WASHINGTON, April 19 (Xinhua) -- U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said on Thursday that the Iraq war was "lost" and that he had conveyed the message to President George W. Bush during a meeting at the White House on Wednesday.
"Now I believe ... this war is lost, and that the surge (U.S. troop increase in Iraq) is not accomplishing anything, as indicated by the extreme violence in Iraq yesterday," Reid said at a press conference.
He said that was the message he took to Bush at Wednesday meeting.
"I know I was like the odd guy out yesterday at the White House, but at least I told him what he needed to hear, not what he wanted to hear," he said.
Bush met with Democratic leaders of Congress as well Republican lawmakers at the White House on Wednesday on an emergency war funding bill, but the two sides failed to settle their differences to avoid an looming showdown over the legislation.
Both the Senate and the House passed bills last month that would provide money for this year's U.S. military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and set a timetable for the Bush administration to pull combat troops out of Iraq next year.
Democrats said after meeting with Bush that they would send him the bill and hoped the president would sign it into law, despite the president's repeated threat to veto it.
Reid, a Democrat from Nevada, said on Thursday that the Iraq war could only be won "diplomatically, politically and economically," and the president needed to come to that realization.
In a speech in Ohio on Thursday, Bush defended his war policy and said it was "the most solemn duty of our country, is to protect our country from harm."
He repeated his assertion that in order to protect the American people, the Untied States "must aggressively pursue the enemy and defeat them elsewhere so that we do not have to face them here."
A latest CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll, taken on April 10-12, showed that 69 percent of Americans now said things were going badly for the United States in Iraq, and only 29 percent believed that sending additional troops to Iraq would make it more likely the United States would achieve its goals there.
A news USA Today/Gallup poll, published on Thursday, found that57 percent of the respondents now felt the Iraq war was a mistake, and 41 percent said it was not.
Related:
Bush, Democrats meet on Iraq bill
U.S. President George W. Bush is seen with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Senate Leader Harry Reid in the Cabinet Room of the White House in Washington April 18, 2007. (Xinhua/Reuters Photo) WASHINGTON, April 18 (Xinhua) -- U.S. President George W. Bush and Democratic leaders of Congress met at the White House on Wednesday on an emergency war funding bill, but the two sides failed to reach agreement to avoid a looming showdown over the legislation.
"It appears that they are determined to send a bill to the president that he won't accept," White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said, referring to legislation that would provide funding to this year's U.S. military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and would set a timetable for American pullout from Iraq. Full story
4/16/2007
‘Nothing to Hide,’ Gonzales Insists in Early Account
WASHINGTON, April 15 — Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales offered a measured apology for his mistakes in the dismissal of eight United States attorneys, but said in testimony prepared for a Senate hearing on Tuesday that he had “nothing to hide” and that none of the prosecutors were removed to influence the outcome of a case.
In his testimony, which was released Sunday by the Justice Department, Mr. Gonzales provided an account of his own actions, which was largely consistent with his past assertions that his role was very limited and his recollection fragmentary.
Mr. Gonzales said he did not select any of the prosecutors slated for dismissal last year and largely delegated the effort to his former chief of staff, D. Kyle Sampson.
“I have nothing to hide, and I am committed to assuring the Congress and the American public that nothing improper occurred here,” he said in the testimony.
Mr. Gonzales acknowledged that his public statements about the firings had been confusing and that he had misspoken at a news conference on March 13 when he asserted that he “was not involved in any discussions about what was going on.”
And, Mr. Gonzales said, “Of course I knew about the process because of, at a minimum, these discussions with Mr. Sampson.”
Mr. Gonzales said he was even aware that two Justice Department lawyers had been identified as possible replacement candidates for United States attorneys to be fired, including Rachel L. Brand, chief of the Office of Legal Policy, and Deborah Rhodes, now a United States attorney in Alabama.
After the testimony was released, two Democratic senators, Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, and Charles E. Schumer of New York, dismissed Mr. Gonzales’s written testimony as inadequate. The top Republican on the panel, Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, said Mr. Gonzales needed to disclose more facts when he appeared before the committee.
Vice President Dick Cheney continued to express the White House’s support for Mr. Gonzales, but he made it clear that it was up to the attorney general to save his job.
“He’s a good man,” Mr. Cheney said in an interview recorded Saturday and broadcast Sunday on “Face the Nation” on CBS. “I have every confidence in him; the president has every confidence in him.”
But Mr. Cheney added, “This took place inside the Justice Department. The one who needs to answer to that and lay out on the record the specifics of what transpired is the attorney general, and he’ll do so.”
Mr. Gonzales’s troubles come as another major figure in the Bush administration, Paul D. Wolfowitz, is fighting to retain his post as president of the World Bank after accounts that he had used his influence to raise the salary of his girlfriend. They each represent important elements of the administration’s policy, as Mr. Wolfowitz was a principal architect of the invasion of Iraq and Mr. Gonzales was a principal supervisor of the legal strategy to fight terrorism.
In his statement, Mr. Gonzales admitted he had made mistakes, but his contrition was limited largely to missteps in the treatment of prosecutors who were asked to resign. “I made mistakes in not ensuring that these U.S. attorneys received more dignified treatment,” Mr. Gonzales said. “Others within the Department of Justice also made mistakes. As far as I know, these were honest mistakes of perception and judgment and not intentional acts of misconduct.”
“I am sorry for my missteps that have helped fuel the controversy,” he said.
Mr. Gonzales is certain to be asked on Tuesday about his own recollection of events. He has said he does not recall a meeting on Nov. 27, 2006, in which the dismissals were discussed. Michael A. Battle, the former director of the department’s United States attorney liaison office, has told Congressional staff members that Mr. Gonzales was at the meeting when a memorandum was circulated that provided a detailed outline of the plan to dismiss the prosecutors.
But Mr. Gonzales insisted in his written statement that not one of the United States attorneys was improperly fired. “I know that I did not and would not ask for a resignation of any individual in order to interfere with or influence a particular prosecution for partisan political gain,” he said.
Mr. Gonzales’s prepared statement did not address several significant issues cited by Democrats who have charged that the firings were politically motivated. Two of the fired prosecutors, David C. Iglesias of New Mexico and John McKay, were fired after Republican officials complained to the Justice Department. In Mr. Iglesias’s case, Senator Pete V. Domenici, Republican of New Mexico, complained to the White House about the prosecutor’s lack of progress on a politically sensitive case involving Democrats.
The release of Mr. Gonzales’s testimony was part of the intense political gamesmanship and calculation by the Bush administration and Senate Democrats in advance of the hearing. Mr. Gonzales also previewed some of his testimony on Sunday in an op-ed article in The Washington Post.
In his testimony, which was released Sunday by the Justice Department, Mr. Gonzales provided an account of his own actions, which was largely consistent with his past assertions that his role was very limited and his recollection fragmentary.
Mr. Gonzales said he did not select any of the prosecutors slated for dismissal last year and largely delegated the effort to his former chief of staff, D. Kyle Sampson.
“I have nothing to hide, and I am committed to assuring the Congress and the American public that nothing improper occurred here,” he said in the testimony.
Mr. Gonzales acknowledged that his public statements about the firings had been confusing and that he had misspoken at a news conference on March 13 when he asserted that he “was not involved in any discussions about what was going on.”
And, Mr. Gonzales said, “Of course I knew about the process because of, at a minimum, these discussions with Mr. Sampson.”
Mr. Gonzales said he was even aware that two Justice Department lawyers had been identified as possible replacement candidates for United States attorneys to be fired, including Rachel L. Brand, chief of the Office of Legal Policy, and Deborah Rhodes, now a United States attorney in Alabama.
After the testimony was released, two Democratic senators, Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, and Charles E. Schumer of New York, dismissed Mr. Gonzales’s written testimony as inadequate. The top Republican on the panel, Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, said Mr. Gonzales needed to disclose more facts when he appeared before the committee.
Vice President Dick Cheney continued to express the White House’s support for Mr. Gonzales, but he made it clear that it was up to the attorney general to save his job.
“He’s a good man,” Mr. Cheney said in an interview recorded Saturday and broadcast Sunday on “Face the Nation” on CBS. “I have every confidence in him; the president has every confidence in him.”
But Mr. Cheney added, “This took place inside the Justice Department. The one who needs to answer to that and lay out on the record the specifics of what transpired is the attorney general, and he’ll do so.”
Mr. Gonzales’s troubles come as another major figure in the Bush administration, Paul D. Wolfowitz, is fighting to retain his post as president of the World Bank after accounts that he had used his influence to raise the salary of his girlfriend. They each represent important elements of the administration’s policy, as Mr. Wolfowitz was a principal architect of the invasion of Iraq and Mr. Gonzales was a principal supervisor of the legal strategy to fight terrorism.
In his statement, Mr. Gonzales admitted he had made mistakes, but his contrition was limited largely to missteps in the treatment of prosecutors who were asked to resign. “I made mistakes in not ensuring that these U.S. attorneys received more dignified treatment,” Mr. Gonzales said. “Others within the Department of Justice also made mistakes. As far as I know, these were honest mistakes of perception and judgment and not intentional acts of misconduct.”
“I am sorry for my missteps that have helped fuel the controversy,” he said.
Mr. Gonzales is certain to be asked on Tuesday about his own recollection of events. He has said he does not recall a meeting on Nov. 27, 2006, in which the dismissals were discussed. Michael A. Battle, the former director of the department’s United States attorney liaison office, has told Congressional staff members that Mr. Gonzales was at the meeting when a memorandum was circulated that provided a detailed outline of the plan to dismiss the prosecutors.
But Mr. Gonzales insisted in his written statement that not one of the United States attorneys was improperly fired. “I know that I did not and would not ask for a resignation of any individual in order to interfere with or influence a particular prosecution for partisan political gain,” he said.
Mr. Gonzales’s prepared statement did not address several significant issues cited by Democrats who have charged that the firings were politically motivated. Two of the fired prosecutors, David C. Iglesias of New Mexico and John McKay, were fired after Republican officials complained to the Justice Department. In Mr. Iglesias’s case, Senator Pete V. Domenici, Republican of New Mexico, complained to the White House about the prosecutor’s lack of progress on a politically sensitive case involving Democrats.
The release of Mr. Gonzales’s testimony was part of the intense political gamesmanship and calculation by the Bush administration and Senate Democrats in advance of the hearing. Mr. Gonzales also previewed some of his testimony on Sunday in an op-ed article in The Washington Post.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)