ABC Falsely Claims Pelosi Opposes Cutting Funds For Iraq Escalation

[Sapphire Blue]

ABC Falsely Claims Pelosi Opposes Cutting Funds For Iraq Escalation

Apparently in desperate search for a headline, ABC last night issued the following “breaking news” alert:

Breaking News from ABCNEWS.com:

HOUSE SPEAKER NANCY PELOSI TELLS ABC NEWS’ DIANE SAWYER SHE WON’T BLOCK FUNDING FOR MORE TROOPS IN IRAQ

Watch ‘Good Morning America’ for the full interview.

In fact, Pelosi said nothing of the sort on Good Morning America. She merely repeated her stated view that she does not support cutting funds to U.S. forces already in Iraq.

Pelosi told Sawyer, “e will hold the president accountable. He has to answer for his war. He has dug a hole so deep he can’t even see the light on this. It’s a tragedy. It’s a historic blunder.” Asked about reports that President Bush has already begun increasing U.S. troop levels by 3,500 soldiers, Pelosi said, “The president knows that because the troops are in harm’s way that we won’t cut off the resources. That’s why he’s moving so quickly to put them in harm’s way.” Watch it: http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/19/pelosi-iraq-abc/

(snip)

Full transcript:

SAWYER: On Iraq, as we sit here right now, 3,500 troops are moving in. That’s the first of the surge. It has begun. Are you going to move to cut off funding for troops going into Iraq as part of the surge?

PELOSI: Democrats will never cut off funding for our troops when they are in harm’s way. But we will hold the president accountable. He has to answer for his war. He has dug a hole so deep he can’t even see the light on this. It’s a tragedy. It’s a historic blunder.

SAWYER: Are you acquiescing in the surge…

(CROSSTALK)

SAWYER: … since the pocketbook is the only other control mechanism?

PELOSI: The president knows that because the troops are in harm’s way that we won’t cut off the resources. That’s why he’s moving so quickly to put them in harm’s way.

SAWYER: Are you saying that the president deliberately manipulated the timing that he sent the troops in, in order to avoid congressional action?

PELOSI: Well, I would certainly hope he didn’t manipulate the timing of sending the troops in. I think he could have told us about it sooner, and invited any comments we might have had, any constructive proposals we might have had. We found out about it as the troops were going in.

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/01/19/pelosi-iraq-abc/

[DearAbby]

1. And the white house called Pelosi remarks

poisionous.

But, that is exactly what they are doing. One Meet the Press, Sunday Jan. 14, 2007:

MR. RUSSERT: If Congress decides to cut off funds for the new troops being deployed to Iraq, will the president accept that decision by Congress and abide by it?

MR. HADLEY: Tim, we’re not there yet. We have funds in the ‘07 appropriations bill to deploy these troops. I think once they get in harm’s way, Congress’ tradition is to support those troops.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16577874/page/3/

[bigtree]

2. that's exactly right

Hadley was the first to broach the subject, and made it clear that the WH considered deployed troops immune from congressional sanctions.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/bigtree

[louis-t]

3. "The president knows that because the troops are in harm’s way ..

that we won’t cut off the resources. That’s why he’s moving so quickly to put them in harm’s way." Repeat, repeat and repeat. Great response.