Taking their lead from liberal Democratic Senator Ted Kennedy, the three broadcast networks all screamed “cover-up” Friday night as ABC and NBC led with Democratic complaints about the CIA destroying video of some interrogations of terrorists while CBS made it the second story -- though Katie Couric teased it with “Cover-Up?” on screen under video of Kennedy. “Tonight, charges of a cover-up by the CIA,” Charles Gibson teased World News, “why were videotapes of its secret interrogations of al-Qaeda suspects destroyed?” Gibson set up his lead story by asserting “congressional leaders are in an uproar tonight over a secret they were never told, and will now never know,” as if leaders of both parties were “in an uproar.” In the subsequent story, however, all four soundbites from members of the House or Senate came from Democrats (two of the four from Kennedy). Couric got it correct as she highlighted how “today Democrats demanded a criminal investigation.”
Brian Williams teased the NBC Nightly News: “On the broadcast tonight, was it a CIA cover-up? New fallout after revelations the CIA may have destroyed videotape evidence in the U.S. war on terror.”
Transcripts of the teases and story leads on the Friday, December 7 evening newscasts, as compiled by the MRC's Brad Wilmouth:
ABC's World News:
TEASE FROM CHARLES GIBSON: Tonight, charges of a cover-up by the CIA. Why were videotapes of its secret interrogations of al-Qaeda suspects destroyed?
GIBSON OPENED: Good evening. Congressional leaders are in an uproar tonight over a secret they were never told, and will now never know. They are demanding an investigation into why the CIA, in the year 2005, destroyed videotapes that were made during the interrogations of two top al-Qaeda suspects, interrogations using so-called "enhanced interrogation techniques." Our national security correspondent, Jonathan Karl, is joining us now with a story that has pretty much consumed Washington today.
Karl properly identified the complainers as Democrats: “Democratic leaders compared the CIA's actions to the Watergate scandal...” His story featured four soundbites from House or Senate members, all Democrats: Senator Ted Kennedy, Senator Dick Durbin, Congresswoman Jane Harman and Kennedy again.
Following Karl, Gibson did refer to “Washington Democrats” as he turned to Jane Crawford Greenburg to discuss the prospects for an obstruction of justice case.
CBS Evening News:
KATIE COURIC, IN OPENING TEASER: Also tonight, serious allegations against the CIA.SENATOR TED KENNEDY, WITH “COVER-UP?” ON SECREEN: Cover-up.
COURIC: That's what critics are calling the destruction of interrogation videos, and they're calling for a criminal investigation.
COURIC, INTRODUCING THE SECOND STORY (after the Omaha shooting): Now to the uproar in Congress over the CIA tape case. The agency acknowledged yesterday that it destroyed videotapes of its interrogations of two terror suspects. Today Democrats demanded a criminal investigation. David Martin has the latest.
NBC Nightly News:
BRIAN WILLIAMS, IN OPENING TEASER: On the broadcast tonight, was it a CIA cover-up? New fallout after revelations the CIA may have destroyed videotape evidence in the U.S. war on terror.
WILLIAMS LED: Good evening. For people who make their living in secret, the U.S. intelligence community sure has been in the news a lot this week. First, we learned they don't think Iran is trying to build a nuclear weapon anymore. Then yesterday we learned that when CIA interrogators used waterboarding to question al-Qaeda operatives, some of it was apparently videotaped. But those videotapes were apparently destroyed two years ago. The problem here is waterboarding is considered by many a form of torture. And when investigators asked for those tapes, they were told they never existed. So critics today, as you might imagine, were howling and using words like "cover-up." We begin here tonight with NBC's Andrea Mitchell.
—Brent Baker is Vice President for Research and Publications at the Media Research Center
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Honestly I don't know how
December 8, 2007 - 03:12 ET by KeithHonestly I don't know how you can fix your mouth to complain.Once again, this is Bush's fault. I know the KOOL-AID drinkers will now call me a "troll" or worse, a LIBERAL, but Jeez man. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot. Wouldn't it have made sense to have this information BEFORE raising gas prices and tightening liberal sphincters by talking about WWIII? I mean, it's almost as if Bush is TRYING to make himself look stupid. I know the reflexive conservative penchant for assuming some deep insight into security briefings you've never been given, but DANG! This man is completely useless. With Republican leaders like him, all I can say is,<sarcasm> VIVA MEXICO!
Yes, how stupid of Bush to
December 8, 2007 - 03:34 ET by ckc1227Yes, how stupid of Bush to make decisions based on the information he has. A smart president would use the White House crystal ball to peer into the future so he can get it right. Stupid presidents like Bush listen to a key NIE author who testified before congress as recently as July of this year that he believed "with high confidence" that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons.
Yeah , I here you. "Stupid
December 8, 2007 - 03:46 ET by KeithYeah , I here you. "Stupid presidents like Bush listen to a key NIE author who testified before congress as recently as July of this year that he believed "with high confidence" that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons."
After going into another sovereign nation and killing almost 60,000 civilians and almost 4000 IRREPLACEABLE U.S. Service men and women, all based on faulty intelligence, "HIGH CONFIDENCE" doesn't mean SH*T! And as for the treachery of this pencil pusher of an NIE author, why did the man work for Bush? I mean don't act shocked that this happened, this is what REAL conservatives like myself SAID would happen! When this smiling dullard assumed (break that word down into syllables and think of the "Odd Couple), command and started mewling about a "new tone" and wanting to "work with democrats" and not wanting to "purge" the state department, many people like me said, You can't be serious. How many leaks of classified information can be chalked up to Bush's wussiness and refusal to recognize politics as a bloodsport? I mean Jeez, McCarthy was right y'know? And REAL conservatives KNOW about the socialist/commie pinko influences that crept into the State Department and the Pentagon. My question is, "If a hick from Long Island knows this, why doesn't someone who has spent his life in politics? How many NYT front page exclusives that put our soldiers in danger or risked the exposure of "assets" in the field, could have been avoided? All he had to do was do what every other president with any sense did. Remove the allies of your enemies from sensitive positions! Did Clinton fart around with the U.S. Attorney's, nope he fired ALL OF THEM before they could harm his agenda. But noooooo instead we heard, where's "Ted Kennedy gotta get his thoughts on the Education bill!"
With Republican leaders like him, all I can say is,<sarcasm> VIVA MEXICO!
Bush
December 8, 2007 - 08:27 ET by allanfAs far as I know, Bush had nothing to do with this decision . It was a good, even a great decision. Having this video in the hands of America's enemies would be disasterous. Having it the hands of the United States Congress would be cataclysmic.
Some members of Congress are more concerned about this video than they are about the safety and security of the United States. I can only judge people by what they say and do. Constant unremiting criticism of United States security efforts does not show concern for the safety United States.
If I've outraged any liberals, please be outraged. In fact lie on the floor and kick your feet while the grownups worry about fighting enemies dispise us with every ounce of their being.
As for Senator Kennedy, his state of high dudgeon is hardly appropriate, particularly in cases of waterboarding.
Talk about trying to make
December 8, 2007 - 09:19 ET by motherbeltTalk about trying to make someone look stupid...did anyone else nearly spew their coffee when they saw that CBS photo of Ted Kennedy with the graphic "Cover-Up?" pasted there???????????
Freudian Slip?????
How this murderer can get on
December 8, 2007 - 04:11 ET by Gary P JacksonHow this murderer can get on TV (or the Senate floor) and accuse anybody, of anything, is beyond me! I mean its not like old Teddy didn't destroy eveidence on that fateful night! Not to mention the fact he let a woman drown! There is no good reason this guy should be allowed to enter the building, let alone serve in the Senate!
You got MORE than a good
December 8, 2007 - 04:44 ET by KeithYou got MORE than a good point there Gary! This piece of feculant waste should have been locked UNDER the jail. I don't know where you stand on this but I've always thought there was more to it than just "leaving the scene of an accident". There's a website, you can google it, it'll come up under Chappaquiddick, that has the transcripts of Teddy's interview's and all sorts of documents. Seems like there was Teddy and several buddies, none of them with their wives having a "stag" party at a cabin. Turns out there happened to be some women there who were part of the "staff", pun intended. Mary Jo, was one of them. Now, what are the odds that an old horndog like "Waitress Sandwich Kennedy", WASN'T bangin' her? Anyway she's allegedly going to leave the island and Teddy, sloshed to the gills agrees to driver her? I don't buy it. I think he was doing her and maybe she wanted to tell the wifey and he choked her out. But I also think they killed Marilyn. If you think of all the reasons that people are killed and all the people that kill them. Few, of them have as much to lose as a political leader of the United States.
}}---> Bingo keith
December 8, 2007 - 05:02 ET by Cool ArrowI'm thinking 9 hours wandering around in shock meshes quite well with detoxification requirements.
I sat down to address the
December 8, 2007 - 05:17 ET by USA4freedomI sat down to address the hypocrisy of the Kennedy family.
I had two pages typed and I had not dinted it.
I had no idea that almost two hours later I would still be finding things. OMG, it is breath taking.
You just have to google these items, it’s just too much to type.
Kennedy Fuji taxes.
Kennedy Arctic Oil Royalty Trust
Chappaquiddick (that’s a no brainier)
Kennedy wind mills
Kennedy unregistered weapon
Kennedy Owl club
Kennedy KGB letter Reagan.
I think my favorite one is this one:
Sen. Kennedy said in his statement during the Senate Judiciary Committee Executive Hearing:
"... he (Mukasey) has repeatedly refused toacknowledge that the controlled drowning of a prisoner - water-boarding - risesto the level of torture. What is the big mystery here? Over and over again,civilian and military tribunals have found that water-boarding to be anunacceptable act of torture. My concerns begin with Judge Mukasey's answers to our questions about water-boarding. Water-boarding is a barbaric practice inwhich water is poured down the mouth and nose of a detainee to simulate drowning."
Just ask Mary Jo Kopechne.
This A$$ hole names his dog splash.. and writes a book about the dog.
The history of this retched family is shocking.
I did not even go into the other branches of this rotten family tree.
These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc. Ronald Reagan- 40th Anniversary of D-Day
The Dark Side Of Teddy Bare
December 8, 2007 - 07:00 ET by NoMoreClintons"The history of this retched family is shocking."
And if you don't believe it read "The Dark Side Of Camelot" by Seymour Hersh. I believe he has ol' Teddy, among other things, passing around the old man's money (illegally, of course) in West Virginia in 1960 in an attempt (successfully) to buy JFK's primary win there, and later the presidency. And of course we all know how to spell Chappaquidack. There is also a book called "Teddy Bare" which is none too flattering that the Kennedy family tried to quash years ago and, so the legend goes, bought up most of the copies (there are several now on eBay). Yes, what right does this jumpin', humpin' (not so) hip hypocrite (apologies to Bob Seger) have to accuse anyone else of a cover up? This guy should have been in prison for a long time for all he has done. Hey, wouldn't it be fun to waterboard the old coward and find out even more?
It would take a big board..
December 8, 2007 - 07:05 ET by USA4freedomIt would take a big board.. maybe a few hundred 12x12's..
These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc. Ronald Reagan- 40th Anniversary of D-Day
And the biggest cover up of all...
December 8, 2007 - 08:09 ET by goldenthroatNMC,
It may be out of print but the book "Senatorial Privilege" by Leo Damore is a scathing expose' about fat boy Teddy. The Mary Jo Kopechne fiasco was one major cover from the get-go that should have landed this digusting democratic scumbag in prison. And he now has the audacity to attempt to level a charge about a CIA cover-up?
Also, check out the book "The Sins of the Father" by Ronald Kessler. If you want to know why the Kennedy boys lived like they did, this book explains it all. This family raised the art of cover-up to a new level!
The idiots in Massachucetts that continually re-elect this sorry excuse for a human being should have thrown him under the bus years ago!
"Yeah! That's the ticket!" - Tommy Flanagan
Thanks GT . . .
December 8, 2007 - 08:52 ET by NoMoreClintonsI'll have to look for that one. Damore's name is very familiar to me . . . I must have read something else by him.
More on Damore...
December 8, 2007 - 09:14 ET by goldenthroatNMC,
Leo Damore was a reporter for the Cape Cod News when this story broke. Amazon.com has plenty of copies of this book available for giveaway prices.
Believe me, if you start reading it, you will not want to put it down.
and the kennedy family
December 8, 2007 - 09:29 ET by MidAmericaand the kennedy family and the CIA were involved in trying to kill Castro
Is it just me, or does
December 8, 2007 - 06:44 ET by motherbeltFirst, let's take a moment to put aside the jaw-dropping idea of Ted Kennedy lecturing anyone on covering anything up. The man is simply chutzpah personified.
Is it just me, or does anyone else find odd, the idea that a covert agency...spies, dealing with covert information, national security secrets, should even be required to videotape interrogations? And that these videotapes should be made available for someone outside the agency to look at? What if someone (a mole?) got hold of them and published them on the web? The information extracted from the subject would be everywhere.
What is this, a criminal investigation where they have to be read their Miranda rights, and no "undue coercion" can be used?
This is more of what happens when some people think national security matters should be treated as court proceedings. What's next: Kennedy demanding that a member of the Senate be present during all interrogations?
And if Ted Kennedy had a shred of the decency he preaches, he would have disappeared from public life in 1969. He is living proof (now there's a hoot!) that for a rich Democrat, no misdeed is too big to be swept under the rug.
"...there's a hoot..."
December 8, 2007 - 08:21 ET by dervishYeah, I'd think Teddy is living about 80 proof most days.
Absolutely spot on
December 9, 2007 - 16:23 ET by KeithAbsolutely spot on MB!
"And if Ted Kennedy had a shred of the decency he preaches, he would have disappeared from public life in 1969"
Have to take a small issue with this sentence though, If Ted K had a SHRED of the decency he preaches, HE WOULD HAVE HUNG HIMSELF from something HIGH, long ago.
Admittedly, it does sound
December 8, 2007 - 07:55 ET by sublight68Admittedly, it does sound bad, at least on the headline level. But then you read a little further and you find that it was two interrogations and the tapes were destroyed two years ago.
Cover-up? I don't know. My guess is that whatever was on the tapes was appropriate to the situation (at least how I'd define "appropriate" when dealing with these animals) but since the Left goes ballistic if the Gitmo sheet thread count is too low, the CIA probably decided it was better off getting rid of the tapes and not opening themselves up to more accusations.
Personally, I hope the interrogations were indeed "enhanced." And I'd have no problem releasing the tapes to the public. BUT, before viewing you'd have to watch Daniel Pearl having his throat slit and Nic Berg being beheaded. Then there'd be a basis of comparsion between that and waterboarding, which is a purely psychological technique involving no physical danger.
I thoroughly agree,
December 8, 2007 - 08:40 ET by motherbeltI thoroughly agree, sublight! It's amazing that they, in effect, "cover up" the atrocities that these animals inflict on our citizens, on the basis that it would be too "upsetting" for us to see it. No wonder people don't think terrorism is a big problem any more....our "fearless leaders" think it's inappropriate to keep things like that fresh in our memories. Better to "move on."
Update: Michelle Malkin has a great roundup on this, ncluding the "coincidence" that the NYT and Washington Post are both playing this up at this specific time:
The [NYT] news just happens to be perfectly timed as the Supreme Court hears a Gitmo case and, as the WaPo notes, on the same day “House and Senate negotiators reached an
agreement on legislation that would prohibit the use of waterboarding
and other harsh interrogation tactics by the CIA and bring intelligence
agencies in line with rules followed by the U.S. military.”
Interesting point. I'd
December 8, 2007 - 08:42 ET by sublight68Interesting point. I'd never thought of the downplaying of the terrorist threat as a "cover up," but you're right. And when the issue IS raised, accusations of "fear-mongering" fly.
The Left sees no attacks on the homeland since 9/11 and says, told you, the threat was hyped and overblown. They just can't connect our actions (including aggressive interrogations) with that result.
No one wants to live in a state of fear. But too many in power live in a state of denial. And that's going to get a lot of people killed.
I don't even see what the
December 8, 2007 - 11:37 ET by pbanks7I don't even see what the big deal is. I live in a country where a COVERT agency destroys SECRETS? <sarc>
Ignorance is bliss. It's easier to repeat a mindless slogan than to do some actual research.
Yeah, isn't that weird?????
December 8, 2007 - 14:31 ET by motherbeltYeah, isn't that weird????? LOL
How DARE they? Don't they
December 9, 2007 - 16:24 ET by KeithHow DARE they? Don't they know that liberals want to use it to prosecute them?
I can't think of anyone
December 8, 2007 - 08:28 ET by Jack BauerI can't think of anyone less qualified to mention anything to do with using water to cause discomfort than Tubby Kennedy.
What next, The Mob complaining about the barbaric sport of boxing?
Good video, Jack
December 8, 2007 - 09:05 ET by motherbeltReminds me of the parody Rush had about her, to the tune of "Try To Remember", entitled "I Can't Remember" (My brain's in a blender...it's Jell-ooooooo). Had the Grand Jury asking her all kinds of questions and her responses...."Uh, I don't recall....I dont' remembe.....I have no recollection....etc."
mother -- thanks!!Glad
December 8, 2007 - 09:27 ET by Jack Bauermother -- thanks!!
Glad you like. The really hard part was cutting down all that stuff she had no idea about. Original cut was 2hrs 17 mins.
I love Rush's new bumper stick that I hope sticks...
SHE JUST CAN'T DO ANYTHING RIGHT and the alternate version THE DEMOCRATS JUST CAN'T DO ANYTHING RIGHT.
My understanding is that
December 8, 2007 - 08:38 ET by joe3My understanding is that the tapes were destroyed to prevent retribution against the interrogators if the tapes were stolen or leaked to the press. You don't think that the MSM would....? Nah, the New York Times, etc. would never publish classified information that would harm the United States!!
Joe3
retribution against the
December 8, 2007 - 08:41 ET by motherbeltretribution against the interrogators ???
Why, who on earth would do that?????
<sarc off>
Maybe the tapes were
December 8, 2007 - 09:07 ET by Jack BauerMaybe the tapes were destroyed to prevent the release of the secret identities of covert CIA agents?
I thought leftists were all against that now, given the fuss they made over Valerie Plame. Unless, shock horror, they didn't really give a crap about endangering CIA agents after all?
By the way, the CIA does have real torture videos, which are nothing like the "harsh" interrogations they used to perform on actual terrorists plotting to murder Americaan's in their hundreds of thousands on US soil.
But I'm guessing those at the State Department who feel kinda sympathetic to the Iranians who they would really not mind getting a nuke (seriously they infest DoS) may not want these vids made public..
GET THIS...
Funny old world.
How much do you think
December 8, 2007 - 10:57 ET by charlietexasHow much do you think Kennedy had to drink before he spoke?? Why does
he care so much for the terriorist?? I wonder what his brothers would
think of him, probably not much. He needs to retire.
Leading Democrats Knew and Said Nothing
December 8, 2007 - 11:16 ET by WoodyMSomehow, the media missed that Democrats had advance knowledge of the intent to destroy the CIA tapes and said nothing. Well, they're scrambling to cover themselves now.
http://balkin.blogspot.com/2007/12/wheres-rose-mary-woods-when-you-need.html
"According to (CIA Director Michael) Hayden, "the leaders of our oversight committees in Congress were informed of the videos years ago [they didn't ask to see them?!] and of the Agency's intention to dispose of the material. In a news release that he put out this evening, Jay Rockefeller claims that the Intel Committees were not "consulted" on the use of the tapes "nor the decision to destroy the tapes." But he does not deny that he was informed of the agency's intent to dispose of the tapes, and he acknowledges that he learned of the destruction one year ago, in November 2006. And this is the first time he has said anything about it."
- - -
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hyL3au-RZxEcch2P9ymXaJ9mroogD8TCAIDO0
"(CIA Director Michael) Hayden said House and Senate intelligence committee leaders were informed of the existence of the tapes and the CIA's intention to destroy them. He also said the CIA's internal watchdog watched the tapes in 2003 and verified that the interrogation practices were legal.
"Rep. Jane Harman of California, then the senior Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee and one of only four members of Congress informed of the tapes' existence, said she objected to the destruction when informed of it in 2003."
What will it take?
December 8, 2007 - 11:17 ET by pbthinkerWhat will it take before we realize that liberals are out to destroy this country. The fact that these tapes were destroyed would indicate, to me at least, that the CIA has no confidence in its ability to keep classified information from falling into the hands of unauthorized viewers. There is a liberal cabal in State, CIA, and Defense that is bent on destroying Bush, with little regard for the United States.
Between this episode, and the NIE, one has to wonder if this administration is so inept it can't control its message or they have a plan to let liberals hang themselves and then call them on it. I'm inclined to believe the former and hope for the later.
Democrats: Specializing in "high tech lynching" since 1987.
Teddy? Coverup?
December 8, 2007 - 11:29 ET by SouthernRootsIf anyone knows about cover-ups, it is Teddy Kennedy.
Mary Jo Kopekne was unavailable for comment.
I won't be wronged. I won't be insulted. I won't be laid a-hand on. I don't do these things to other people, and I require the same from them. - J.B. Books (John Wayne)
FBI Files
December 8, 2007 - 11:54 ET by George2107Was the media as upset with the collection of FBI files by the Clinton White House and the failure of Hillary to tell us who hired Craig Livingstone?
Or Sandy Berger stealing and
December 8, 2007 - 12:08 ET by sublight68Or Sandy Berger stealing and destroying classified documents from the National Archives?
Kennedy thinks there was a
December 8, 2007 - 15:07 ET by MikeBKennedy thinks there was a cover up? Could it be because the inquest concerning Mary Jo was a big cover up? Seems that Teddy boy should know a cover up when he sees one, as how many scandals have the Kennedy family covered up? Hypocrite!
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
Cover up? What, did they
December 8, 2007 - 18:39 ET by fitzfongCover up? What, did they hire Ted Sorenson?
tape cover up
December 9, 2007 - 02:17 ET by JudithWhat??? This title under a picture of the Cover Up King? What the HE** is wrong with everybody? Has America gone nutz?