NBC: 11 GOP congressmen confront Bush on Iraq in “no holds barred” meeting
posted at 8:47 pm on May 9, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Looks like that September deadline was optimistic. Some of you will scoff at believing anything NBC has to say, but the AP’s reporting the same thing and its sources include some of the congressmen at the meeting.
They don’t say what precipitated the meeting, exactly, but I think Russert gives us a clue with his perfectly fair closing question: how can U.S. troops be expected to fight for Iraq when Iraqi MPs want to head to the beach for the summer? That’s what Cheney allegedly was in Baghdad today to discuss. Iraqi NSA Mowaffaq al-Rubaie, who was actually in Washington yesterday to lobby Murtha and Carl Levin, insists the vacation won’t last more than a week.
Needless to say, this is bound to bolster the Democrats’ plan for a two-step spending bill with funds to be cut off as early as July if the Iraqis don’t meet their benchmarks. Click the image to watch.
Update: Per Iraqslogger, there’s a report out that Sadr’s MPs might withdraw from the Maliki government and form a new coalition with … the Sunnis (and some other Shiite parties). Even stranger: it comes from Al-Hayat, a Saudi paper owned by a member of the royal family. Supposedly the idea is to change their image from Shiite sectarians to Iraqi nationalists by reaching across the aisle; I can’t imagine why they’d care to do that, unless they expect us to be gone soon and want to make their own job of filling the power vacuum a touch easier by building goodwill. This makes two conspicuous attempts now by Shiite fundamentalists to collude with their supposed enemies, the other of course being Iranian funding of Sunni insurgents. What gives? The only answer I can think of is that, unlike Maliki, the Sadrists and Sunnis both want the U.S. out ASAP. Why the Sunnis would prefer to take their chances with Sadr instead of us is beyond me, but hey — if everyone wants us to leave, they don’t have to ask twice. And in light of tonight’s meeting at the White House, they may not have to.
McClatchy’s hearing the same rumors as Al-Hayat and claims the Sunnis have given Maliki one week to rein in the Shiite militias. If they really are talking to Sadr, presumably that’s part of some grand bargain: i.e., an agreement not to partition Iraq lest the oil-poor Sunni areas in the west be cut out of federal oil-revenue-sharing (the Sadrists, being avowed nationalists, are against partition anyway) plus some sort of informal understanding about sectarian boundaries with mutual promises to rein in the violent nuts on each side.
Update: As expected, many commenters are denying that it happened. Here’s another report from the Times:
Participants in the Tuesday meeting between Mr. Bush, senior administration officials and 11 members of a moderate bloc of House Republicans said the lawmakers were unusually candid with the president, telling him that public support for the war was crumbling in their swing districts.
One told Mr. Bush that voters back home favored a withdrawal even if it meant the war was judged a loss. Representative Tom Davis told Mr. Bush that the president’s approval rating was at 5 percent in one section of his northern Virginia district.
“It was a tough meeting in terms of people being as frank as they possibly could about their districts and their feelings about where the American people are on the war,” said Representative Ray LaHood of Illinois, who took part in the session, which lasted more than an hour in the residential section of the White House. “It was a no-holds-barred meeting.”…
Representative Charles W. Dent of Pennsylvania, a co-chairman of the Tuesday Group, an alliance of about 30 moderate Republican lawmakers, helped arrange the meeting. He said lawmakers wanted to convey the frustration and impatience with the war they are hearing from voters. “We had a very frank conversation about the situation in Iraq,” he said. Even so, the Republicans who attended the White House session indicated that they would maintain solidarity with Mr. Bush for now by opposing the latest Democratic proposal for two-stage financing of war, which is scheduled for a vote on Thursday in the House.
Boehner was at the meeting too, although he says he let the moderates do most of the talking.
You must be logged in to post a comment.


















Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
Yeah, what you said. The Liberals are always planting stories about what the GOP is doing when they aren’t.
tarpon on May 9, 2007 at 8:55 PM
It’s good to clear the air every now and then. And the Iraqi MP’s are demonstrating we may have held elections too soon. But, I think President Bush will win this argument and the war.
Zorro on May 9, 2007 at 8:57 PM
Russert looks closer everyday to a major stroke. Stand back, he’s gonna blow!
Freelancer on May 9, 2007 at 9:02 PM
I don’t know the exact mortality rate for Iraqi lawmakers, but I suspect it’s higher than average, and not all due to “natural causes”. So it’s kind of lame for our gutless wonders (on BOTH sides of the aisle) to be criticizing them at all. No?
bofh on May 9, 2007 at 9:31 PM
And the press wins again! Nam, Watergate, Tehran, 9/11, Iraq. Only thing left now is the how fast can they get somebody to play with some plutonium. Won’t that make a grand Pulitzer Prize moment! At least everyone will be in a union, have health coverage, and have freedom from religion when the flash goes off.
I hope whatever crawls out of the mud after us finds a fossil record of HA so they will know we all weren’t insane.
Limerick on May 9, 2007 at 9:38 PM
Any delays in the Iraqi legislative agenda favors Iran. No oil revenue sharing, greater chance of the Kurds splitting. More time to stir the pot.
Zorro on May 9, 2007 at 9:44 PM
Jennifer Loven is a contributor to that article Allah, so I’d take it with a grain of salt. See what the 11 say in follow up questions tomorrow.
The Apologist on May 9, 2007 at 9:45 PM
I agree. When I heard the Iraq parliament was going on vacation for 2 months; I thought, clearly they do not take this situation seriously. 2 months in the middle of a war? If they don’t care about their country, why should we?
lorien1973 on May 9, 2007 at 9:46 PM
Very difficult to figure out what is true and what isn’t in a NBC report (easier with the NYT, none of their stories are true).
Anyway, it has long seemed to me the current Iraqi leadership has been trying to kill off its domestic opponents, and is using US forces as an anvil for the purpose. Why should Republican members of Congress support that?
Republican lawmakers know the results of the last US election were, more than any other single issue, a referendum on the war. Things can get worse, folks. I think it’s going to be hard defeating a Democrat/socialist agenda if a Democrat wins the White House. What about if the left wins a two-thirds majority in the Senate? This war could make that happen.
I do not want to sacrifice every other conservative legislative issue on the alter of some Islamic banana republic.
There simply is not enough time in heaven or hell for the people in Iraq to get tired of killing each other, and I’m sick that it has rendered what should have been a brilliant presidency to week after week of crisis management.
We should have shot Saddam in his spider hole and walked out.
doufree on May 9, 2007 at 9:49 PM
You forgot the “Good News” tag, Allah.
Attila (Pillage Idiot) on May 9, 2007 at 9:55 PM
Stories like this remind me that the “serious journalists” in Washington are nothing more than glorified gossip reporters. The only thing separating Tim Russert from the Truther Maxim gossip reporter is style, the substance is essentially the same.
forged rite on May 9, 2007 at 9:58 PM
When I first heard of the 2 months I immediately thought of the practical reason, silly me. It hotter then Hades during that time and for a people who are used to power outages and little A/C it was probably to them a normal event. But with that being said I also realized that this is too critical of a time to be taking that much time off. They do not realize or appreciate fully that to form a democracy from stratch is harder then sucking a Steak and Shake® milkshake through a straw. I do believe they will take some time, I do believe that strange alliances are being formed and believe there are plenty of wolves waiting in the woods. I don’t think that Iraqi’s who think of terms of a nation necessarily consider their Muslim brothers are also their enemies, meaning they don’t think the Iranians are waiting to sweep in once the protection of the Americans are gone.
I am very much afraid that once we leave without the Iraqis having a unified nationalistic outlook rather then tribal culture they have always known they will be the scene of bloodletting on an unimagineable scale. There will be Sunni jihadists supported by Saudi Arabia, eager to get the Al Queda out of their back yard, battling the Shiite fascists backed by Iran with Baghdad as the prize. The Iraqis will suffer and cease to exist as a nation.
But hey I could be wrong.
LakeRuins on May 9, 2007 at 9:59 PM
Unfortunately because the argument has been made that this war is unwinible the American public believes that. And they ultimately have the say even if they are wrong on this issue.
I think we should consider more of a containment policy. Retreat to neighboring countries that are freinds and work with them to protect them.
Iraq would then logically become Iran and Syria’s problem. Al Queda has no love for either the Ayatollahs or the Baathists of Syria. The bloodshed in Iraq wouldnt stop.
But once Iraq become as bad as darfar it will start to discredit those that push for this war to end on the insurgency terms. We will look bad for abandoning the Iraqi people to barbarism but ultimately the Islamics will finally be seen around the world as the barbarians they are.
Sometimes in military terms you take a defeat move to a better position then hit back. I think we have to consider the longer game rather than the short term stability of Iraq. We need to ultimately defeat Al Queda not create a Marshall plan for Iraq.
Our military has to win the bigger fight against Islamofacism and not just the battle for Iraq.
William Amos on May 9, 2007 at 10:04 PM
lorien1973 on May 9, 2007 at 9:46 PM – Indeed it is infuriating.
Why did these 11, or some of them talk to the media? Russert already thought he was the media Messiah? Now what will he be, if he doesn’t have a heartattack?
Entelechy on May 9, 2007 at 10:05 PM
NBC? AP?
Yawn. Let me know when a credible source reports this.
JayHaw Phrenzie on May 9, 2007 at 10:11 PM
Not at all. It was a rejection of RINO politics. Of weakness on illegals, of overspending like no Democrats had ever done, or failing to obey their oaths of office.
Freelancer on May 9, 2007 at 10:12 PM
This is somewhat controversial for me. See, the Iraqi govt members risk (literally) life, just by walking down the street, and going to work, daily. Yet, we criticize them for taking a week vacation. Our own legislators ride in fashion, safe and sound, and yet, take a Spring break vacation.
My scale of belief for what NBC, or the Associated (with terrorists) Press, is somewhere between zip and zilch.
amerpundit on May 9, 2007 at 10:14 PM
If we desert Iraq there is no place on the planet that the jihadists will not attack, brazenly, openly and with the full understanding that they do so with no risk of reprisal. The US will be convinced that the best policy is just to sit it out and strike back only if we are hit at home. Of course we don’t mean hit back militarily, but rather with lawyers and the courts. It won’t happen in 5 or even 10 years but the Islamofascists have a long term goal and they have never lost sight of that goal. They do not worry about bad press or seizing the moral high ground, hell they own it just ask them. But hey all that is important is winning the next election and besides they are having a sale at the mall this weekend, I got other things to be concerned about. And it is just a shame what they are doing to that poor Paris Hilton girl.
LakeRuins on May 9, 2007 at 10:16 PM
Tell me, again, why I should believe anything that Tim “The Perjurer” Russert and Al Qaeda Whore Jenifer Loven have to say?
Unless proven by one of the “leakers” coming forward and identifying himself, this is nothing but a psyops campaign attempting to demoralize the Republican Party by the Treason Party and former staffer Russert.
georgej on May 9, 2007 at 10:18 PM
From what I see, they’re not against the war, and they don’t say they’d vote against the President. They’re saying that the news and facts need to come from Patreaus, not the President. They’re also saying that the Parliament can’t take a vacation. I’m not seeing them voting to overturn a veto.
amerpundit on May 9, 2007 at 10:19 PM
Why is it so much worse for the Iraqis to take a week off than it is for the dems to take a week off with no money for the troops?
csdeven on May 9, 2007 at 10:24 PM
We Americans have this terrific military and this disgusting media. The only reason I could see bringing home the military would be to take out the disgusting enemy at home. Find Russert in his spider hole, stick a paper bag with ham in his shorts and drop him off somewhere Islamic without a veil.
Hening on May 9, 2007 at 11:32 PM
Great thinking. Let’s leave Iraq to the Iranians. Then 1/3 of the worlds oil can be controlled by Islamofascists from that nutball-led country.
And when that happens, it’ll be W’s fault.
The Dems will claim they didnt get good intelligence.
Labamigo on May 9, 2007 at 11:57 PM
The Republicans aren’t getting good intelligence either and they are most likely being hornswaggled by Dem activists. See:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1831055/posts?page=151#151
Connie on May 10, 2007 at 12:06 AM
I’m slightly surprised that the Iraqis have yet to mention that our legislature is taking Iraq so seriously that they left the funding bill laying around for weeks while they went on Spring Break.
Karl on May 10, 2007 at 1:04 AM
Are you saying that the base stayed home and voluntarily gave up the house and senate in 2006?
Bradky on May 10, 2007 at 5:58 AM
No, God’s sense of humor would have the following items found which would be viewed by future scholars as the religious icons of our age:
One picture of Rosie (Mother Earth)
The one existing picture of Allah Pundit (Zeus)
Scholars will conclude that eons previously the Zeus and Mother Earth began populating the earth with humans.
Bradky on May 10, 2007 at 6:40 AM
Dem psy-ops are in full swing, and getting traction even here. Imagine what could happen if we had the Dems on our side, instead of whoring for any vile idea they figure will buy them a vote next year. That’s an “imagine” that could actually have changed the world for the better. But it cannot be allowed lest it benefit their political enemy: their country and the world be damned.
Well, this is what we got from the “summer of love”, a whole generation of faithless bastards.
drunyan8315 on May 10, 2007 at 10:18 AM
Because we are not in the midst of a bloody civil war or sectarian violence.
PS, for future reference, if W would follow the normal budget procedure and include his military spending in the regular budget instead of this supplementary bullshit, he wouldn’t be facing this problem.
It should be painfully obvious by now that he’s really not smart enough to out-smart the system. When the Republicans held the Congress and had serious leaders in place they could cover his butt. Those days are gone.
honora on May 10, 2007 at 11:08 AM
The real questin that inquiring minds want to know: is it Laura and Barney, or is it down to just Barney?
honora on May 10, 2007 at 11:09 AM
I wish you were right on all of these, but I don’t see a useful difference between Bush and the Dems on illegal immigration. This and the other issues you describe are what is in the balance now.
It’s not that I think a “victory” in Iraq is impossible, it’s just that the amount of blood that will have to be spilled would be enormous, and too much of it will be American.
I reject the idea that the Iranians will be able to magically take control, even at gun point, if we leave. I hope they try, because it will ensure they end up bleeding even more so than we have.
But events have moved on http://hotair.com/archives/2007/05/10/majority-of-iraqi-mps-endorse-bill-demanding-timetable-for-us-withdrawal/, Iraqi lawmakers (HA!) know we are leaving and are voting to say they wanted us out all along. It won’t save their worthless lives, but it’s good to see them crawl. Most of them were interested only in stealing.
I think I muffed the link!
doufree on May 10, 2007 at 11:17 AM
They sure are – it’s a breeze now to sail all bills through.
Entelechy on May 10, 2007 at 11:44 AM
This is precisely the problem and it makes me want to puke! The “moderate” have had too much talking time on the right side of the aisle and it’s what’s killing the conservative movement. Now, if they have their way it could literally be killing the American way of life.
The Ritz on May 10, 2007 at 2:51 PM
My only question at this point is this “why does Tim still have any credibility”? They convicted Libby solely on his testimony and I tend to believe Libby. Tim should probably be the one going to jail (If anybody}.
duff65 on May 10, 2007 at 5:59 PM
Comment pages: