Fleischer says Bush changed after WMDs not found

Fleisher keeps lying. None of them told the truth, and none of them had any principles.

Um, no, Bush won in 2004 because of the Swift Boat Veterans for "truth." Then, a number of those veterans recanted their contributions to the organization during the two years after the election. Oh, and I won't even go into voting irregularities in Ohio...

Ari, Ari, Ari...President Bush kept saying over and over, that he made is decisions regarding the Iraq war on his deeply held beliefs and unwavering principles. He said over and over that his decisions were about who he was, and would remain steadfast in his philosophical and tactical views on the war. Bush was wrong, Cheny was wrong, Rumsfelt was wrong...the entire cabinet was wrong, Ari Fleischer was wrong. Colon Powell has been the only one to come forward with regrets and tell the truth. No more excuses, 8 years of history tells it all. Shame, dead soldiers, broken families, 2 unresolved wars, failed policies and debt tells it all.

No! GWB invaded Iraq in order to secure his re-election and nothing more! This criminal President murdered so many thousands, destroyed that nation, deeply endangered our own way of life and our moral ethics, as well as the worlds economy by refusing to consider anything more than himself. The fool is now going to live with his belligerent mistakes and most unfortunately, so do we!

George Bush is indeed either a liar or guilty of gross neglience and negligent homicide. The CIA was wrong, but cautiously; its report that Bush waved about on national TV was edited by his administration to remove all warnings that the CIA information was uncertain and that in any case Hussein would not use WMDs against anybody except internal enemies. Fleischer knows this and is a liar and, like all the desperate neocons these days, a historical revisionist. Unfortunately, the American people, who were stupid enough to be fooled in the first place, are still stupid enough to be fooled by this sort of nonsense.

"That's why George Bush won in 2004." - Ari Fleischer
George Bush won in 2004 because John Kerry was such a poor campaigner. If people can't understand what the heck you are talking about, they are unlikely to want to elect you president.

Translation; "Please don't prosecute us for sending your sons to die for nothing. It was George Tenet's fault!"

More self-aggrandizing BS from Ari. First of all, weapons of mass destruction is a misnomer. The weapons we were looking for, biological and chemical, are battlefield tactical weapons and difficult to use effectively. Of course, we knew he had them at one time because we still had the receipts. But so long as he was using them on Iranians and the Kurds, no one in the government gave a rat's behind. As for Saddam being a liar, I think he was saying he didn't have them anymore. We had probably as much saying he did not have them as we did saying he did. We did not let the inspectors finish the job. Instead Bush cooked the books to invade.

Revisionist bull, a twist on so-called CIA intelligence, and discussed on the comedian turned 'news anchor' joke of a news program. Ridiculous.

Ari .. you are still a moron .. W never won a presidential election

What a whitewash.

Blaming the CIA is a weak excuse. GWB was still responsible for making sure the information he used was accurate.

No, the reason why George Bush "won" in 2004 is the same reason why George Bush "won" in 2000 --- he and his cabal conspired to subvert the Constitution, render minorities in key electoral states unable to vote, trashed the Democratic process in Florida because honestly counting the votes there would have resulted in Al Gore winning its 25-electoral votes, and --- just in case --- had five Supreme Court justices who'd been appointed by Reagan and Poppy Bush wired in the event truth and honesty reared their ugly heads. I like the fact that I can look in the mirror every morning and know that I did not vote for that incredible dolt, a coward of a man who ran from responsibility throughout the Vietnam War, and that I bear no responsibility for the 4,000 military killed in Iraq --- or the thousands more maimed and injured --- because of George W. Bush. The people I really pity are those who voted for Bush and whose payback was a son or daughter killed and wounded in Iraq. What a terrible price to pay for believing in another human being!med and wounded --- who've died in IraqiGeorge Bush key electoral statesis owo

I'm sorry, Ari, it was the Supreme Court that gave Bush the win in 2004, wasn't it? Such selective memory-and from someone we were supposed to trust?

"Stand by your principles and act on them" is bad counsel???
Are you serious?

Those guys are amazingly stupid. A small time dictator would never anger a country that can destroy it. It's Dictatorship 101 and one didn't need to have any special insight to know that. It clearly was a matter of being frivolous with Americans lives so the neglected son (Jeb was always the favorite) could stick it to his old man.

These guys are trying like crazy to re-write their awful and incompetent history but it ain't gonna work. The best thing Fleischer and company could do for themselves is to just shut up.

Yeah, its nice to be sincere whether you are right or wrong. But some people are actually smart enough to know the right from wrong. And some people are smart enough to admit when they are wrong. Shrub Bush isn't one of these people.

People believe President Obama is both smart and sincere, and will not be so boneheaded to resist admitting even the smallest mistake, or to stubbornly refuse ("sincerely refuse" without the spin), to take steps to make sure he corrects the larger ones. This is why Obama won in November, and his win serves as a complete repudiation of Shrub Bush's fitness for the job and his consistently wrong but sincere, never admit a mistake, and everything is a secret, style of governing.

Fleischer's a tool...

Obama can do anything he wishes, he doesn't need Fleischer's advice. Isn't he a rock star with Hollywood's blessing ? How many movie stars have we seen complaining and crying about the Obama War ? Even the great CNN has given their blessing for the war.

no, w won in 2000/2004 because the reps used every dirty trick they could think of and then some.

Good start, but I disagree that the faulty intelligence was just about the CIA. I hope in the interview he acknowledges the misinformation that came from Bush's cabinet.

No, Saddam was telling the truth - that he had no WMDs in Iraq. He said this on Channel 4 TV in Britain in February 2003.

It is Fleischer that is the liar, as usual.

And I was one of the millions who were "smart enough" to figure out that WMDs would not be found and Iraq would be turned into a hell-hole because of evil people like Fleischer and Bush.

But

Saddam had weapons, he used them on his own people and his generals knew had had them too.

Saddam hid them or sent them to Syria or another country. Do you forget that Libya gave up thier WMD? That was immediately after we invaded Iraq.

I though Bush won in 2004 because a group of Texas billionaires rounded up a group of psuedo-Vietnam Vets from various unemployment lines and Salvation Army soup kitchens to become the infamous (and astoundingly well-funded) "Swift Boat Veterans" and subsequently call into peculiar question everything John Kerry had done in Vietnam, while simultaneously blurring the reality that Bush had not only never bothered to demonstrate his consummate patriotism in Vietnam, but wasn't particularly inclined to show up for his National Guard mercy slot either.

The fact that it was ultimately shown that not a single member of this August group had EVER served with John Kerry during ANY of the actions for which he received his various medals and letters, but only ONE had ever served with Kerry in 'Nam at ANY point during the conflict was was somehow buried as well.

I don't think it was because it was generally accepted that Bush was a man of principle and action

Bush has nothing to be ashamed about.Saddam was a weapon of mass destruction. Ask 300,000 dead Kurds.If left unchecked,it was a matter of time before he financed a dirty bomb somewhere,probably Isreal. Remember,he gave $10,000 cash to each family of the Palestinian suicide "martyrs"
To not have anything would have been criminially neglegent...especially in light of 9/11, and every intelligence adgency telling him they Saddam had them.
As a matter of fact, Saddam did have them. We have the receipt. We sold WMDs to him during the Iran-Iraq war. I still love the guy.

"If people think you are sincere, ... people will back you up." Or, stated more plainly, "you can fool most of the people some of the time." And by the way, Fleischer isn't credible now when he portrays Bush as a witless idiot. Well, Bush is a witless idiot, but he's also the liar that Fleischer isn't willing to admit.

"People say George Bush is a liar. No, he was telling what he was told by our CIA. Saddam was a liar.”

Bullfeathers. The CIA told George what George told them to tell him. George is the liar; it's as simple as that.

Saddam reportedly told his debriefer that he had previously had the makings of chem and bio weapon but got rid of them when the UN inspectors came in. When asked why he did not admit this earlier, Saddam said he did not believe that the US would really invade and he did not want Iran to know that he did not have chem or bio weapons. Of course there are or were still some remaining components as evident by the 20 or so coalition troops killed or injured by IEDs using old chemical shells.

Let's see... If you are in a position of great power, start out with a conclusion, and then tell people to find evidence to support that conclusion (after 9/11, Bush telling his intelligence people to "find the connection to Iraq"), what is likely to happen...?

Deliberately lie? No, probably not. Create an environment which encouraged exactly the type of intelligence failure that happened? Ayuh.

For this over 4000 of our service people have given their lives in Iraq.

Michael post here what yellow papers told you to he post us. Michael is liar; it's as wrong as that

Ari Fleischer is one of the exponents of Zionism in the US. His opiinions about Bush and Iraq must be read in that context.

Ari Fleischer is undoubtedly one of the most notorious of public liars who ever lived.

Why should anyone believe a word of what he says, after his years of obfuscation and deceit?

Care to elaborate, Yankee12?

I truly believe the Iraq war and deposing Saddam was the right thing to do. Study how the man ran his country and look at his regional ambitions. It would have been ugly had he succeeded. I also believe the way the war was conducted was borderline criminal. The military generals and politicians (i.e. Powell) who told the truth on how the Iraq war would probably turn out were chastised by Rummy and Cheney and run out of town. And yes, I know, we supported Saddam and helped him greatly in his war with Iran. International politics is an ugly, dirty business.
I'm headed to Iraq soon and still believe it was a just war but just not done right.