Harry Reid: "We're going to find out how intelligence was manipulated, taking us to war"

Entering the office of incoming Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid can be a bit of an intimidating experience. It has the austere look one would expect of such a room and it's easy to feel overwhelmed by the fact that the man who has just become the most powerful person in the United States Senate occupies that space.

That is, until you meet Harry Reid himself.

Senator Reid gave me 30 minutes of prime time on his last day as the Senate Minority Leader on Friday and, from the moment I was ushered into his office, Reid gave a welcome that quickly made me feel more like I was talking to an unassuming country lawyer than the man who will chart the Senate's legislative course for the next two years.

In addition to the warm welcome, I was struck over the course of our visit by something that I've learned to spot in life and that's readily apparent in Reid: He's a genuinely tough guy. Not in the loud, back-slapping, overt sense, but in the quiet, firm resolve with which he speaks and the conviction that he attaches to almost every word.

Reid is, after all, the former boxer who once beat a man senseless for trying to bribe him for political favors, a guy who knows what he's going to do in the next two years and who doesn’t believe that needless posturing will make it any more clear that fools will not be easily suffered on his watch.

Let's see how the former schoolyard bullies on the Republican side of the aisle deal with that until 2008.

The pride of tiny Searchlight, Nevada, who has been in the Senate for 20 years after two terms in the House of Representatives, talked with me about many things, including his legislative agenda, the Iraq Study Group, caring for Veterans, the minimum wage and investigations that he says will occur on the cooked intelligence used by George W. Bush to take us to war in Iraq.

Here is that interview:

Bob Geiger: Senator Reid, having read the Congressional Record every day for the last year, I've seen what you've struggled through as Minority Leader and I want to first congratulate you on a well-earned victory last month.

Senator Harry Reid (D-NV): Thank you very much. It's something that people didn’t think we could do. I always felt in my head… three or four months out from the election, my head kept telling me we might be able to do this. We can do this. But my heart kept overriding my head because I've been disappointed so many times, but my heart finally had to acknowledge on election night that we had won.

Geiger: I think even those of us who wanted this so badly and who wanted you to become Majority Leader felt deep down that this was just too many seats to make up…

Reid: Until election night I never even considered it. I was rationalizing that three seats would be 48 and that's certainly better than 45, but 49 would be wonderful -- change the committee structure, but here we are.

Geiger: Here we are. But having endured the antics of the Republican majority the last few years -- both from a procedural and policy point of view -- how do you balance now, as incoming Majority Leader, taking every advantage you possibly can, for the Democratic party and the Democratic party vision, but not doing a lot of what they did and, in the course of that, becoming like them?



Reid: I think first of all you have to apply a very simple principle: It's called the Golden Rule. I will not treat them like they treated me. We're going to have Congress the way it ran for more than 200 years. We're going to have committee hearings, we're going to look and see what the White House is doing. We have a Republican president, but it doesn't matter -- Republican or Democratic president, Congress has the ability and the obligation of Congressional oversight, which has not existed for six years and we have to do that. <Audio>

We're going to have real conference committees and I think if the Republicans proved anything, it's that a one-party town doesn’t work. We can't do it on our own. We have to reach out and get things done. What the Republicans failed to realize is that legislation is the art of compromise and consensus building and I'm going to compromise. And that is not a negative word because it comes from what I believe legislation is all about. I have done a lot of things legislatively in my quarter century here in Congress, but I've never ever gotten everything I wanted. I had to work with other people, build consensus and compromise and that's what I intend to do.

Geiger: There was a lot in the right-wing side of the political blog world, some carping about the Nuclear/Constitutional option, whatever you prefer to call it, and I heard one fairly well-known right-winger say that Harry Reid would do the same thing Bill Frist tried to do in a heartbeat. Would you?

Reid: No. And whoever said that is a fool and doesn't read the Congressional Record and doesn't watch what goes on in the Senate. I stated on the Senate floor that if I became Majority Leader and they passed that, I would rescind it. It is something that was negative to our country. I would never, ever do that because it was so anti-Senate and it was so anti-American.

You can read the rest of this interview at http://bobgeiger.blogspot.com/2006/12/conversation-with-senator-harry-reid.html">BobGeiger.com.

you're a DUer. :) Nicely done, Bob.

On another note, Good lord, you read the Congressional Record every day? You are hardcore!

How do you dupe a citizenry of 300 million people into supporting an unnecessary war? This question goes far beyond the United States and the Iraq War and concerns democracy itself. If a government accountable to the people can convince the people to do anything they want, including giving up their own rights and sending their children to kill and be killed for no good reason, isn't it just a different form of despotism?

The challenge now will be to get the MSM to pay attention in order for the public to be informed. We need this issue to get the kind of coverage that O.J. and Monica got. Perhaps we can suggest the following leads:

Reid Initiates Iraq Intel Investigation: What Does Angelina Jolie Think?
Dick Cheney's Intel Testimony as Hot as Paris Hilton! Details Inside!
The Office of Special Plans: Vote For the Hottest Manipulator, American Idol Style!

There is no need to go down the "manipulated intelligence" rat hole to impeach.

Bush, Cheney, et al. terrorized us into war. We know it, but the accusation is not indefensible. All they need to do is hold fast to the claim that "We believed Saddam had WMD."

No matter how compelling the evidence, we cannot unequivocally prove what was in their heads -- we can't prove that they did not believe what they were saying.

Of course, terrorizing a nation into war with their fantasies -- fantasies that they hung onto in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary -- could be characterized as criminal negligence, but that's a judgement call, not an "open and shut" case.

A case for impeachment on either the war crimes or the criminal surveillance program is an open and shut case. The fact that they committed the crimes -- and have publicly admitted to doing so -- cannot be changed by their personal beliefs about the meaning of those facts.

Bushcheney willfully violated Geneva at Guantanamo. They knowingly ordered war crimes to be committed. They can claim they convinced themselves that Geneva didn't apply, but that doesn't help them a bit. Their belief does not suspend reality, a reality that even our own Supreme Court -- the one THEY stacked -- couldn't deny.

There is no "unringing the bell" when it comes to war crimes.

If anything, their declaration that "Geneva doesn't apply" and attempt to "redefine Geneva" demonstrate consciousness of guilt. Those declarations demonstrate their knowledge that their actions were violations of those conventions. (If they weren't violating the conventions, why "redefine" them or claim they "don't apply"?).

Their criminal surveillance program is another high crime committed in plain sight. Like the war crimes, they admit their criminal behavior and then compound their crime by making the Unconstitutional claim that they have a "get out of jail free" card (the laughable claim to "unitary" power).

As in the case of their war crimes, their "cover" is no cover at all.

It is LONG PAST time to impeach Bush and Cheney for the KNOWN and PROVEN crimes against our Constitution -- i.e., the war crimes and the criminal surveillance program.

Keep it simple. Keep it open and shut. Don't go down unnecessary rat holes. Congress can investigate the hell out of their conspiracy to terrorize us into war after Bush and Cheney are impeached and removed.

Geiger: House Speaker-elect Pelosi took some heat when she made the statement that the subject of impeachment is "off the table." Now, those of us who understand that politics is probably 99 percent gray and very little black and white, looked at it and said that it's probably not something that an incoming Speaker should say or that an incoming Majority Leader should say -- that they're specifically going after the president.

But that said, isn’t there a big difference between that and any investigations that might happen and, without benefit of a crystal ball, acting on whatever results may come from those investigations?

Reid: I haven't been interested in impeachment for some time because of two words: Dick Cheney. I think that there's a significant difference between impeachment and investigations. We have to have investigations. We have to have our Intelligence Committee complete the work they started on investigating how we went to war. That's an investigation. We would be derelict in our duties by not doing that.

Of course we have to have investigations. Exhaustive investigations, too. But once all the data is in, if either Reed or Pelosi (or both) stands in the way of serious attempts to impeach Bush, then it is very likely that he will escape justice.

...All this talk of what they will do, when they should be talking about what they are doing right NOW.

The reason why they don't say that? Because right NOW, they aren't doing anything.

I want to SEE them taking action, building a case, and starting the friggin' impeachment proceedings already.

I'll believe it when I see it, because if Pelosi blocks this from happening, then all this talk of what they "will do" is just more hot air.

A little belated, I realize, but we're glad you're here!

:hi: :toast:

??

An exclusive with Harry Reid! Congrats on a great piece.
:toast:

...and for sharing it.

Disclaimer: I have differences with Senator Reid on several issues, some which I consider quite important.

Now, disclaimer aside, I am utterly convinced we have THE BEST man for the job holding that broom on the Senate podium. The man has gonads AND principles. The GOPpies ain't a-gonna know what's hittin' 'em.

That was a simply gorgeous waft of fresh air to start a Monday, Bob. Thanks so much!

appreciatively,
Bright

Republican. You should ask them to have it read (R-Not Really).

A fine interview!

I know it indicates that it's Bob Geiger on the right, but it initially confused me into thinking he was a republican. Then as I read more and visited BG's blog, I could see that was not the case.




Cher

Bookmarked for future reference. This interview has a massive amount of information in it about the direction of the next Congress.

:patriot:

Great interview.

WOW, you really hit a grand slam here Bob! :yourock: Excellent interview - Reid talks tough here and I believe he'll maintain that in session for the next 2 years.

Great interview- enlightening, even. Thanks for the detailed look into Reids head.

(Reid)
One of the things that I am dismayed about is why these (swiftboating) Veterans groups even support Republicans. They under-fund their benefits, they have little concern for some of the new things -- agent orange, they fought that -- we now have the Post-Traumatic Stress Syndrome which is running rampant among all these people and the Republicans won’t fund these programs. We do that.

The finest hospitals, I should say medical care, in the country today is the Veterans Administration. VA Hospitals. Now that's not a perfect health-care system but it's the best we have and the Republicans under-fund it every year. It's under-funded next year by this president by at least $30 billion -- billion not million.

And we have these men and women coming back from Iraq, this unusual war, with all kinds of problems. We have 23,000 who have been wounded, we have 2,000 of them with multiple amputations, we have a third of that 23,000 who have head injuries -- blind, missing limbs, paralysis. We fight for money for these programs and Republicans don’t, so I don’t understand why they would support Republicans.

(Geiger's question re Post-Traumatic Stress syndrome as a hidden problem)

Reid: The problem is, it's not too hidden any more. There's been a number of reports in recent weeks talking about how they are just not being treated and they've taken case studies of different Veterans facilities. If somebody has an appointment with a psychiatrist, a social worker or psychologist to work on their emotional problems, if they're in training, they can't take time off from their training to go see their doctor. The military's got to get modern. This is a modern war and we have modern diseases as a result of this war. Post-Traumatic Stress is a disease just like tuberculosis and it needs to be taken care of.

(End of quote)
Mr. Geiger, this is an excellent, professional piece of reporting. Thank you for taking the time to participate in this blog.

On the one hand, his credentials as a Democrat are impeccable:

Born in New York City to John D. Rockefeller 3rd and Blanchette Ferry Hooker, Jay Rockefeller graduated from Phillips Exeter Academy in 1954. He graduated from Harvard University in 1961 with a B.A. in Far Eastern Languages and History, after having spent three years studying Japanese at the International Christian University in Tokyo.

After college, Rockefeller worked for the Peace Corps in Washington, D.C., under Kennedy - where he developed a friendship with Robert Kennedy - and worked as an assistant to Sargent Shriver. He served as the operations director for their largest overseas program in the Philippines. He continued his public service in 1964–1965 as a VISTA volunteer, under Johnson, during which he moved to Emmons, West Virginia.

....

He is vice-chairman of the prominent Senate Intelligence Committee from which he has raised a series of contentious issues on the war in Iraq. By working aggressively, taking a long-term view and emphasizing the loyalty and work ethic of West Virginia's workers, Rockefeller has attracted national and international companies to the Mountain State.

In 1993 Rockefeller became the principal senate supporter, with Ted Kennedy, behind President Clinton and Hillary's sweeping health care reform package, liaising closely with Hillary, even opening up his mansion in Rock Creek Park for its first strategy meeting. The reform was subsequently defeated by an alliance between the Business Roundtable and a small-business coalition.

...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_Rockefeller

On the other hand, he is a direct descendant of John D. Rockefeller and thus a direct heir to the largess of Big Oil...

Here's hoping Reid knows what he's doing...

Bush replaces him with Rice, just in time for 2008

I believe this is true.

I also believe once investigations begin taking place, Jr. won't have nothin' on cheney as far as crimes committed. If cheney's still in, take 'em both out at the same time. President Pelosi for the remainder.

is very impeachable--Spiro Agnew comes in a very distant second in the crimes contest compared to Dick.

We should not make judgements about people soley because of what their last name.

On the other hand, he is a direct descendant of John D. Rockefeller and thus a direct heir to the largess of Big Oil...

Just a little inside secret. Many of the Rockefellers are die-hard liberal Dems. That comes from a friend who knows them personally.




Cher

family gatherings.... :shrug:

He cannot possibly have any credibility investigating the lies told to get us there?

I have no doubt whatsoever that Jay will act on this.

List of Roadblocks the Senate GOP has Put Up re: Iraq Investigations

Emmons, BTW, is about 3 miles from my home and I met Jay several times long ago.

Great interview!

Great interview. I'm particularly pleased that he recognizes the media doesn't report Dem news and the 'peculiarity' of gas prices rising again. Great agenda, although I wish real health care access for the uninsured were part of it. Maybe once they prove they can fix things Americans care about, they figure it'll be easier to convince Americans that they can fix health coverage too.

that when Mr. Geiger followed up on the question about media ignoring Dems, Senator Reid said:

"Well, you're unique -- you've read it. Most of them just read other peoples' newspaper columns and let's just let it go at that."

He seems unwilling to discuss or even acknowledge the #1 problem in this country which imho is the Corporate Press.


Thank you Mr. Geiger. Excellent interview!

He acknowledges there is a problem with the media, but doesn't set himself up as a target of specific individuals, although he obviously knows who those individuals are.

Duh. You'd think I would have realized that... In 2003 after General Clark announced he was running, he said one of the first things he would do if elected was restore the Fairness Doctrine and break up media consolidation. That was the end of General Clark on the Corporate Cable so-called news shows.

Thanks for sharing it with all of us!!!

K & R!

... I hope he's able to do what he's promising.

An honest accounting of the Iraq mess would serve the nation well

The OSP conspired to create the lies and then Bush, Cheney, Rice, Powell and Rumsfeld conspired to spread the lies. It's even in Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_on_the_Record_Report

----- ...Prior to the war in Iraq, the President and his advisors repeatedly claimed that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction that jeopardized the security of the United States. The failure to discover these weapons after the war has led to questions about whether the President and his advisors were candid in describing Iraq’s threat.

Summary of Report

This report contains 237 claims for specific misleading statements made by:

* Colin Powell
* Donald Rumsfeld
* Condoleezza Rice
* George W. Bush
* Dick Cheney -----

There actually was no intelligence saying that Iraq was a threat of *any* magnitude. I remember Nancy Pelosi coming out of an intelligence hearing and saying that she saw all the data they were presenting, and that Iraq was not the threat they were hyping it to be.

The investigation should be about the White House stovepiping propaganda to the New York Times

:yourock:

We're going to have real conference committees and I think if the Republicans proved anything, it's that a one-party town doesn’t work

Can we drop this "one Party town doesn't work Non-sense"? How are we ever gonna get a President in 2008 using rhetoric like this? A one party town CAN work - if its the Democratic party.

a situation where one party dominates everything and shuts the other party out of all meaningful participation.

...I would certainly have something more important to say.

that MSCorporate Media isn't doing. :toast:

Reid: Two years ago on election night when Kerry lost, I stood before the cameras and said this election was not lost because of abortion and Gay rights. It was lost because Democrats did not campaign in rural America. We support the issues of rural America. While the Republicans are taking care of the banks, we're taking care of the farmers, while the banks are foreclosing on them. We look at rural medical care -- who do you think saved rural hospitals with Medicare? We did.

Talk like that is why I like Reid.

Great interview Bob.

I hope this gets widespread attention!