Down the memory hole: Transcript of Schumer’s surge speech rewrites knock on U.S. troops; Video: Ralph Peters on Schumer — “He’s a liar”

posted at 11:03 pm on September 6, 2007 by Allahpundit

Excellent catch by Sweetness & Light. Here’s how the relevant passage reads in the official transcript on Schumer’s website:

And let me be clear: the violence in Anbar has gone down despite the surge, not because of the surge.

The lack of protection for these tribes from al Qaeda made it clear to these tribes, “We have to fight al Qaeda ourselves.”

Follow the link to see how he rephrased that on the Senate floor. If you want to check S&L’s work, click the image below and fast forward to about 2:40. Two possibilities: either Schumer delivered the line as prepared and is now trying to rewrite the speech after the fact to hide the evidence or else the transcript reflects the version that was prepared for delivery and Schumer reworked the line on the floor to make it more damning of the military. Either way, we have a discrepancy between the official version and the actual version of a key passage to which he clearly paid some attention. Why?

Update: The left’s being very careful with its terminology right now.

schumer.jpg

Update: A choice cut of red meat for you from tonight’s Factor. Peters’s point about Al Qaeda’s strategic defeat in Anbar is dead on; revisit this Iraqi opinion poll from last September, when the province was still jihadi HQ, and ponder the fact that even at the time Al Qaeda was viewed very or somewhat unfavorably by 77% — of Sunnis. Those numbers might be well into the 90th percentile now, not the sort of feedback from his core constituency that Osama will be trumpeting in any press releases. But like I said this afternoon, Schumer’s basic point about the surge not having bolstered the Iraqi government is true. How, exactly, does he not know what he’s talking about on that score?

Update: Bill Ardolino, on the ground in Fallujah, answers Schumer by way of a new local recruit:

“Before [the Iraqi Police] did not have enough cover to hold their city. But right now, they got cover, like what you see: every single IP station has marines with them, to give them support every time the IP want it. Another thing? They didn’t have weapons, but right now they have weapons, so they can do the right thing, kill the terrorists and survive.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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

Let ME be clear Senator Schumer

You are a contemptible POC!

BobH on September 6, 2007 at 11:08 PM

“We’ve always been at war with Eastasia.”

jaleach on September 6, 2007 at 11:09 PM

Is it really a material difference? I don’t think so.

The lack of protection (by US Troops) for these tribes from al Qaeda….

It has the same meaning, either way.

lorien1973 on September 6, 2007 at 11:10 PM

I’m certain it was a mistake when he was giving the speech. I thought it sounded pretty harsh from a Senator who ‘supports the troops’ to talk about their ‘inabilities’.

ThackerAgency on September 6, 2007 at 11:11 PM

Is it really a material difference? I don’t think so.

Same basic meaning, sure. Why change it, then?

Allahpundit on September 6, 2007 at 11:12 PM

Sounded to me that he reworded it as he spoke it. I didn’t listen to it earlier, but certainly seems like he hesitated there. I think he wanted to emphasize the point that the troops were the inept ones here and the original wording didn’t make that clear enough?

lorien1973 on September 6, 2007 at 11:13 PM

Actually, it’s not exactly the same meaning. The transcript version can be read as indicting the Iraqi government too. Which would be a fair cop; as I said in my earlier post on this, Schumer’s basically right. But being right doesn’t entitle you to get away with sleight of hand that I’d be pilloried for if I tried it in a post.

Allahpundit on September 6, 2007 at 11:14 PM

Or; one is better for a 6:30 news broadcast; the other is better for the historical record?

I’d almost lean towards that.

lorien1973 on September 6, 2007 at 11:15 PM

I think he wanted to emphasize the point that the troops were the inept ones here and the original wording didn’t make that clear enough?

I think you’re right. Now, why’d he do it? And why not correct the transcript?

Allahpundit on September 6, 2007 at 11:15 PM

Democrats doing what they do best, re-write history and hope the sheeple aren’t paying attention. Thanks to the blogoshphere, the people can pull the wool from their eyes if they choose and not be sheeple.

Yakko77 on September 6, 2007 at 11:16 PM

>

But being right doesn’t entitle you to get away with sleight of hand that I’d be pilloried for if I tried it in a post.

It’s not uncommon for what is said in senate chambers to be changed before it goes to the official transcript. They all get the ability to edit their remarks before they are recorded (or however that works).

transcript version can be read as indicting the Iraqi government too.

True, which I think lends to my 11:15 comment. One is good for the immediate consumption news (forgotten in 5 minutes, but gets attention); the second is better for the historical record.

lorien1973 on September 6, 2007 at 11:17 PM

Either way, we have a discrepancy between the official version and the actual version of a key passage to which he clearly paid some attention. Why?

Overly simplistic yet dead-on analysis:

The Dems want us to lose in Iraq.

infidel4life on September 6, 2007 at 11:18 PM

I think he wanted to emphasize the point that the troops were the inept ones

THAT’S the difference. A senator doesn’t want to say on the floor of the senate that ‘our troops are inept’. The way the transcript is worded it doesn’t specifically say that.

Why would you want to say our troops are inept? Even if they lost, you wouldn’t say that. A politician is supposed to always say what fine troops we have. Of course Kerry talked about how if you didn’t stay in school, you’d find yourself in Iraq (that went over well too didn’t it?)

there is a big difference in the two versions. Schumer messed up in his delivery.

ThackerAgency on September 6, 2007 at 11:18 PM

Ridiculous as it may sound, I believe this happens all the time. Senators are for some reason allowed to “clarify” their official statements for the record from their actual statements on the floor.

Anyone else understand this to be the case?

MT on September 6, 2007 at 11:19 PM

One is good for the immediate consumption news (forgotten in 5 minutes, but gets attention); the second is better for the historical record.

That’s shifty in and of itself, though. It’s one thing if he ventured off the script on a whim, but if he’s doing it deliberately to split the historical record off from actual events, then he really is engaged in Soviet tactics.

Allahpundit on September 6, 2007 at 11:20 PM

When Bush gets back from Australia…

Do another one of these.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbZ5jPJk4Dg

freedomplow on September 6, 2007 at 11:21 PM

Why would you want to say our troops are inept? Even if they lost, you wouldn’t say that.

He’s appealing to the far left here. Sure he’d say they lost. They say it all the time. Reid declared the war lost months ago, didnt he?

A politician is supposed to always say what fine troops we have.

Get into the 21st century. We have Murtha saying troops are murderers before any convictions are made. What politicians are “supposed” to do is irrelevant – what they ‘are’ doing is all that matters.

lorien1973 on September 6, 2007 at 11:21 PM

Schumer is still on the hook with me for disparaging the troops who allow him to breathe the corrupt air in the Senate.

Stormy70 on September 6, 2007 at 11:22 PM

Why?

If you’re gonna be a bear, be a grizzly…

elgeneralisimo on September 6, 2007 at 11:23 PM

Allahpundit on September 6, 2007 at 11:20 PM

I think you’d be surprised how often that happens, though. Rush has brought this up a ton of times – at least he used to when I was listening during the Clinton Admin. Congressman would say something outrageous on the floor; then the transcript showed a much milder version of that same thing.

Senators getting the final stamp of approval on their own transcript is not a good situation; but they set their own rules.

Would you (imagine yourself as Schumer) want – in 50 or 100 years – have someone bring up the fact that you called US troops inept buffoons or would you want to give your supporters at that time the out you mentioned – he could just be referring to the Iraq government. The video would be long gone, most likely. The transcript is all that’s left.

lorien1973 on September 6, 2007 at 11:25 PM

lorien1973 on September 6, 2007 at 11:21 PM

And Reid was chastised by PELOSI for saying that.

And MURTHA is getting SUED for his comments.

yes, Schumer makes strike three here. He wants to indict the president’s policies without indicting the troops. His premise was that the president’s policy wasn’t the success. (they are doing better in spite of the president’s policy). He messed up like they always do.

The statement was a mistake, and he’ll be held accountable for it as the others have.

ThackerAgency on September 6, 2007 at 11:26 PM

And Reid was chastised by PELOSI for saying that.

And MURTHA is getting SUED for his comments.

Meaningless. Getting double exclamation point letters written to these people isn’t enough. There are no consequences for this behavior. Crap politics; as AP has said a hundred times.

The statement was a mistake, and he’ll be held accountable for it as the others have.

With a meaningless letter and a light spanking by Pelosi. That’ll fix it.

Come on. Our politics is a cesspool.

lorien1973 on September 6, 2007 at 11:33 PM

This needs an update with video from the O’Reilly Factor tonight with BOR and Ralph Peters discussing the video of Chuckie’s dig at the troops in the field.

Said Peters, Schumer is a ‘liar’. No hesitation, no mulling the position, just a fast straight call as he sees it.

They go on to discuss the Democratic leadership already moving to discredit General Patraeus…and how reprehensible it is to put party / power ahead of country.

Athos on September 6, 2007 at 11:34 PM

And why not correct the transcript?

Because the transcript is the “official” record.

The Dims can spin this any way they want, but the tape doesn’t lie. All we’ll hear now is that is not what he meant to say…. proven by the fact he stumbled a bit… and on and on.

MSM says nothing here to see folks, move along now.

BacaDog on September 6, 2007 at 11:36 PM

Granted they don’t actually CARE if they get a slap on the wrist. I’m just saying that it was a mistake.

They want to vilify Bush as much as possible while claiming to be patriotic. They can’t claim to be patriotic if they call our troops inept (who they sent into harms way and are supposed to give money and resources to).

Schumer is as slimey as any of them. But understand they are trying to walk a thin line here. They are trying to bash Bush without actually sounding like Al-Qaeda. The problem is that Al Qaeda agrees with them most of the time.

ThackerAgency on September 6, 2007 at 11:37 PM

they are trying to walk a thin line here

What fine line?

Shumer said the “American troops” lacked in their protection, not “al Quada”. He said it. It’s on tape.

Changing the written record is not walking a fine line, it’s outright dishonesty.

BacaDog on September 6, 2007 at 11:42 PM

Let ME be clear Senator Schumer

You are a contemptible POC! POS
BobH on September 6, 2007 at 11:08 PM

Fixed it for ya.

bikermailman on September 6, 2007 at 11:55 PM

It’ll be interesting to see what shows up here:

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/crecord/07crpgs.html

That’ll be the official record. When the 6th is posted, find schumer’s speech and see what’s recorded here. I practically guarantee it’ll be the version on his site (the unspoken version) rather than what was actually said.

If this is altered, then it’ll officially be down the memory hole. As if he never said it.

lorien1973 on September 6, 2007 at 11:56 PM

Actually, it’s not exactly the same meaning. The transcript version can be read as indicting the Iraqi government too. Which would be a fair cop; as I said in my earlier post on this, Schumer’s basically right. But being right doesn’t entitle you to get away with sleight of hand that I’d be pilloried for if I tried it in a post.

Allahpundit on September 6, 2007 at 11:14 PM

Actually AP, we’ve been trying to get the locals to take up the fight with us for a very long time. The fact that the tribes decided to align with Coalition forces means that we showed them we were worth working with.

Schumer has made it clear several times what side he’s on. The tribes in Anbar joined the right side. Senator Al-Schumer did not. His behavior is no surprise to anyone really and to feign outrage over this is just silly. We expect these things to be said by Zawahiri, Adam Gadahn, that hezbollah idiot Nasrallah. Since Schumer has aligned himself with the barbarians we should expect no different from him.

Pilgrim on September 7, 2007 at 12:01 AM

Changing the written record is not walking a fine line, it’s outright dishonesty.

BacaDog on September 6, 2007 at 11:42 PM

Which is all Schumer has in him. It’s not just partisan, it’s pathological, even compulsive. The only thing you can trust about him is, if he’s saying it, not only is it untrue but he knows it’s untrue. He’s a psychopath.

Blacklake on September 7, 2007 at 12:04 AM

Pure and complete Scum. Liberal, slime, scum.

No better than Chavez or Castro. Just scum.

How did New York EVER elect this pig . . .

Texyank on September 7, 2007 at 12:22 AM

Let me be perfectly clear.
I am not questioning your patriotism Mr. Schumer.
I am calling you a straight out anti American pos.

Mojack420 on September 7, 2007 at 12:28 AM

Come on. Our politics is a cesspool.

lorien1973 on September 6, 2007 at 11:33 PM

And the sad reality is that the majority of the public is too caught up in their own lives to notice or care.

infidel4life on September 7, 2007 at 12:30 AM

That’s shifty in and of itself, though. It’s one thing if he ventured off the script on a whim, but if he’s doing it deliberately to split the historical record off from actual events, then he really is engaged in Soviet tactics.

I bet Sweetness has stumbled upon something and if one went back and checked the “official record” it would look far different from these blow hards actual stumps…

Also, I recall that vote fraud in the house and how the Dems tried to con everyone out of the procedural vote or what not – thinking no one would notice.

Dems are dirty.

Topsecretk9 on September 7, 2007 at 12:32 AM

either Schumer delivered the line as prepared and is now trying to rewrite the speech after the fact to hide the evidence or else the transcript reflects the version that was prepared for delivery and Schumer reworked the line on the floor to make it more damning of the military

One of the most loathsome things about politicians, IMO, is their absolute need to tell people what they want to hear.
What can you do if you don’t know? Take a stab one way in a speech, then change a couple words in the transcript to reflect the opposite?
Again, my opinion, I think this guy is sooo wacky, he means to call our military inept.
(Love the Colonel calling him a liar.)

RedCrow on September 7, 2007 at 1:15 AM

Schumer is scum. I had some respect for the guy before this. I hope someone boots his butt out of the Senate.

msipes on September 7, 2007 at 1:57 AM

So the Iraqis did this all by themselves?

How could they, if, by the parallel “story” from the anti-surgists, they are incompetent in every way, from their police to their government?

How can it both be that they are more competent than our trooops and incompetent?

Schumer’s web’s getting mighty tangled.

profitsbeard on September 7, 2007 at 2:30 AM

Article from last January by Leslie Gelb, whom Charles Krauthammer calls a thoughtful scholar:

We’re Fighting Not to Lose – Leslie H. Gelb

MB4 on September 7, 2007 at 2:41 AM

Wait a second, Chuckie. The surge is supposed to be about helping the Iraqi’s do things themselves. The Sunnis in Al Anbar do JUST THAT and you’re finding fault with that? Putz.

rotorhead on September 7, 2007 at 2:47 AM

Ridiculous as it may sound, I believe this happens all the time. Senators are for some reason allowed to “clarify” their official statements for the record from their actual statements on the floor.

Anyone else understand this to be the case?

MT on September 6, 2007 at 11:19 PM

If memory serves, (not always a given,)the official designation of the discussed behavior is revise and extend.

More often it’s retreat and expunge.

On the bright side, it’s a great opportunity for true bi-partisanship.

soundingboard on September 7, 2007 at 2:57 AM

“We’ve always been at war with EastEurasia.”

jaleach on September 6, 2007 at 11:09 PM

You are instructed to report to minitruth.

soundingboard on September 7, 2007 at 3:20 AM

Shumer said the “American troops” lacked in their protection, not “al Quada”. He said it. It’s on tape.

BacaDog on September 6, 2007 at 11:42 PM

I’d say it was Schumer’s macaca moment but, oh, wait – he’s a Democrat. Nothing to see here, move along, folks.

Laura on September 7, 2007 at 4:54 AM

I called Shumer’s office yesterday afternoon and a young staffer said that Shumer made a speech on the Senate floor yesterday “reaffirming his support for the troops.”

I was driving home and I couldn’t write down everything the kid said but it seems that Sen. Shumer was taken out of context; that he never slandered the troops and is in full support of them.

Thank God traffic was heavy and moving slow so I didn’t go off the highway.

Grantman on September 7, 2007 at 6:42 AM

I’d say I hate New Yorkers for Schumer …but we bring Durbin, Obama and the Hildebeast…so we ain’t got nuthin’ to say. Sorry America.

LtE126 on September 7, 2007 at 7:49 AM

I can’t stand schumer. I thank God I escaped the gulag that is New York.

His staff uses Michael Steele’s SSN to go through his credit reports, and schumer is still allowed to be a senator. He doesn’t have the testicular fortitude to be a man, and resign from his seat.

Then, the miserable SOB tries to stick his nose into Va politics by telling Sen Allen to step down without a challenge to Sen elect Webb. Hey chuck, mind your own *&^%$& business! You ruined new york state along with shrillary, with your confiscatory tax schemes.

Just don’t get between a camera and chuck schumer, you’ll be run over!

rightside on September 7, 2007 at 8:13 AM

More often it’s retreat and expunge.

On the bright side, it’s a great opportunity for true bi-partisanship.

soundingboard on September 7, 2007 at 2:57 AM

That’s funny. It’s amazing that this practice of retreating and expunging is allowed. Talk about a lack of accountability.

Not sure there’s any bright side!

MT on September 7, 2007 at 8:46 AM

They run but they cannot hide!

jeanie on September 7, 2007 at 8:51 AM

One of the two GREAT Senators from New York!

Golfer_75093 on September 7, 2007 at 8:51 AM

Supporting the Troops, Donkey style,

Schumer: “Troops are incompetent”
Kerry: “Troops are illiterate dopes”
Reid: “Troops have failed with surge”
Pelosi: “Troops are losing the war, bring them home”
Kennedy: “Defund the troops”
Murtha: “Troops are cold-blooded killers”
Durbin: “Troops use Gestapo tactics”

If you’re walking down the street and see any soldiers in uniform today, or any day, shake their hand and thank them for their service. Don’t hesitate to buy them lunch or a cup of java.

Duty, Honor, Country.

If you run into any of these turn-coat Dems, spit on them.

Despicable, Cowardly, Traitors.

fogw on September 7, 2007 at 9:17 AM

I like Ralph Peters. He is always very thorough in his opinions.

csdeven on September 7, 2007 at 9:30 AM

Schumer is why Rudy would be a problem President. All those New York politicians are screwed up in their rational.

When you pack that many people in a “Human Antbed” like New York City, the inhabitants loose touch with the rest of the country living in more open spaces.

I don’t trust any New York City politician. More government control, more gun control, less personal responsibilty. Living in an ant mound will do it to ya.

saiga on September 7, 2007 at 10:37 AM

In past times, assholes like Schumer and Durbin would have been ridden out of town on a rail.

georgej on September 7, 2007 at 10:43 AM

Look, the Dems can do whatever they want and get away with it. The Hsu fundraising scandal hasn’t touched them but Craig’s problems have killed the Republicans again. Republican Congressmen are investigated and charged. Dem Congressmen are seldom investigated and charged. They told everyone in 2003 or 2004, I don’t remember which, how they were going to undermine the war and thus Bush. They’ve stuck to the script and successfully done both. It doesn’t matter what they do. They’ve gained another 10 points in congressional preference over the Republicans with public approval for Congress in single digits. They’ll likely pick up an additional 6 Senate seats in 2008. They’ll likely pick up House seats as well and maybe even the Presidency. I have to think people still think Republicans control the House and Senate and not the Democrats. As dumb as people are, that actually wouldn’t surprise me. I’m not saying Republicans haven’t hurt themselves, it’s just that there are different standards apparently for the two parties with both law enforcement and the voters.

Things are changing and quickly. I grew up in Illinois. It used to be a purple state with Senators from each party and with state government, although primarily controlled by Democrats at the legislative level, at least sharing the governor’s office and other elected executive offices with the Republicans. That’s no longer the case as downstate Illinois lacks voting power over the Chicago area monolith. A corrupt Democratic governor was overwhelmingly re-elected last year. This is another case where a Dem US Attorney, Fitzgerald, doggedly pursued a former Republican governor for corruption, but when faced with a Dem governor, backed off when he got too close. Obama is tied up with our mobbed up State Treasurer and another Chicago area criminal who do his fundraising. It’s reported and yet no one seems to care nor does anyone investigate. Unfortuantely it’s not just Illinois tht’s a changin’. Republicans are in the process of losing Arizona, Colorado, and other states that were fairly reliable. The NE Republicans are gone.

I just don’t see how Republicans can ever regain control at the federal level for the forseeable future. It won’t surprise me if they also lose the Presidency for generations. Even Rassmussen has the Dems rated above the Repubs in all categories except defense and they only trail by a few points there. I’m dubious that campaigning will turn this around, but who knows.

Laddy on September 7, 2007 at 10:48 AM

One of the two GREAT Senators from New York!

Golfer_75093 on September 7, 2007 at 8:51 AM

Please don’t remind me that I have to wake up with these 2 Senators representing me.

For Senator Schumer to say that “the soldiers inability to protect the villagers” is so vile. I am embarassed for this country that he is a member of the Senate

HarryStar on September 7, 2007 at 11:15 AM

I’d say it was Schumer’s macaca moment but, oh, wait – he’s a Democrat. Nothing to see here, move along, folks.

Laura on September 7, 2007 at 4:54 AM

Ditto.

***
Chuck Chuck.

The Race Card on September 7, 2007 at 11:39 AM

Two possibilities: either Schumer delivered the line as prepared and is now trying to rewrite the speech after the fact to hide the evidence or else the transcript reflects the version that was prepared for delivery and Schumer reworked the line on the floor to make it more damning of the military.

This has been going on for as long as I can remember. Most of these chowder heads still haven’t figured out that they’re living in a new world and “down the memory hole” doesn’t work anymore. They can amend the record all they want, but sites like YouTube will preserve the truth for all to see.

student on September 7, 2007 at 12:02 PM

With so many erudite and intelligent people who post here, when oh when will the definition of traitorous and seditious talk ever be acknowledged and acted upon. Republicans continue to have no spine at all. Oh, I forgot, it’s because of the blessed 1st Amendment often misread and misunderstood rarely applied. I AM Not PC you will recall.

MNDavenotPC on September 7, 2007 at 12:24 PM

I tried to watch the video, but I couldn’t get past, “paint a rosy picture.”

I’ve heard this canard so many times, by lefty trolls. Now I have to listen to it from a Senator?

If you don’t agree with the Harry Reids and Chucky Schumers, that it’s a total disaster, then you are, “painting a rosy picture.”

What about nuance, Chucky? You anti-war jerks keep telling conservatives that we see everything in black and white.

What about you? Where is the grey, Chucky?

JannyMae on September 7, 2007 at 12:42 PM

Senators and Congressmen cannot be held responsible for what they say on the floor.

It has always been the rule that Senators and Congressmen can add, subtract, and otherwise change everything and anything that is said on the floor when the transcript in the Congressional Record is prepared.

slp on September 7, 2007 at 5:46 PM

More often it’s retreat and expunge.

On the bright side, it’s a great opportunity for true bi-partisanship.

soundingboard on September 7, 2007 at 2:57 AM
That’s funny. It’s amazing that this practice of retreating and expunging is allowed. Talk about a lack of accountability.

Not sure there’s any bright side!

MT on September 7, 2007 at 8:46 AM

What? Dems and Repubs, rising above politics, working together to serve their constituents own agendas?

Of course there’s a bright side. but don’t take my word for it, just ask any politician engaged in the practice. I’d suggest Ted Kennedy any Saturday after midnite.
In Vino Veritas baby!

soundingboard on September 8, 2007 at 3:56 AM

This a first-class JERK ! Way to go New York voters!

oldelpasoan on September 8, 2007 at 6:41 AM

LtE126 on September 7, 2007 at 7:49 AM,

At least we have given up the Hildabeast to a State that is far worthier. Now that Spitzer is catching up with Blago.

MSimon on September 10, 2007 at 8:29 AM

Commenter jaleach said “We’ve always been at war with Eastasia.” Well said, sir. We make a quite similar point this morning in Beholden to hard left, Democrats in a bind.

However, we don’t make the Orwellian connection; instead, we just go for it and directly compare Schumer to Stalin. No, Schumer is not a mass murderer, but his ideology is connected by a long chain that runs through Stalin’s Russia all the way back to 1848 Germany.

All of this reinforces something we said just about a year ago in The stinking blossom of the totalitarian left.

ModernConservative on September 10, 2007 at 9:33 AM