Dick Cheney lied to me on war, says GOP leader

It is the central charge against the Bush White House, that the administration lied its way into a war in Iraq.

For years, left-wing pundits and groups like MoveOn.org beat the drums with this accusation. The White House response: We were just acting on the same intelligence everyone else had -- evidence, which turned out to be faulty, that Iraq's Saddam Hussein was harboring weapons of mass destruction.

Now comes Dick Armey, once House Majority Leader, who described a classified one-on-one briefing in the vice president's hideaway office in the U.S. Capitol where he says Vice President Dick Cheney went beyond that into outright deception.

According to a new book on Cheney called "Angler," by Washington Post reporter Barton Gellman, Armey, a Texas Republican, had spoken out against the war. Cheney was trying to change his mind. So the vice president told him the threat from Iraq was actually "more imminent than we want to portray to the public at large." In Armey's account, Cheney told him:

Iraq's "ability to miniaturize weapons of mass destruction, particularly nuclear," had been "substantially refined since the first Gulf War," and would soon result in "packages that could be moved even by ground personnel....We now know they have the ability to develop these weapons in a very portable fashion, and they have a delivery system in their relationship with organizations such as Al Qaeda."

"Did Dick Cheney ... purposely tell me things he knew to be untrue?" Armey said. "I seriously feel that may be the case...Had I known or believed then what I believe now, I would have publicly opposed [the war] resolution right to the bitter end, and I believe I might have stopped it from happening."

-- Johanna Neuman

Photo: Mykola Lazarenko/AP

Comments

[Justin]

What Armey says may be true, but what difference does it make now? There actually were many voices opposing the war before it happened and we were written off as un-patriotic. Seriously. People who voiced any dissent or questioned the RUSH to war were ridiculed on FOX, etc. These politicians who say "If I knew then what I know now..." do us no good. Obama opposed the war in the face of the critisim. He was one of the few. If Armey and everyone who supported the preemtive war with Iraq were as strong as Obama and those of us who opposed it our country would be a very different and better place. I wish they wouldn't hide behind Cheney and Bush saying "they tricked me!" We all knew they were feeding us a line of bull. At least I did.

[yoshi]

dear america, it seems the gop is willing to finally throw one of their own "under the bus", now that it is convenient. by that i mean they are going to sacrifice dick so the republican party will seem like they were innocent, thus removing any annoying stench that might be lingering around the gop come election time. truly, a masterful act of deceit and manipulation. my hat's off. sincerely, satan.

[Bruell]

Last train to Nuerenberg

It's time to think about putting together another "Nuernberg" Trial, we just need someone with a spine who is not part of the lying network that goes through both the Republicans and the Dem's.

[Rhysom]

And yet, in spite of ALL this, Sarah P is making people want to vote for her--and people are falling for it. What IS up with Americans these days??

[Ivan]

Likely, Richard Armey will be lambasted as unpatriotic for sharing his views in a seeming reflective and sorrowful way. The great thing is that he's doing it at a time when it matters most: Americans choosing which path they will opt for to get us out of this mess that has been so profitable for his former-soon-to-be-current employer/company/contractor that didn't have to bid the way all others have to and will into the future.

God bless all Americans, even those lying criminals.

[Jack]

To vulture from Texas - Robert McNamara was a republican. John F. Kennedy picked him anyway and offered him the job because he was known to be smart very smart. But he has never been a democrat.

[VultureTX]

TO JacK- thank you for that correction. McNamara acted under the Democratic Mantle of JFK and routinely donated to the democrats (Kennedys mostly) and espoused Democratic positions of the time. so a RINO politically. or maybe just owned by the Kennedys.

Still you have a better evidenced case against McNamara for crimes of office than you do Dick Cheney. The DEM (leftist side) are silent just like when you tell them that GWB was not the first to listen in on phone calls. Silly progressives you would think a liberal arts degree included US History.

[Louie]

Viet Nam and Iraq are proof that you need to fear the military industrial complex

[Zourgrapes]

McNamara? Please. I am taking a wild guess here, but I tend to think that people who oppose the war in Iraq are pretty unanimous in thinking that the war in Vietnam was the wrong thing to do at the time, regardless of party affiliation.

[brandon]

Vote third party!!

Most importantly. Be well informed and vote with your gut instinct.

This is good news because its someone who has clout.

Thank the man and encourage such behavior.

I we all say "so what, thats not news" then it sounds like we accept the bushit we are handed

[Jeff]

Cheney is a criminal and should be tried for war crimes.

[H. Hamlin]

Case I. This statement by Cheney was made as quoted. Cheney knew it was totally false and simply manufactured it in order to persuade Dick Armey to support Bush on Iraq. Armey told exactly this to the reporter and the reporter correctly reported it.

If I is true then we have

1) Cheney blatantly lied in order to get Armey's vote
II) Armey accepted the statement without any checking and it was his main reason for his vote.
III) The reporter has done us all a great service by revealing this lie and its consequence.

There are some reasons to doubt Case I.

a) Politicians live in a world where truth is a very malleable quantity. For example, in the recent primary Obama told voters in Ohio (or , maybe, Michigan) that NAFTA needs to be revised. At the same time one of his high ranking advisors was telling some official in Canada that Obama's statements should not be taken seriously--they were purely political. Things like this are common to all politicians. Hillary Clinton was doing something similar. McCain has done similar things in other contexts. Apparently Sarah Palin is doing much the same in describing her activities in Alaska to her new (entire U.S.) audience. In brief, all statements by politicians must be treated with caution. Politicians themselves are certainly aware of this. Certainly Dick Armey had ways of checking statements about U.S. Intelligence.

b) Reporters write for a certain audience. Gellman knows he is writing for the liberal Democrats. He wants to get attention and to sell books and to win a Pulitzer. He knows the Pulitzer committee is liberal Democratic. He is giving us his version of what a politician chose to recall after a four year period. Many reasons are there for caution.

Case II.
Cheney actually read deep in some obscure Intelligence report that someone, sometime had conjectured something like this might be possible. Cheney related this to Armey with some qualifiers--but with an unjustified level of enthusiasm
Armey chose to accept this and whatever else he knew as being reason to go into Iraq..Now, four years later, he would like to not be responsible for that decision. His statement about "knowing what I know now", etc. is just the current popular position and does not add any new information.
Either Armey or the reporter neglected to mention whatever qualifiers Cheney offered.

Whether you believe Case I (like most of the blog commentators) or Case II, like me, probably depends on your political leanings. I think U.S. national interest was well served by getting rid of Saddam. I do not know what would have happened if Bush had not gone into Iraq. I suspect, however, that that timeline is worse for the U.S than this one.

[Robert]

This government is out of control because the people let it get out of control. You spy on your neighbors, the government spies on you, they spy on each other and nobody wins.Democrats or Republicans are all the same corrupt dogs.It will never change, no matter what. The corruption is 100 times worse than Mexico or anywhere else because YOU LET IT HAPPEN !!!!!!!