About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Right-wing media narrative on Christmas Day plot falling apart

February 09, 2010 7:50 pm ET — 19 Comments

The right-wing media narrative that the Obama administration endangered security by giving Miranda rights to alleged attempted Christmas Day bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab is falling apart. Contrary to claims based on unnamed sources in the right-wing media, Obama administration officials agree that Abdulmutallab gave valuable intelligence during his first interrogation and that Abdulmutallab has begun divulging intelligence again.

Right-wing media run with false claim that Abdulmutallab was not interrogated

Media claim Abdulmutallab was not interrogated. On Fox News' Your World, pundit K.T. McFarland claimed that administration officials "just let this guy get -- not be interrogated." Similarly, The Weekly Standard's Stephen Hayes falsely claimed that Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair "admitted that Abdulmutallab was not interrogated for intelligence purposes." In addition, Sean Hannity falsely claimed that Abdulmutallab was not interrogated, saying: "[W]e have an underwear bomber that has information, that wanted to kill 300 Americans and we don't interrogate the guy and we let him lawyer-up."

In fact, Abdulmutallab was interrogated and intelligence, law enforcement officials agree he gave valuable information. Blair stated on January 20, "The FBI interrogated Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab when they took him into custody. They received important intelligence at that time, drawing on the FBI's expertise in interrogation that will be available in the HIG [High-value detainee Interrogation Group] once it is fully operational." Additionally, FBI director Robert Mueller testified that interrogators interviewed Abdulmutallab "to gain ... intelligence about whether there's another bomb, whether other coconspirators, where'd he get the bomb, all of that information without the benefit of -- or within the Miranda warnings."

Abdulmutallab has cooperated with interrogators since being Mirandized

Media claim DNI Blair testified that intelligence was lost because of the handling of Abdulmutallab. In her National Tea Party Convention speech, Sarah Palin claimed that Abdulmutallab "was questioned for only 50 minutes," adding: "We have a choice in how to do this. The choice was only question him for 50 minutes and then read his Miranda rights. ... [T]here are questions we would have liked this foreign terrorist to answer before he lawyered up and invoked our U.S. constitutional right to remain silent." The Wall Street Journal previously claimed in an editorial that that Blair "told the Senate that by immediately handing Abdulmutallab to the civilian justice system, the government all but slammed the door on its ability to interrogate him thoroughly."

In fact, Abdulmutallab has cooperated with interrogators since being Mirandized. Responding to Senate Intelligence Committee chairwoman Sen. Dianne Feinstein in a February 2 hearing (accessed via the Nexis database), Mueller agreed that "Abdulmutallab has provided valuable information" and that "the interrogation continues despite the fact he has been Mirandized." Blair testified in the same hearing: "There are decisions that have to be made in which you balance the requirement for intelligence with the requirement for a prosecution and the sorts of pressure that you bring onto the people that you arrest in either form. It's got to be a decision made at the time. And I think the balance struck in the Mutallab was a very -- was an understandable balance. We got good intelligence, we're getting more."

Moreover, Reuters reported in a February 2 article that "a law enforcement official" said "Abdulmutallab is talking and has been talking since last week providing useful, actionable and current intelligence that we've been actively following up on." The New York Times also reported:

Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian man accused of trying to blow up a jetliner bound for Detroit on Dec. 25, started talking to investigators after two of his family members arrived in the United States and helped earn his cooperation, a senior administration official said Tuesday evening.

Mr. Abdulmutallab, 23, began speaking to F.B.I. agents last week in Detroit and has not stopped, two government officials said. The officials declined to disclose what information was obtained from him, but said it was aiding in the investigation of the attempted terrorist attack.

"With the family, the F.B.I. approached the suspect," the senior administration official said, speaking to reporters at the White House on the condition of anonymity because of the pending legal case. "He has been cooperating for days."

Claim that administration hurt national security by disclosing Abdulmutallab's cooperation refuted

Fox forwarded claim that Obama administration hurt national security by disclosing Abdulmutallab's cooperation. Fox News has repeatedly forwarded Sen. Kit Bond's dubious claim that it was wrong to disclose that Abdulmutallab was cooperating with the investigation because, according to Bond, FBI officials, including Mueller, instructed members of the Senate Intelligence Committee that "keeping the fact of his cooperation quiet was vital to preventing future attacks against the United States." Indeed, Fox News' website FoxNation.com went so far as to ask: "Did Obama admin. help terrorists by saying undie bomber was talking?"

In fact, Intelligence Committee Chair Feinstein stated that administration didn't tell committee to keep quiet about Abdulmutallab's cooperation. A February 4 FoxNews.com article about Bond's criticism noted that "Feinstein added later that at no time in the briefing did Mueller say that Abdulmutallab's cooperation was not to be revealed" and that "Bond, however, did not attend Monday's briefing, but spoke separately with Mueller." Additionally, on February 4, Fox News national correspondent Catherine Herridge reported that "[t]wo law enforcement officials dispute Bond's characterization of the phone call with the FBI director. They claim Mueller was warning the senator that new information about Abdulmutallab could become public. The senator says others weren't on that call, he was, and he knows what happened."

Claim that Bush administration did not treat terrorism suspects in similar manner debunked

Perino claimed shoe bomber was handled differently because there was "no system in place" to hold Abdulmutallab in military custody. On Fox & Friends, former White House press secretary Dana Perino attempted to rebut the Obama administration's comparison of their use of civilian trials for alleged terrorists with the Bush administration's similar treatment of shoe bomber Richard Reid by falsely suggesting that "there wasn't a system in place" for former President Bush to order Reid to be held by the military.

Hundreds of detainees were placed in military custody before shoe bomber pleaded guilty and was sentenced. Reid was arrested in December 2001, pleaded guilty on October 4, 2002, and was sentenced on January 30, 2003. Soon after the war in Afghanistan began in October 2001, the United States began holding detainees in military custody. For instance, in the 2006 case of Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, the Supreme Court majority opinion stated that in November 2001, the plaintiff in that case, Salim Ahmed Hamdan, "was captured by militia forces and turned over to the U.S. military." In the 2004 case of Rasul v. Bush, Justice John Paul Stevens, writing for the majority, stated: "Petitioners in these cases are 2 Australian citizens and 12 Kuwaiti citizens who were captured abroad during hostilities between the United States and the Taliban. Since early 2002, the U.S. military has held them -- along with, according to the Government's estimate, approximately 640 other non-Americans captured abroad -- at the Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay." Additionally, Jose Padilla was initially held in the civilian court system after his arrest on a material witness charge and was transferred to military custody on June 9, 2002. And Yaser Hamdi was held in military custody at Guantánamo Bay beginning in January 2002 and transferred to a military brig in South Carolina in April 2002.

Bush Attorney General Ashcroft praised handling of Reid as an example of "progress because of the combined and cooperative efforts of law enforcement and intelligence." From an August 25 speech by then-Attorney General John Ashcroft:

Around this nation, we can point to quiet, steady progress because of the combined and cooperative efforts of law enforcement and intelligence:

[...]

132 individuals have been convicted or pled guilty, including shoe-bomber Richard Reid, "American Taliban" John Walker Lindh, six members of the Buffalo cell, and two members of the Detroit cell.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by magnolialover (February 09, 2010 8:44 pm ET)
      9  
      Yeah, but that was like, 8 or 9 years ago, and Ashcroft is nothing but a commie loving socialist anyway. I mean, he probably even wore a Che shirt underneath his suit.

      Anyway, WTF is wrong with these people? We got the guy who tried to blow up a plane, and thankfully, he didn't succeed. He's going to be tried, convicted, and tossed into a Supermax prison for the rest of his life, never to see freedom again.

      What more could we do to him? Nothing.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by rtwmd1230 (February 09, 2010 9:19 pm ET)
        10  
        And, as has been pointed out elsewhere, the fact that his family had access to him and persuaded him to talk more is very significant: if he'd been tossed into Gitmo for all eternity, his family wouldn't be able to get to him and certainly wouldn't have been feeling very pro-US.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by magnolialover (February 10, 2010 9:51 am ET)
          4  
          Nothing like having your Mom there to make you feel really guilty about what you tried to do. That might be worse than waterboarding.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by chrisgodawgs (February 10, 2010 8:08 am ET)
      8  
      It's even worse than MM is portraying. He was not mirandized until 9 hours after his arrest, and he had already stopped talking and had asked for a lawyer. I have YET to see a media outlet in ten of the undie burner's associates were arrested because he told the FBI/CIA where they were. Abdulmuttalab is now an informant. Tell me any other high profile terrorist who we arrested and put in the military system who became a cooperative informant within 30 days after arrest. Jose Padilla was on a brig for six years and didn't say squat. We have convicted 190+ terrorists in the civilian system, with an avg sentence of 8 years. Only 3 were convicted in the military system under Bush. One got a life sentence, one got six months and was freed and the other got nine months and was freed. I could go on and on. The Christmas bomber was handled correctly. There are ZERO advantages to have put him into military custody. ZERO!!!
      Report Abuse
      • Author by chrisgodawgs (February 10, 2010 8:12 am ET)
        4  
        I had a typo. Meant to say "I have YET to see a media outlet in the US report that ten of his associates have been arrested in Malaysia." They are being held indefinitely while we go through extradition procedures. You have to go to a Nigerian website to find out about it because the US media is asleep at the switch. You would have thought it was big news, but I guess not:

        http://news.onlinenigeria.com/templates/?a=14146&z=12
        Report Abuse
        • Author by kyle b.c. (February 11, 2010 9:24 pm ET)
             
          i just checked that link and it said that a report linked those men to Abdulmutallab, not Abdulmutallab himself. or is it assumed that the report was put together as a result of the information they got from Abdulmutallab?
          Report Abuse
      • Author by DellDolly (February 10, 2010 12:16 pm ET)
        2  
        Even Factcheck.org has it backwards - they say that he was mirandized and THEN he stopped talking.

        I sent them an email with sources, but they haven't fixed their report yet (under their Sarah Palin Tea Party factchecking), so it might help to get more people emailing them to get them to fix their description.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by nerzog (February 10, 2010 8:50 am ET)
      6  
      Gingrich tried to peddle these lies on the Daily Show last night, and Jon Stewart nailed him pretty good. I kept expecting him to just look at Newtie and say "That's just bullsh*t", but I guess he's didn't want to lose Gingrich as a future guest. He did say something like "Never mind reality" after one of Lizard Man's whoppers.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by chrisgodawgs (February 10, 2010 9:03 am ET)
        5  
        Nerzog, I saw TDS with Newt too, and I thought Stew let him off pretty easy. To me, it's simple: "Mr. Gingrich, we have him in custody, he is narcing on his associates and leading to their arrests in Malaysia, and he is cooperating fully. He will go on trial, a hundred people on the airplane will testify that they saw him try to blow them up, case closed, life in prison. How is any of this bad? Okay...GO."
        Report Abuse
        • Author by nerzog (February 10, 2010 9:26 am ET)
          4  
          I agree; he was too polite. However, he did get that little zinger in at the end of the show, pointing out that Newtie had lied about the shoe bomber being an American citizen.

          Invariably, the Troglodytes fall back to their default talking point, that Democrats treat Terrorism as a Law Enforcement problem instead of a War. The truth is that there has to be a Law Enforcement/Investigative element, since the enemy is hidden among the populace, just like criminals.

          In a stand up war, the enemy gathers in groups and wears uniforms. This is nothing like that. Unfortunately, the Troglodytes are too dense to understand that.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by proudObamasupporter (February 10, 2010 10:12 am ET)
      3  
      Bond is just upset that he and his buddies can't advance the theory that reading him his rights makes us vunerable. Why else would he care that the White House released the info that the undie bomber is talking? They certainly tried to convince us that KSM talked due to waterboarding, which is ridiculous comparison since they did it hundreds of times. If it really worked, the guy would have given us Osama.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by DellDolly (February 10, 2010 2:14 pm ET)
        2  
        People in military custody can clam up.

        People in military custody get lawyers - eventually.

        The only difference is that they think we can use torture on military detainees. But we can't.

        The thing that works to get people to talk is what the FBI and others did with Abdulmutallab.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by rumpleteasermom (February 10, 2010 11:13 am ET)
      4  
      Has any major media outlet pointed out that the reason that first interview was only for 50 minutes was because he was being sedated for surgery and was no longer competent to answer question ?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by chrisgodawgs (February 10, 2010 12:53 pm ET)
        3  
        No Rumple, the media is not mentioning that. Because that would go against the right wing narrative that Obama wants to shut turrists up before they give us intel. The media is in bed with the right wing on this issue, facts be darned.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by scanlontodd9871 (February 10, 2010 11:54 am ET)
      3  
      Anybody here see Sen Bond on Chuck Todd and Savannahs show this morning. If he thinks that the Dems are politicising(?) how terroists are being handled he is getting or already is delusional. what a joke these righteous A@#H@$%s are beginning to sound. I don't know about anyone else but I feel just as safe as I did when Cheney was running things as I do now.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by foghornleghorn (February 10, 2010 12:16 pm ET)
        2 1
        I saw that. His stupidity made it compelling television. He said the KSM trial shouldn't be in New York because it would give the terrorists a "forum", then a few minutes later said they shouldn't be done in secret in Gitmo because that would create martyrs. He seemed to know nothing about how military tribunals operate.

        Bond is an idiot. And he has power, so that makes him dangerous.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by DellDolly (February 10, 2010 12:18 pm ET)
        1 1
        It's politicizing. That's why it looked wrong with the 's'.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Bulletproof Air (February 10, 2010 2:21 pm ET)
      2  
      The thing I find funny is that no matter where these guys go, military or civilian, they have the right to consult a lawyer. Mukasey will refuse to admit he ruled this very thing to a terrorist during Bush... making an argument that our civilian crime system doesn't work is RETARDED. We're excellent at incarceration.

      The idea that these guys have superhuman powers and will bust out of handcuffs and chains is the current mindset. These Repubs are being a bunch of PATSIES.

      Another thing is that our country remains just as much of a target to terrorists no matter where these guys end up having trials. The idea that trying this KSM in NY is somehow going to make NY MORE of a target is the logic of a 6 year old.

      I just don't understand WHY if a domestic terrorist commits homicide to the extent of a foreign terrorist, he isn't referred to as an "enemy combatant" also. Or that the foreign terrorist CAN'T be tried via civil court...

      Are we in war with EVERY country that spawns an "al qaeda" terrorist that attacks the US? In that case, we're in a war WITH OURSELVES!
      Or are we in a war with al qaeda? Or do we just (all of a sudden..) want to send all FOREIGN terrorists to military tribunal, while the DC Snipers and the "jewish cleansers" that the US endures are somehow marketed as less threatening...

      It's all race and politics. The Republicans LOVE the 2nd amendment, but apparently haven't read the 1st amendment...
      Report Abuse
The Fox Effect
Media Matters Connect

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.