a Jordanian court in 1992. However, there is a gap in Think Progress’ “sordid history” and “rap sheet” on Chalabi. They went from 1992 to the Bush administration years and completely left out Chalabi’s activities between 1992 and 2001.

So, what was Chalabi doing during the 1990s? During much of that decade Chalabi led the Iraqi National Congress (INC), an umbrella Iraqi opposition group formed with the aid and direction of the United States government following the Gulf War. INC’s goal was the overthrow of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. During 1999 and 2000, Chalabi and the INC met with many Clinton administration officials, including Thomas Pickering, Madeleine Albright, and, yes, Al Gore himself. (Note that Gore's meeting with Chalabi came just seven years after Chalabi was convicted of embezzlement. Gore kind of gives hypocrisy a bad name.)

Of course, Clinton's chief of staff had to be aware of the fact that members of the Clinton administration were meeting with Chalabi and offering him support. Who was that chief of staff? None other than John Podesta, who is now the Center for American Progress' president and chief executive officer.

Do the folks at Think Progress have amnesia concerning Pollack and Chalabi. No. Their goals are to stir up hatred for Bush (just read the comments readers offer) and present those they favor in the best possible light. If they have to leave out the whole story (i.e., lie through omission) in order to achieve those goals, they will do exactly that. As a component of Clinton Inc., they have worked for years to damage Bush's reputation. Unfortunately, it seems they are now taking a bit of credit for finding success in that mission.

Media misrepresents Pentagon report on Iraq-al Qaeda links

The Pentagon this week released its report documenting Saddam Hussein's support for terrorism. Unfortunately and predictably, the mainstream media misrepresented what the report actually said. While the report noted numerous connections between Iraq and al Qaeda, the media focused on the report's finding that there was no "smoking gun" (i.e., direct connection) that linked Saddam's Iraq and al Qaeda.

Power Line did an excellent job of covering this issue, so, instead of offering my own commentary, I'll direct you to that blogs items.

The Connection, take 54
The Connection, Take 55
The connection, take 56

As noted by William Kristol in "take 56," the Bush administration has apparently decided to plea nolo contendere when it comes to reexamining the case for removing Saddam from power. I personally believe that such a reexamination needs to take place and that it why I wrote "Sins of the Husband." I hope that such a reexamination is part of the debate leading up to this November's election.

Video on YouTube

I put together a little "Sins of the Husband" video and uploaded it to YouTube. The video includes just a few of the items discussed in my book. Please click here to view the video. If you like it, please leave a comment on YouTube.

Sins of the Husband has been published

After Super Tuesday on February 5, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were in a virtual dead heat for the Democratic presidential nomination. Larry Sabato, the Robert Kent Gooch Professor of Politics at the University of Virginia, stated today that the Clinton-Obama race is likely to continue through June. Therefore, I have decided to go ahead with my original publication target date (which was immediately after Super Tuesday) for Sins of the Husband. For more information about the book, including ordering information, please visit the Sins of the Husband web site.

Illegal activity in Berkeley

Here is an incredible video of protestors in Berkeley, Calif., using force to prevent people from entering a Marine Corps recruiting station. One gentleman who attempted to enter confronted a police offier who, while acknowledging that the protestors were breaking the law, said the police were remaining neutral. Good you imagine the police remaining neutral as a mugger uses force to beat an elderly lady.

If you are as outraged as I am over this, contact the Berkeley Chamber of Commerce and politely let them know you will boycott Berkeley until the police enforce the law. The Chamber disagrees with the the mayor of Berkeley and the majority on the city council who have allowed this illegal activity toi take place. If business in Berkeley begins to suffer, the objectively pro-terrorist folks who run the city might have a change of heart.

Senator Leahy's Big Lie

On January 30, Sen. Patrick Leahy made the following statement during an oversight hearing with Attorney General Michael Mukasey:

"It is not enough to say that waterboarding is not currently authorized. Torture and illegality have no place in America. We should not delay beginning the process of restoring America’s role in the struggle for liberty and human dignity. Tragically, this administration has so twisted America’s role, law and values that our own State Department, our military officers and, apparently, America’s top law enforcement officer, are now instructed by the White House not to say that waterboarding is torture and illegal. Never mind that waterboarding has been recognized as torture for the last 500 years. Never mind that President Teddy Roosevelt properly prosecuted Americans soldiers for this more than 100 years ago. Never mind that we prosecuted Japanese soldiers for waterboarding Americans during World War II."

What our soldiers did to Filipinos during the Philippine-American War and what the Japanese did to our troops during World War II was the "water cure," not waterboarding. According to Wikipedia:

"Water cure is a form of water torture in which the victim is forced to drink large quantities of water in a short time, resulting in gastric distension, water intoxication, and possibly death.

"Often the victim has the mouth forced or wedged open, the nose closed with pincers and a funnel or strip of cloth forced down the throat. The victim has to drink all the water (or other liquids such as bile or urine) poured into the funnel to avoid drowning. The stomach fills until near bursting, and is sometimes beaten until the victim vomits and the torture begins again."

That is far different from waterboarding. If Leahy had any integrity, he would apologize for suggested that the water cure and waterboarding are the same thing.

The Center for Public Integrity's study on Bush's false statements

The Center for Public Integrity (CPI) last week released a study in which they claimed the Bush administration “made at least 935 false statements in the two years following September 11, 2001, about the national security threat posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq.” Given that it has been nearly five years since Operation Iraqi Freedom began, the timing of this report is a bit curious. It's almost as if they held the report until it would have the greatest impact, i.e., a presidential election year.

It's not as if CPI just decided last year to take on alleged false statements concerning Iraq. For example, Charles Lewis, founder and executive director of CPI, wrote an opinion piece in 2005 in which he claimed, “[W]ith some notable exceptions such as Seymour Hersh of The New Yorker and Walter Pincus of the Washington Post and the Knight Ridder’s duo of Jonathan S. Landay and Warren P. Strobel, investigative news coverage before March 2003 of the Bush administration’s ramp-up to the war in Iraq was underwhelming, to say the least.”

It's not a coincidence that Lewis made mention of Walter Pincus. The Washington Post reporter is married to Ann Pincus, who, as of December 2007, was listed as the director of communications and outreach for CPI. Ann Pincus, an Arkansas native, was appointed by Bill Clinton to the U.S. Information Agency. She later transferred to the State Department.

CPI has received several grants from George Soros' Open Society Institute. Soros, of course, spent more than $20 million to defeat George W. Bush in 2004. Soros also reportedly provided almost half of the funding for a 2006 study that claimed 650,000 people were killed as a result of the invasion of Iraq. That claim was 10 times higher than consensus estimates. According to the Times Online, "New research published by The New England Journal of Medicine estimates that 151,000 people - less than a quarter of The Lancet estimate - have died since the invasion in 2003. "

CPI claims to be non-partisan, yet where is the study in which this group detailed the false statements regarding Iraq made by the Clinton administration? That administration claimed that Iraq and al Qaeda were cooperating on weapons production and left office in January 2001 still claiming that Iraq had WMD. CPI may respond that such a study would not be relevant since Bill Clinton has been out of office for seven years. That is true. However, Hillary Clinton is running for president and it is quite possible that Madeleine Albright, Sandy Berger, Richard Holbrooke, and other officials from the Bill Clinton administration would join her administration if she were elected. If the Bush administration made false statements concerning Iraq, CPI cannot deny that these Clinton administration officials also made false statements.

I doubt that we will see such a study since CPI appears to be aligned with Clinton Inc. and, therefore, lacks the integrity to share the whole truth with the American people.