Former Vice President Dick Cheney, in his first interview since a heart transplant operation in March, blasted President Obama calling him “one of our weakest presidents.”
“Obviously, I’m not a big fan of President Obama,” said Cheney in an excerpt from an interview with ABC News aired Monday on “Good Morning America.” “I think he’s been one of our weakest presidents. I fundamentally disagree with him philosophically, be hard put to find any Democratic president I disagree with more.”
Asked by ABC’s Jonathan Karl if Obama was “worse than Jimmy Carter in your perspective,” Cheney responded “yes.”
I don’t know about worse than Carter.
During Carter’s Presidency we had foreign policy humiliation (Iranian hostage crisis and failed rescue attempt), a poor economy (stagflation) and gasoline lines.
At least President Obama has had some foreign policy success with the killing of Bin Laden. But, the economy has been extremely poor and he will have to justify his policy decisions in the November election.
Here is the Cheney interview in an embedded video below:
Former Vice President Dick Cheney and former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin
Dick Cheney said today that John McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin as his Vice Presidential nominee was a “mistake.”
Dick Cheney has some advice for Mitt Romney on choosing a running mate: Don’t pick another Sarah Palin.
In his first interview since receiving a heart transplant in March, Cheney told ABC News, that John McCain’s decision to pick Palin as his running mate in 2008 was “a mistake” — one that it is important from Romney not to repeat.
It’s subject on which Cheney has some unique experience. He helped Presidents Gerald Ford and George W. Bush lead their vice presidential searches and, of course, served as vice president for eight years. He’s also privately offered some advice to both Romney and Beth Myers, who is leading Romney’s search for a runningmate, on the process.
Cheney would not comment on what he told Romney and Myers, but he was harsh in his assessment of McCain’s decision to pick Palin.
“That one,” Cheney said, “I don’t think was well handled.”
“The test to get on that small list has to be, ‘Is this person capable of being president of the United States?’”
Former Vice President Dick Cheney won’t say whether he thinks Sarah Palin is qualified to be president.
Asked in an interview on NBC broadcast Tuesday morning whether he thought she was qualified, Cheney ducked and said he’s “not going to get into the business … of saying this one is, this one isn’t.”
The former vice president said he would speak out at a later time on the 2012 contest.
“I’m interested in Gov. Palin like a lot of people are,” he said in an interview on the “Today” show.
“I’ve met her,” he said. “I thought she’s got an interesting political career established.”
Cheney said he watches the former Alaska governor and former vice presidential candidate’s reality show, “Sarah Palin’s America,” and thinks it’s “very good.”
Cheney wouldn’t weigh in on her chances in 2012 or whether she’d do a good job in the White House. “She’s clearly a factor in the Republican Party, has a strong following. She also has a lot of critics.”
It’s not the first time Cheney has avoided weighing in on whether he thinks Palin could be president.
The problem with the GOP in 2008 was not Sarah Palin, despite her shortcomings and lack of experience. It was not her blow-up with Katie Couric.
The problem and the mistake in 2008 was the Presidential nominee, John McCain. He simply was too old, too liberal and not aggressive enough in order to make the GOP case to the American people. The campaign he ran was abysmal.
Even though New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani was more moderate on social issues than the GOP platform, he would have been the better nominee.
Rudy would not have needed and would not have selected a novice, inexperienced Governor from a small state to be his Vice President. I would have bet he would have chosen Mike Huckabee to balance the ticket and would have beaten Obama.
Here is the video embedded below of Cheney’s interview:
The extent of the dishonesty is quite stunning. In a Cabinet meeting on October 7, 2003, the White House press corps bombarded President George W. Bush with questions about who the leaker was. Bush said he didn’t know, but there would be an investigation to get to the bottom of it. Powell, who had been told by Armitage just days earlier that Armitage was the leaker, sat there next to the president, stone silent. Not very loyal or honest, was it?
Moreover, the notion that Armitage’s slip was somehow inadvertent is belied by Bob Woodward’s taped interview in which Armitage repeatedly mentions Joe Wilson’s wife, evidently doing his best to get Plame’s identity out there. This was no slip of the tongue. Woodward testified that when he spoke to Libby sometime later that Libby never said anything about Plame.
At issue here is not simply Powell and Armitage’s deception and undermining of their commander in chief. There was a victim, one whom neither Powell or Armitage has ever apologized to. The person who ultimately paid the price for this was Scooter Libby. Had the president and the country known about Armitage, a special prosecutor would never have been appointed. Libby was eventually convicted on the basis of a he-said-he-said dispute between his recollection and that of the late Tim Russert. (Charges concerning Libby’s alleged comments to Judy Miller were dismissed, and he was acquitted on the count involving Matt Cooper.) A compelling case for Libby’s innocence can be found in this account by Stan Crock.
Powell may be peeved at being fingered by Cheney. But on this one Cheney has him dead to rights. The Plame is a blot on his record and that of Armitage. Maybe it is time to own up and make amends rather than bristling at Libby’s former boss.
Dick Cheney said that when his book, In My Time, was released that heads would explode in D.C. It appears that Colin Powell’s has and he should apologize to Libby and Cheney for his despicable conduct in the Valerie Plame matter.
Four knowledgeable sources tell NEWSWEEK that he is now leaning toward appointing a prosecutor to investigate the Bush administration’s brutal interrogation practices, something the president has been reluctant to do. While no final decision has been made, an announcement could come in a matter of weeks, say these sources, who decline to be identified discussing a sensitive law-enforcement matter. Such a decision would roil the country, would likely plunge Washington into a new round of partisan warfare, and could even imperil Obama’s domestic priorities, including health care and energy reform. Holder knows all this, and he has been wrestling with the question for months. “I hope that whatever decision I make would not have a negative impact on the president’s agenda,” he says. “But that can’t be a part of my decision.”
And, then, President Obama can declassify a whole bunch of CIA and NSA materials that may shed some light on the entire 9/11 enhanced interrrogation technique’s flap. Of course, this may endanger American national security but Eric Holder, the Attorney General who encouraged President Clinton to pardon Marc Rich, a known criminal, knows best.
Now will it be suprising that after this piece in Newsweek that Obama or Rahm calls Holder in for a little chat?
I say put Leon Panetta, Dick Cheney, Porter Goss and George Tenent on the stand under oath and let the chips fall where they may.
A CIA spokesman is sharply downplaying Director Leon Panetta ‘s recent comments that appear to question whether former Vice President Dick Cheney is hoping for another terrorist attack against the United States.
“The Director does not believe the former Vice President wants an attack,” CIA spokesman Paul Gimigliano said in a statement to CNN. “He did not say that. He was simply expressing his profound disagreement with the assertion that President Obama’s security policies have made our country less safe. Nor did he question anyone’s motives.”
The statement comes days after the New Yorker published an interview with Panetta during which he said Cheney’s recent criticism of Obama â€“ including the decision to close the detention center at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba â€“ show the ex-vice president “smells some blood in the water on the national security issue.”
“It’s almost, a little bit, gallows politics,” said Panetta. “When you read behind it, it’s almost as if he’s wishing that this country would be attacked again, in order to make his point.”
Cheney’s office released a terse statement from the vice president Monday responding to the comments, saying “I hope my old friend Leon was misquoted.”
Exit question: Was CIA Director Panetta misquoted or did he commit a gaffe?