Today, President Bush gave an address at the Coast Guard Academy's commencement, in which he revealed specific details about Osama bin Laden's personal involvement in the creation of a terror cell in Iraq that sought to commit terrorist attacks in the U.S.
Yet several hours before the speech, "American Morning" host John Roberts and CNN White House correspondent Suzanne Malveaux questioned the timing of the President's speech.
In his first question to Malveaux, Roberts asked, "what's the reason that he's declassifying part of this and trotting it out in his speech? The information is two years old." Malveaux attributed the release to President Bush "using any kind of power that he has to make his case to justify the Iraq war."
Bin Laden and other top al Qaeda officials have expressed their desire to commit terrorist attacks inside the United States on numerous occasions. Malveaux herself admitted that "we have heard this general story before" about the coordination between bin Laden and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's al Qaeda in Iraq group, "but the specifics we have not heard." Even with all of this, both Roberts and Malveaux expressed more than a healthy amount of skepticism about the recently declassified material and the Bush administration's motives for releasing it.
This skepticism hit its peak towards the end of the segment:
ROBERTS: Now, Suzanne, we've seen this before. As you said, that the president selectively declassifies this information. People are rather skeptical about it because they remember one of the big declassifications was -- which was that national intelligence estimate back in 2002, which didn't turn out so well for the White House.
MALVEAUX: Well, you're absolutely right, because, I mean, it really is an act of faith here. We don't know, viewers don't know, really, the full body of intelligence here. Just a select group of people in the administration know, including the president here. So, yes, critics have pointed out to the fact that, look, you know, the whole thing with weapons of mass destruction, selective declassification, all of it turned out to be wrong. So, you know, we'll have to wait and see on that.
Even though bin Laden and al Qaeda conclusively want to strike America again, and are actively trying to use Iraq as a base of operations to do so, CNN would rather that its viewers dismiss any intelligence that is released by the Bush administration that further drives this point home.
—Matthew Balan is a news analyst at the Media Research Center.



















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Malveaux herself admitted
May 23, 2007 - 16:51 ET by FlashmanMalveaux herself admitted that "we have heard this general story before"
I'll bet her bloody viewers haven't heard it before.
This coming from a news organ
May 23, 2007 - 16:56 ET by ThisnThatThis coming from a news organization that actively suppressed news just to keep a Baghdad office running, and they dare question this information with absolutely no evidence to back them up? Seems to me that if a news outlet is going to make a statement, they had better have evidence, or facts, or at least two sources of their information. These people have nothing. So, in fact, they are saying the following:
"Who are you going to believe? The President of the United States, or CNN?"
And they they must really think we are going to believe them. CNN -- just too important for this world.
They already think we'll be
May 23, 2007 - 18:17 ET by lnthompThey already think we'll believe one CNN reporter over the combined voices of hundreds of U.S. Soldiers and Marines who tell us things are going well in Iraq. They've said so in almost as many words.
Lee T.
U.S. Navy (ret.) / Vancouver, Washington
The history of the race, and each individual's experience, are thick with evidence that a truth is not hard to kill and that a lie told well is immortal.-- Mark Twain
It just doesn't make sense th
May 23, 2007 - 17:05 ET by Night WatchmanIt just doesn't make sense that AQ would use Iraq as a base to hit us here.
I'm skeptical too. It sounds too much like: " ...Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
They actually said this?
May 23, 2007 - 17:23 ET by AJSHOPE"using any kind of power that he has to make his case to justify the Iraq war."
How can they still profess that there is no liberal bias? How can some people still not see this deliberate bias?
why have homeland security, t
May 23, 2007 - 17:26 ET by pmohbuckwhy have homeland security, the pentagon, a military, the CIA or a government ... when we have CNN reporters
All they have to do is ask AB
May 23, 2007 - 18:31 ET by general companyAll they have to do is ask ABC, they probably leaked it years ago
The Enemy Within.....hard at
May 23, 2007 - 17:29 ET by bigtimerThe Enemy Within.....hard at work...24/7...
A day will come when they will rue the day they decided to be our enemies.
"The information is
May 23, 2007 - 19:09 ET by GregE"The information is two years old."
These people use this type of point all the time when it come to Bush declassifying information. I think they moronically prefer is that when the info is available, release it right away. Don't worry about the fact that intelligence has usefulness for a duration of time, and only after it's no longer a threat to release it, it can be released. Whether that's two years, two days, or two decades, it's not for the press to decide. But, anything that might help undermine America, they're all for it.
Right you are, Greg. How lo
May 23, 2007 - 23:20 ET by MikeBRight you are, Greg. How long was information on our cracking code Purple, or of being able to read Enigma messages supressed? There is still information from WW2, from the Cold War, etc, still classified, and WW2 ended over 60 years ago. I think these *sshats are ticked because they weren't given the information as soon as it was available, and they weren't able to leak to the terrorists what we knew, and possibly how we got the information.
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
this is the bunch that could
May 24, 2007 - 00:09 ET by PKthis is the bunch that could not understand why the maalox trucks started doubling their deliveries to every building that had uniformed military or civilians working for the military in it, shortly after Jimmy Carter spilled the beans on the stealth fighters, bombers, ships, etc. etc. etc.
some of that stuff had a good ten years run left in it before the public even should have an idea that it existed.
but no the peanut farmer had to blab about it.
and him being an ex commander in the navy.
bah, humbug.
c
So, yes, critics have pointed
May 23, 2007 - 20:01 ET by HypocriteHaterSo, yes, critics have pointed out to the fact...
And who are these "critics", honey? You... your co-workers... your bosses? Sorry, I'm going to need some sources on your "critics". Anyone teach Jounalism 101 anymore?
CNN? Weren't they the officia
May 24, 2007 - 07:28 ET by Sergeant ROCKCNN? Weren't they the official cable news network of the former Saddam Hussein regime? Imagine my surprise...
David Gregory is a complete,
May 24, 2007 - 10:37 ET by ThisnThatDavid Gregory is a complete, 100%-certified a**hole and jackass. President Bush called upon him in today's news conference, and he asked: "Given all of your mistakes in this war, and given the current use of 2-year old data and the fact that many people are questioning this data, what makes you think you have any credibility left for making Iraq war decisions"?
I'm so mad I can't see straight. Gregory needs to be banned from future press conferences. If he shows up, the President should absolutely and completely refuse to recognize him. Tony Snow should just tell him to shut up from now on.
Mr Gregory, given you complete and obvious bias against the President of the United States, what makes you think that any blabbering you might make gives you any credibility as a journalist?
Huh? What? I can't hear you, jackass.
TnT... I could not agree more
May 24, 2007 - 11:13 ET by bigtimerTnT...
I could not agree more your sentiments along with the rest of the press arseholes too as far as I am concerned.
What part of he is fighting for the protection of this country and that includes the imbeciles like them.
Ungrateful agenda driven fools.
Perfect prime examples of the enemy within hard at work.
Thisn,Karl Rove should get
May 24, 2007 - 15:06 ET by Night WatchmanThisn,
Karl Rove should get his buddy Jeff Guckert back in.
Guckert asked President Bush how he could deal with Democratic
congressional leaders "who seem to have divorced themselves from
reality."
We need more hardball questions like that asked. Why he left DC I'll never know.
I am NOT skeptical of the Pre
May 24, 2007 - 11:45 ET by sembyI am NOT skeptical of the President, but I am skeptical of the media. The truth must be told!