Andrea Mitchell: Did Petraeus really meet with Republican caucus?

[Jonathan50]

Salon's Joan Walsh has a column today regarding Andrea Mitchell's claim on "The Chris Matthews Show" on Sunday that General Petraeus met via videoconference with the Senate Republican caucus to promise them that he would show improvement in the situation in Iraq by August.

Apparently, yesterday on "Hardball" Mitchell retracted her claim that Petraeus met with Republicans only and said that there were Democrats present also.

Ms Walsh suggests that Democrats call their Senators and Representatives and find out if there really were any Democrats at the meeting with Petraeus.

Read the article:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/walsh/?last_story=/opinion/walsh/iraq_war/2007/04/02/mitchell_petraeus/

It's Sunday, so the story may not be reported out until Monday, but there are several mini-scoops hiding in Mitchell's story, and they're worth breaking down. First, did the war commander really meet alone with Republican senators, and if so, why? Democrats are dying in Iraq, too; we hear all the time that this shouldn't be a partisan debate. Party caucuses mainly exist to hammer out positions on legislation, eliminate or manage internal dissent and rivalry, and frame issues for the best political spin. Why was the busy Petraeus at a caucus event helping Republicans?

[salin]

1. recalls when the "Shadow Govt" plan was revealed - and then Maj Leader

Daschle acknowledged that he had never been notified of the plan (moving a rotation of high level fed employees from different agencies to a bunker somewhere so that the govt wouldn't completely shut down were a strike to happen on Washington.) Daschle stated that he first learned about the plan (many months into operation by then) from the then current media coverage.

Also reminds me of Condi Rice inviting top level GOP donors to National Security briefings she gave to GOP members of congress - no dems allowed - but give the GOP $$ and you can get the scoop from then NSA Dir Rice.

It wouldn't shock me at all were the original reporting accurate.

[annabanana]

2. Andrea Mitchell is a twit.

She's always saying things that make you think she knows anything.

[Supersedeas]

16. Today she doesn't mean what she said yesterday when she meant it -- Credibility????

[AnnInLa]

3. Several RW blogs are reporting that Dems were invited

to the conference, but didn't attend. I still find the most interesting part of her reporting was the fact that moderate (?) Republics are ready to pull the plug around Labor Day. Can't exactly figure out who these moderate Republics are tho....are there 2 of them, 10, 20?

[NNN0LHI]

4. Moderate Republics actually means scared Republicans n/t

[Jonathan50]

6. I'm not sure that I believe right wing blogs..

Would you?

[gatorboy]

15. Especially since they do what they do best:

Not give specifics.

Can they name a single Democrat that was invited? Or can we file this in the "some say" category?

[spanone]

5. bush* has politicized every facet of gov't.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

7. Transcript from Chris Matthews Show

IMHO, Andrea Mitchell seems pretty definitive that this meeting took place.

http://thechrismatthewsshow.com/html/transcript/index.php


MITCHELL: Excuse me, Chris, but Petraeus went to the Republican caucus and
told them, `I will have real progress to you by August.' They told him, `We'll
stick with you...'

Mr. KLEIN: I don't think he did.

MITCHELL: Well, listen, I--excuse me...

Mr. KLEIN: Listen, I'm--I--OK. I...

MATTHEWS: I agree to disagree.

Mr. KLEIN: I believe that he did not, and I think this is a...

MATTHEWS: But the country--the country was led to believe that a--by the way,
the nature of a surge, the word itself is an escalation.

Ms. ZACHARIA: (Unintelligible).

MATTHEWS: It's just a short term upgrade of the effort.

Mr. KLEIN: Counterinsurgency tactics are not a surge, they're a glacier that
takes years...

MATTHEWS: Well, maybe we're giving the wrong labeling here.

Mr. KLEIN: ...to work.

MATTHEWS: Andrea, we got the label surge from the president himself.

Mr. KLEIN: What--but this is--the important thing is that this isn't going
to work.

MITCHELL: The Republicans were against the surge, but they felt that it's a
fait accompli, and that they were willing to give Petraeus until August. He
told them there will be real progress by August. They have told him at a
caucus meeting very, very recently that if there isn't real progress by
August--and real progress means not a day of violence and a day of sanity...

[Jonathan50]

8. That's certainly what it looks like to me..

If Petraeus met privately with Republicans would that be a violation of the Hatch act?

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

9. I thought the Hatch Act was concerning the use of government to promote political campaigning. eom

[Jonathan50]

10. That's why I raised the issue of the Hatch act..

It seems to me that Petraeus meeting with the Senate Republican caucus to speak of providing progress for them by August would be a political act.

If the meeting were truly bipartisan then there would be no question on this matter.

[leftofthedial]

11. It happens all the time--generals are mostly repukes

which does not change the fact that it is a court-martial offense

[in_cog_ni_to]

12. Another OOPSIE by Andrea? Remember when she reported that Christianne Amanpour had been spied on?

Man, did THAT story die fast. Andrea forgot it was a 'secret' that ONLY repukes were there. OOPS! Let me retract that.:eyes: Too late, Andrea! We now know the TRUTH.

[kenny blankenship]

13. There were Democrats present: they were refilling water glasses and coffee cups all afternoon

some spiffy uniforms they got, too.

[gatorboy]

14. Why was the busy Petraeus at a caucus event helping Republicans?

Why? Because Petraeus, as that one Attorney-Gate email famously put it, is a "Bushie". That's what they've been doing for the past 8 years. Putting people in positions that will further the right agenda and will NEVER question the republican party

[Bucky]

17. Crooks and Liars has the video. No Retraction. She just gave an altered accout

C&L notes how the non-correction correction sounds utterly canned. If you look at the vid, Mitchell looks quite downbeat, as if she'd just come back from the woodshed. My guess is someone with some real pull on her gave her a thorough chewing about spilling some forbidden beans.

[Bucky]

18. On further thought, another reason there was no "Sorry, looks like I was in error" is...

someone felt a full retraction would draw too much attention to the clear violation of military decorum.

[WinkyDink]

19. Mrs. Greenspan might find herself asked about this in a more formal setting.

[Jonathan50]

20. Only if the public pushes the issue..

Otherwise the MSM, and hence the politicians, will ignore it.

[Disturbed]

21. Mrs. Greenspam wanted a scoop.

She is a Rethug that loves the limelight. She had a scoop but then her handlers told her to retract her scoop and she ate some shit. Why would Dems be invited to a Rethug Cabal? They wouldn't have been. Betrayus is a Busholini War Dog and the Congress endorsed him fully. Did any Dems vote against him? I think not. This is indeed something to ponder.