About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Perino falsely claims Obama administration admitted it "bungled" Abdulmutallab interrogation

February 12, 2010 9:20 am ET — 86 Comments

On Fox & Friends, Fox News contributor Dana Perino falsely claimed that the Obama administration admitted that it "bungled" the interrogation and Mirandizing of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab following his arrest because "they had to do a review." In fact, the "review" the administration conducted following Abdulmutallab's attempted attack on a Northwest Airlines flight focused on intelligence and national security measure failures prior to the incident and was not focused on Abdulmutallab's detention and interrogation. 

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

Perino claims interrogation was "bungled" by the "administration's own admission" because it had to "do a review"

From the February 12 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends:

STEVE DOOCY (co-host): Yesterday, Robert Gibbs, who stepped into your shoes at the White House -- stepped into your high heels --

PERINO: They're tight.

DOOCY: Stop it. He actually stood up for John Brennan. Here's a little snippet of that.

GIBBS [video clip]: I know this: John is there each and every day working in his office to try to do everything he can to keep the American people safe. And I would suggest, whether it's to Senator Bond or others on Capitol Hill, that these are decisions best left to people that have an understanding of counterterrorism, experience in counterterrorism and law enforcement rather than to politicians on Capitol Hill.

DOOCY: Well then, this past week, it all got started when he wrote that lecture, essentially, in USA Today. And he said of his critics, "We don't need lectures," and then he went on to say, "politically motivated criticism and uninformed fearmongering only serves the goals of Al Qaeda." Makes it sound like if you criticize the administration, you're helping Al Qaeda.

PERINO: But also remember, he didn't just write an opinion-editorial in the USA Today; he was responding to the USA Today being critical of the administration's handling of the Abdulmutallab situation. I think there's a lot of room for criticism there. I've written about it a lot with my former colleague Bill Burck on National Review Online. Ever since they Mirandized the underwear bomber after 50 minutes of questioning -- and by the administration's own admission, it was bungled. They had to do a review.

Review looked at security and intelligence failures prior to attempted attack, not the interrogation itself

Obama ordered two reviews of air security and announced immediate increased airline security measures. In a December 28 address following the incident, Obama ordered several actions to "protect the American people and to secure air travel," including a review of the watch list and airport security procedures. From his December 28 order:

Since I was first notified of this incident, I've ordered the following actions to be taken to protect the American people and to secure air travel.

First, I directed that we take immediate steps to ensure the safety of the traveling public. We made sure that all flights still in the air were secure and could land safely. We immediately enhanced screening and security procedures for all flights, domestic and international. We added federal air marshals to flights entering and leaving the United States. And we're working closely in this country, federal, state and local law enforcement, with our international partners.

Second, I've ordered two important reviews, because it's absolutely critical that we learn from this incident and take the necessary measures to prevent future acts of terrorism.

The first review involves our watch list system, which our government has had in place for many years to identify known and suspected terrorists so that we can prevent their entry into the United States. Apparently the suspect in the Christmas incident was in this system, but not on a watch list, such as the so-called no-fly list. So I have ordered a thorough review, not only of how information related to the subject was handled, but of the overall watch list system and how it can be strengthened.

The second review will examine all screening policies, technologies and procedures related to air travel. We need to determine just how the suspect was able to bring dangerous explosives aboard an aircraft and what additional steps we can take to thwart future attacks.

White House conducted security and intelligence review. The White House produced a security and intelligence review on January 7 and issued a statement along with it saying it reflected a review of the "terrorist watchlisting system" and "the need to look for ways to constantly improve and assist our CT [counterterrorism] analysts."

White House issued directive for "immediate actions" for intelligence and national security. On January 7, Obama issued a list of "immediate actions" for the "intelligence, homeland security, and law enforcement communities" to take "to enhance the security of the American people." The directive says the "actions are necessary given inherent systemic weakness and human errors revealed by the review." The directive addresses corrective actions for the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Director of National Intelligence, the CIA, the FBI/Terrorist Screening Center, the National Counterterrorism Center, the National Security Agency, and national security staff. Among other things, the directive orders DHS to "[a]ggressively pursue enhanced screening technology, protocols, and procedures, especially in regard to aviation and other transportation sectors, consistent with privacy rights and civil liberties; strengthen international partnerships and coordination on aviation security issues."

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by nerzog (February 12, 2010 9:26 am ET)
      16 1
      The Republicans resemble a rabid Chihuahua chewing on Obama's shoe. It's annoying, impossible to ignore, and potentially dangerous, but it's still a f***ing Chihuahua.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by null1fy (February 12, 2010 10:02 am ET)
        2 21
        Well, the rabid loony left seem to be a little too re-active instead of pro-active.

        "Apparently the suspect in the Christmas incident was in this system, but not on a watch list, such as the so-called no-fly list. So I have ordered a thorough review, not only of how information related to the subject was handled, but of the overall watch list system and how it can be strengthened."

        Maybe if Obummer bowed to Abdulmutallab he would say: "Ok, we're cool, I won't bomb anyone anymore."
        Report Abuse
        • Author by nerzog (February 12, 2010 10:10 am ET)
          5 2
          Yap Yap. Grrrrrrrr.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by jediknight65 (February 12, 2010 10:20 am ET)
          4 1
          so what you think we need to invade nigeria now? how about iran?

          and as for being rabid?

          who are the lones pushing the birther bullcrap and support racists like rush limbaugh? loony left?

          no its people who support the republicans like your doing right now.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by null1fy (February 12, 2010 10:39 am ET)
              18
            It's the smoke and mirrors loony left living in their magical fairy-world where there are no terrorists and saying we should apologize to <insert protected group here> and implementing taxation robbery us so we can all be poor and equal.

            Remember that South Park episode where humans from the future come to the past for a better life? (calm down, this is only an analogy) That's what the loony left wants out of us. To strip us of our freedom and humanity.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by vhw28672478 (February 12, 2010 10:47 am ET)
              6 1
              prove it
              Report Abuse
            • Author by vhw28672478 (February 12, 2010 11:03 am ET)
              5 1
              Tax cut for rich is a joke
              Report Abuse
            • Author by jediknight65 (February 12, 2010 11:33 am ET)
              6 1
              where do you get that? seriously? what are you on?

              prove it if you have the stones
              Report Abuse
            • Author by jediknight65 (February 12, 2010 11:55 am ET)
              6 2
              see this is why you chickenhawk idiot neo cons are so stupid.

              the only magical fairy world that exists is the one your living in.

              you defend people who are blatantly racist against our president, you support people who say its fine to go to war and lie about the rational because the republicans played upon fears, you support people who would torture terrorists rather than try them as the criminals as they are and you support people who spy on their own countrymen just to ensure they can stay in power. and then give away tax cuts to rich people who have no interest in benefiting their country but only their own pockets.

              the only loon here is yourself. your a coward and chickenhawk. if your so gung ho, pick up a rife and join the army and go fight.

              prove your statemens if you have the stones. otherwise sit down and shut up
              Report Abuse
              • Author by null1fy (February 12, 2010 1:00 pm ET)
                  10
                Ah, the magical loony left. What a fantastic place it must be!

                I will prove my statement with a single quote from Obummer:

                "The Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can't do to you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you, but doesn't say what the Federal government or State governmentmustdo on your behalf."

                I like how you say "sit down and shut up." That's pretty funny. What are YOU going to do about it if I don't? Punk.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by jediknight65 (February 12, 2010 1:21 pm ET)
                  7 1
                  oooo calling me a punk? is that the best you have? really? and where exactly did you get that quote?

                  and by your obvious disrespect to call the president by his name simply proves that you belong with the bigots and racists like limbaugh and darth cheney and the rest.

                  see here is the thing, your quoting a opinion given by a president who happens to have been a law professor. it is his own interpretation. there are many scholars who hold differing interpretations on the constitution.

                  like for example john ashcroft. even though the 4th amendment was explicitly violated with the domestic spying program, he said legally it was ok, based on bullcrap opinions by jay bybee and john yoo. hmm.

                  or alberto gonzales even....said that torture was ok, even though it is illegal by law and treaties that we signed again backed by bullcrap opinions from the brain trust of bybee and yoo.

                  there are two rights addded to the constitution specifically violated by people your defending. call me a punk all you want. but you know what. when i call you a gutless chickenhawk, its because its true and you have proved it more than once on this thread. so this time instead of telling you to....im going to ask you to sit down and shut up to be nice and try to help you avoid further embarrassment of yourself.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by null1fy (February 12, 2010 2:00 pm ET)
                      8
                    What does any of that unintelligble garbage you spouted have anything to do with the president's opinion on the Constitution? You go from one topic to the next, not even realizing how braindead you are by generalizing my opinion. "Because I think this, I must be that!" Lets focus on one issue at a time, chief.

                    He has taken the role of Commander-in-Chief, not scholar. Unlike a scholar, his negative views towards the Constitution are actually harmful to our way of life.

                    He thinks the governement MUST protect us from ourselves! And rob the country of the principles on which it was founded.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by jediknight65 (February 12, 2010 2:42 pm ET)
                      5  
                      people cant change their minds? or their attitudes when present with something better?

                      i presented the fact that two previous AG's shredded the Constitution, and its principles, that you are holding so tightly.

                      and if i remember correctly, president obama isn't the one trying to inject god into every political argument there is.

                      if your so into freedom and everything, then you should be screaming for the repeal of "dont ask, dont tell" and gays should be allowed to openly serve in the military. that is freedom. not this braindead crap arguments about homosexuality being wrong because the bible said so, when there is supposed to be seperation of church and state. they are people and they have rights just like us. so let them do what they want.
                      Report Abuse
                    • Author by peebs755 (February 12, 2010 2:43 pm ET)
                      6  
                      Its telling that you called the answer "unitelligble", if that's a word. Its perfectly understandable to those of us with a brain. The fact that you DON'T understand makes you dull and tiresome. Go away.
                      Report Abuse
                    • Author by mikehuck1976 (February 13, 2010 11:40 am ET)
                      3  
                      I would love to hear your explanation of what Obama has done to the Constitution that has been harmful to our way of life. Please explain.

                      I love it when people who voted for G-Dub twice now pretend as if the Constitution is all holy. It is except for when your in the fetal position crying yourself to sleep at night because the terrorists are coming, right? Then all rules and Constitutional laws go right out the window.
                      Report Abuse
                  • Author by null1fy (February 12, 2010 2:23 pm ET)
                      8
                    It is also interesting to note that you say I'm defending people. I have defended nobody. I only attacked Obama's wayward principles & the loony left.

                    The enemy of my enemy isn't my friend.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by jediknight65 (February 12, 2010 2:28 pm ET)
                      5  
                      you're using the same arguments these idiots and know liars are using.
                      Report Abuse
                    • Author by peebs755 (February 12, 2010 2:44 pm ET)
                      6  
                      You STILL haven't given any examples that stand up.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by null1fy (February 12, 2010 6:39 pm ET)
                          7
                        Yes I did, go back up and use your mighty brainpower to read Obummer's quote.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by Johaely (February 12, 2010 7:26 pm ET)
                             
                          But you haven't given us a source for your quote. It could be from someone else or even made up.
                          Report Abuse
                        • Author by RealTruthseeker (February 15, 2010 7:41 am ET)
                          1  
                          And you have yet to say to what Mr. Obama was referring when he said what's in your quotes.

                          For instance, I can take the words of your previous post and say that you said "I'm... defending... loony... people." Of course, that's not the context of what you're posting.

                          What is the context of Mr. Obama's quote? And, yes indeed, he did say it.
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by RealTruthseeker (February 15, 2010 7:53 am ET)
                               
                            Also, must add another quote:

                            "Nothing is more certain than the indispensable necessity of Government, and it is equally undeniable, that whenever and however it is instituted, the people must cede to it some of their natural rights, in order to vest it with requisite powers."

                            Is that said by some socialist, Communist, or Marxist? No.

                            It's a quote from a signer of the Declaration of Independence and defender of the Constitution.
                            Report Abuse
                    • Author by mikehuck1976 (February 13, 2010 11:42 am ET)
                      4  
                      Actually, you have not provided one example of any Obama policy at all. You may want to re-read what you have posted. There is no policy argument at all from you. Just name-calling and repeating talking points about bowing, etc. you hear on hate radio and Fox News. Give us some actual evidence of something and there will be an argument. As of right now, we're just watching the slow kid dribble with both hands, but are nice enough not to call double dribble because we feel bad for you and hope you will catch on someday.
                      Report Abuse
                • Author by redrage (February 13, 2010 7:17 am ET)
                     
                  Re:
                  "The Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can't do to you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you, but doesn't say what the Federal government or State governmentmustdo on your behalf."

                  Nothing damning here.

                  He isn't saying that the liberties as outlined in the Constituion are "bad." He's stating (correctly) that it guarantees negative liberties (freedom from) as opposed to positive liberties (freedom to). It's a littany of the state/government "shall not","will not", and etc as opposed to the citizen/individual "can," ,"may" and etc.

                  If you undestand the concept and still take issue with what he said please provide additional background. In the context you presented the quote it makes it seem as if you think he's saying that thes liberties are ... for lack of a better word...bad. That's not the case. These are common terms in political science/philosophy and even a neophytes should understand them.

                  This is fist year poli-sci stuff.
                  Report Abuse
            • Author by denbengerman (February 12, 2010 3:32 pm ET)
              6 1
              Immediately upon entering office, President Obama lowered taxes for 95% of working folks. In what world is that considered a tax increase? Commander-in-Chief Obama has eliminated more terrorists in one year than the previous President did in all his years. In what world is that considered a "fairy-world where there are no terrorists"? President Obama has pushed for equal rights and respectful dialogue between folks with differing views. In what world is that considered a "strip of our freedom and humanity?" I am continually amazed at the ability of folks to ignore reality and live in their own made up world. What a waste. Reality can be scary at times, I suppose, but the beauty of life lived in reality is truly rewarding.
              Report Abuse
            • Author by mikehuck1976 (February 13, 2010 11:37 am ET)
              3  
              It is hard to refute all of your examples, unkown, since you provided ZERO. Perhaps your evidence is as unknown as you are.

              And you may want to go back to 10th grade English. I don't think analogy means what you think it does. Or else you completely missunderstood the South Park episode you are referring to. Perhaps you should watch the episode when Cartman becomes Glenn Beck. You might learn something about convinving simple minds to believe any amount of nonsense by cloaking it in the form of a question.
              Report Abuse
        • Author by shaggles (February 12, 2010 11:36 am ET)
          8  
          HA! Reactive like ignoring the warnings about the threat of terrorism until after 9/11? That Dubya sure was one loony lib alright.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by mari2jj (February 12, 2010 1:23 pm ET)
          4  
          Amazing to me, a Republican, when our party blabs about Obama Administration by playing loose with the facts. No matter how much Perino tried, she just muddied the water because the Bush administration handled their terrorist caught in the US the very same way. He was caught on US soil and contrary to the hype from our esteemed former Speaker of the House, Gingrich, the guy was NOT a US citizen. All Perino and Newt's bleating only makes our party look like we are so stupid on the facts. But the worst part of all this tirade by Republicans - instead of being thrilled that this approach produced great intel, they just have to hate monger even so. Amazing that our Republican Party has gotten so far off course, so that we cannot even rejoice when actionable intel is gotten from this perp. Now that is anti-Americanism of the first order. mJJ
          Report Abuse
        • Author by mari2jj (February 13, 2010 4:14 pm ET)
          3  
          A totally racist post that even as a moderate Republican, makes me totally embarrassed. Amazing that there is so many lies attached to this story. First of all, Obama has done exactly like Bush did when the shoe bomber was arrested. Second, the guy was arrested on U S soil, and there is not a millionth of an inch difference between Obama's treatment of the underwear bomber and Bush's treatment of the shoe bomber. But of course, the rabid part of our Republican Party just plays loose with the facts. This woman almost seems retarded or maybe just dense since she continues to fib about the details of his ROUND TRIP TICKET. This sort of "loose with the facts" reporting simply makes her look totally and rabidly partisan or she feels somehow the Bush record needs these lies to make it look good. Either way, it is just stupid.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by Boxer1979 (February 12, 2010 11:11 am ET)
        8  
        The Republicans resemble a rabid Chihuahua chewing on Obama's shoe.

        [http://ihasahotdog.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/funny-dog-pictures-anger-management.jpg]
        Report Abuse
      • Author by John Paradox (February 13, 2010 1:16 am ET)
        4  
        [http://i.azcentral.com/commphotos/view/312305.jpg]
        Report Abuse
    • Author by IRONY 101 (February 12, 2010 9:30 am ET)
      10 1
      Dana Perino has been trained to lie and distort...easy, because it's also apparently part of her genetic make-up.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Major Tom (February 12, 2010 10:17 am ET)
      7  
      Has she done her homework yet and figured out what the big-deal was about the Cuban Missile Crisis? All those facts and history... It's hard for a conservative.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by jediknight65 (February 12, 2010 10:21 am ET)
        4 1
        someone how the new story will be how jfk did nothing to diffuse the crisis and how it was all ronald reagan from the shadows
        Report Abuse
    • Author by jediknight65 (February 12, 2010 10:17 am ET)
      5  
      hey its bush barbie swinging and missing again!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by scanlontodd9871 (February 12, 2010 11:27 am ET)
      4  
      If I remember correctly was John Brennan part of the Cheney/Bush team on intelligence? I really thought that I read that somewhere. Now they are going after him like he just stepped into this position. What a fing joke these people are starting to sound.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by shaggles (February 12, 2010 11:33 am ET)
      4  
      Damn. She's turning out to be a real POS. I shouldn't be surprised but when she was press secretary it always seemed like she knew she was lying so I thought maybe she'd not stoop to this level after.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by captfoster2 (February 12, 2010 11:50 am ET)
      4  
      Only in the mind of a rabid right-winger could it be assumed that a president and the AG actually follow the law is somehow considered a bungling.

      Sadly, elected Democrats don't have balls of steel or is it fury? For if they did, they would be fighting this garbage and doing their able best to call these morons out on their lies and propaganda, to show just how pathetic these Cluster Fox clowns really are!!
      Report Abuse
      • Author by wesley (February 12, 2010 5:29 pm ET)
          5
        -- a president and the AG actually follow the law -- captfoster

        The War Room at Salon.com has a nice column about the issue:

        -- What a lot of people don't understand...is that the right at issue is about self-incrimination. In short, if you've already given the goverment all it needs to convict you by, say, trying to blow yourself up in front of a plane full of witnesses, then the police can talk to you indefinitely without ever Mirandizing you. --

        That's the case with Reid and Abdul...Miranda rights were not necessary in either incident.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by DellDolly (February 12, 2010 7:52 pm ET)
          4  
          Nope. Abdulmutallab stopped talking. Then he was given the Miranda warning. Just because you don't get immunity from the evidence they've already collected doesn't mean they don't have to tell you that other stuff, including the fact that you have the right to a lawyer.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by mikehuck1976 (February 13, 2010 11:45 am ET)
            1  
            Not to mention, police will keep talking to you sometimes after they Mirandize you. It just means once you have invoked the right to counsel, they can't use anything you say after that against you. They can still press you to answer questions. It happens all the time. If they want to know something about a future attack or where to find someone, they will continue to ask. They will still use your information. Just not against you at trial.
            Report Abuse
    • Author by bludog1 (February 12, 2010 11:53 am ET)
      1 7
      President Obama’s Speech On The Christmas Day Nigerian Underwear Bomber 1-7-10

      "This afternoon my counterterrorism and homeland security adviser, John Brennan, will discuss his review into our terrorist watchlist system; how our government failed to connect the dots in a way that would have prevented a known terrorist from boarding a plane for America and the steps we’re going to take to prevent that from happening again.

      "As president, I have a solemn responsibility to protect our nation and our people, and when the system fails, it is my responsibility."

      Now let's see: 1) our government failed to connect the dots in a way that would have prevented a known terrorist from boarding a plane for America; and 2) -- well the president said it better than I can summarize.

      Any questions, or just more hyperventilating?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by null1fy (February 12, 2010 11:56 am ET)
          9
        Well, I pretty much summed that up and they posted pictures of a chihuahua barking.

        I guess when you run out of arguments you REALLY run out of arguments.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by jediknight65 (February 12, 2010 12:01 pm ET)
          3 1
          you and your neo con kind have no trouble making stuff up......thats what fox news is for. 24/7 bullcrap. but that doesn't matter to gutless chickenhawks like you, because you make stuff up. like birtherisim. you wanna support a bunch of bigots and racists, have fun. but dont try to cloak it in something else when your too scared to admit to yourself what you are
          Report Abuse
          • Author by null1fy (February 12, 2010 12:48 pm ET)
              8
            How did birthers and fox news get thrown into this? When you run out of arguments, WATCH OUT FOR THE BOOGEYMAN!
            Report Abuse
            • Author by jediknight65 (February 12, 2010 1:12 pm ET)
              3  
              it got into this because they are people that you are indirectly supporting. thats how. your defending people that defended bush to no end and are now birthers and racists and make their appearances on fox news to spew their hate and their lies. and your defending them. look in a mirror if you wanna see a boogeyman
              Report Abuse
              • Author by null1fy (February 12, 2010 1:15 pm ET)
                  7
                Dumb. I'm not indirectly supporting anyone. Unlike your typical loony left, I have no hidden agenda. I have nothing to hide.

                Good one with the boogeyman comment! Man I wish I thought of that. Oh wait, I did.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by jediknight65 (February 12, 2010 1:22 pm ET)
                  3 1
                  your defending these clowns. thats indirect support. if you don't agree with them. then raise the issue to have rush limbaugh fired and everyone at fox news fired.

                  yeah ill hold my breath on that one
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by southerngal (February 12, 2010 1:33 pm ET)
                      6
                    Now you're becoming unhinged. So unless we all call for firing Limbaugh and everyone at Fox means we support them? Wow, loony left is a moderate description.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by jediknight65 (February 12, 2010 1:46 pm ET)
                      3 1
                      well when all i see here are defenses of these people and their lies, how else is there a way to describe it?

                      fine i back up a bit. can one of you guys at least say....hey this is a pack of lies and i disagree....

                      again ill hold my breath on that ever happening.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by mari2jj (February 13, 2010 4:34 pm ET)
                        2  
                        No one needs to hyperventilate. This woman told an outright lie. All this discussion of side matters apparently is an attempt to dodge that fact. Both the shoe bomber and the underwear bomber were tried in a US court. Both were Marandized as the constitution requires for those arrested on U S soil. Perhaps all this palaver from Perino is an attempt to dodge that fact. The unfactual thing (lie) that both she and Newt tell is that the perp had a round trip ticket. He did not and that fact has been in the news all the time. Newt has admitted his honest mistake publicly. I suggest you avoid holding your breath till Perino does. She is either willfully telling her whopper or she refuses to check after being confronted. But even worse than that is her constant whine about how it was handled when the results of this administration's handling of this guy has produced a lot of factual and actionable intel. So stand back, you pack of wolves and give this administration some credit. Not likely to happen but it is a FAIR idea for a change. As Republicans, we do NOT need to exaggerate stuff like this. Makes us look like racists or stupids.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by DellDolly (February 13, 2010 7:07 pm ET)
                          1  
                          Actually, Republicans DO need to exaggerate stuff like this - if they don't, they have no chance to win elections and keep their supporters.
                          Report Abuse
                    • Author by jediknight65 (February 12, 2010 1:51 pm ET)
                      4 1
                      im simply sick to death of lies being of lies being told by people like perino, and the rest of the fox three ring circus and having people to come here and defend them.

                      they incite hatred and spread lies. how can anyone with a conscience actually defend these people? how can you rationalize defending them.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by pongotwistleton (February 12, 2010 2:03 pm ET)
                        1 5
                        im simply sick to death of lies being of lies being told by people like perino, and the rest of the fox three ring circus and having people to come here and defend them.

                        Relax dips**t, nobody's forcing you to read the comments here. If they get your panties in such a bunch, maybe you should find another hobby
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by jediknight65 (February 12, 2010 2:25 pm ET)
                          3  
                          how intelligent a response. did you think that one up all by yourself?

                          you are right in that im not being forced. but i would to come here once and see someone like mag, or seahwaks, or dick's evil twin, come and say hey these are lies these people are telling and its wrong.

                          you wanna defend people like bush and perino, be my guest. have fun. but stop trying to defend these people like they are some beacon of truth when they are not
                          Report Abuse
                        • Author by mari2jj (February 13, 2010 4:36 pm ET)
                          2  
                          Nothing like a NICE intellectual response to someone's post. Poor thing, you probably grew up without being taught any manners.
                          Report Abuse
                    • Author by peace4all (February 12, 2010 2:38 pm ET)
                      3  
                      you have to forgive some of the posters here. they are kind of not used to having to deal with the out right lies and uninformed opinions you guys post. give him some time. he will adjust. it's just kind of shocking at first when wingnuts post things that are so obviously false.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by jediknight65 (February 12, 2010 2:46 pm ET)
                        3  
                        i shouldn't have to adjust. if the republicans, neo cons, tea baggers, fox news and rush defenders, all actually told the truth, there would be no need for this site. they should be doing the adjusting and calling out these liars for what they are
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by peace4all (February 12, 2010 3:51 pm ET)
                          3  
                          don't get me wrong, i agree with you. it's just there is no point getting angry with the wingnuts here. i don't even respond to them anymore really unless i am just making fun of them. there is no need to try and refute what they say. none of it is true and most of the time they know it.
                          Report Abuse
                    • Author by my4cents (February 12, 2010 10:58 pm ET)
                      2  
                      If, frequently, you defend them in some form or other, YES.
                      Feel free to heap your disgust on the word liberal.
                      Report Abuse
        • Author by bludog1 (February 12, 2010 12:19 pm ET)
            4
          it is interesting how some on this board appear to be incapable of serious, factual conversation. The seem, as the National Guard general said relating to Katrina, stuck on stupid!
          Report Abuse
          • Author by jediknight65 (February 12, 2010 2:26 pm ET)
            2  
            and how anyone at fox news is soooo much more capable of intelligent conversation when all they do is lie 24/7
            Report Abuse
          • Author by Hasa Diga Eebowai (February 12, 2010 7:02 pm ET)
            2  
            it is interesting how some on this board appear to be incapable of serious, factual conversation.
            I know. The con apologists that rear their ugly heads here are pathetic.
            Report Abuse
        • Author by nerzog (February 12, 2010 12:31 pm ET)
          3  
          When you post a cogent argument, we'll reply with a cogent argument. Until then... YAP! YAP!
          Report Abuse
      • Author by jediknight65 (February 12, 2010 11:58 am ET)
        3  
        yeah just one. what was your point? he was admitting that the fact the terrorist got on the plane was a mistake.

        the article is about botchign the interrogation, which didnt happen because they guy talked....alot. so how is that screwed up?

        oh wait is it because he actually had a lawyer and was charged as a criminal and not tortured? is that the problem you have?

        come on. your the one hyperventilating here given that you brought up something that has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by benjr (February 12, 2010 1:02 pm ET)
        3  
        What you quoted has nothing to do with the Abdulmutallab interrogation. That was what Perino was dishonestly saying the administration admitted to screwing up. What you're quoting is President Obama admitting that the intelligence community did not do a good job in preventing Abdulmutallab from getting on the plane in the first place. You just used a quote from President Obama about a totally different aspect of this story to try to prove something completely different. Well done.

        Any questions, or just more hyperventilating?


        I have a question. Do you bother reading the articles before you post, or do you just make the article up and run with it?
        Report Abuse
      • Author by shaggles (February 12, 2010 1:22 pm ET)
        3  
        I have a question. What does that have to do with whether or not President Obama said we bungled the interrogation of Abdulmutallub?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by mari2jj (February 13, 2010 4:43 pm ET)
          1  
          He did not say they bungled the interrogation of Abdulmutallub. End of discussion. He commented ONLY about the problem that the guy was NOT on the watch list so he could have been stopped from flying. In fact Obama has spoken of the immense amount of actionable intel they have gotten from their LEGAL interrogation of this guy.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by DellDolly (February 12, 2010 2:14 pm ET)
        3 1
        Did you READ the headline before you posted, imbecile? I guess not. If you had, you'd know that the topic isn't the failure to prevent this guy getting on a jet, but rather the interrogation of him after he was detained.

        This is not rocket science, but you're confused?
        Report Abuse
      • Author by whatIthink (February 12, 2010 3:31 pm ET)
        3  
        You do realize that you just proved MMFAs point, don't you? In that quote from the President, he did say a review was to be conducted about what lead up to the events, but it says nothing about the interroragation needing to be reviewed, which, if you remember, was the point of this post.

        See, Perino said:

        "Ever since they Mirandized the underwear bomber after 50 minutes of questioning -- and by the administration's own admission, it was bungled."

        Even what you posted, contradicts her.

        Sheesh, reading comprehension isn't really a very strong point for righties, is it?
        Report Abuse
    • Author by dr. engine (February 12, 2010 12:05 pm ET)
      3  
      "Makes it sound like if you criticize the administration, you're helping Al Qaeda."

      Well, that should sound familiar Doocy, considering you and Kilmeade, and E.D. Hill, and Hannity and O'Reilly, and Hume, and every other right-leaning personality on your network did that EXACT, VERY THING from about, oh, 2001 until roughly...January 20, 2009.

      He has to be joking. It's not possible for him to be this unaware of his own tactics.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by lede39571545 (February 12, 2010 2:39 pm ET)
      3  
      Wow, it boggles my mind how most of the newscasters/pundits twist facts and flat-out lie whenever it is convenient for them to do so. Evil bunch of folks. What ever happened to "do unto others as you would have them do unto you"?.....and they call themselves Christians???Surely, if there is a purgatory or a Hell, they will visit each other one day.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by peets101 (February 13, 2010 1:31 pm ET)
         
      Perino is an idiot for suggesting that a "review" means "failure". A well-run organization is constantly reviewing its policies and procedures. I own a contracting company. We review every single project, large or small, to see what works and what doesn't work.
      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

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.