English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

"Bush did not recall being told about the interrogation tapes or their destruction before he was briefed by Hayden on Thursday, she said. "He has no recollection of being made aware of the tapes or their destruction before yesterday."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071207/pl_nm/security_cia_interrogations_dc

Why wouldn't they just say he wasn't informed? When someone in the Bush Admin says "I don't recall", usually it means "it happened but I'm not going to admit it".

Do you think Bush honestly doesn't recall whether he was informed about this, or is he simply refusing to admit it? Or are members of the Bush Admin so used to saying "I don't recall" that it's the default answer?

2007-12-07 09:58:28 · 19 answers · asked by Dana1981 7 in Politics & Government Politics

19 answers

I automatically assume he doesn't want to say he wasn't informed b/c he doesn't want to get caught lying.
To everyone who said 'Why would he remember/who would remember a couple of tapes?' Yes, he would know of every single tape he was told about that was in reference to that event. I heard on a radio show that the tapes were destroyed in Sept 2005 but the event had already been questioned/discussed starting in February 2005. He would be sure to 'recall' whether he had been informed of every tape plus, you don't become President if your memory is that bad. He's obviously lying to protect himself or someone close to him that's involved.

2007-12-08 08:47:39 · answer #1 · answered by strpenta 7 · 1 0

" I don't recall" = I am guilty as hell but will not admit it. Of course he knew about it. If he said he was not told there would be witnesses to come forward to refute this but playing the stupidity card tries to buy him some protection. It is sickening the level of corruption in the White House.

2007-12-07 13:01:27 · answer #2 · answered by yourmtgbanker 5 · 3 0

It should be of no surprize given what has already happened in the command of this man. Homeland spying, Weapons of Mass Destruction, Terror mongering. I just don't see how anyone can look beyond all this and say it's going to be ok. You and I would be fired from our jobs if we told so many lies. Yet, this man seems to skirt any issue that he doesn't agree with, and we as Americans do and say nothing.

2007-12-07 10:22:15 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 5 1

The convenient amnesia when in trouble. There seems to be a ton of that in the Bush Administration. Eventually it will all come out and people who are now supporting Bush will deny they ever voted for him let alone steadfastly support him.

2007-12-07 10:13:49 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 5 1

How convenient. I used this phrase to answer my wife's questions like - Where were you last night ? I don't recall.
How did you get this long hair on your shoulder? I have no recollection. Somehow she never believed me. The only one believed me was my dog, I think. ??????? Yes, definitely. she's wagging her tail.

2007-12-07 20:17:59 · answer #5 · answered by CAPTAIN BEAR 6 · 2 0

I have no doubt that Bush does not remember - because the torture policies were Cheney's.
If Cheney claimed he didn't know , I would be sure it was a lie.

2007-12-07 11:25:18 · answer #6 · answered by oohhbother 7 · 3 0

Losersrd, it's his job to know what everybody else is doing. He may be telling the truth though. Years of Cocaine and booze does have an effect on the brain you know.

2007-12-07 10:29:20 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 5 0

He has shown a pattern of forgetting what is truly important; like Bin laden for example---

"The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him." —Washington, D.C., Sept. 13, 2001

"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority." —Washington, D.C., March 13, 2002

2007-12-07 10:13:21 · answer #8 · answered by David M 6 · 8 1

it would have been more believable if he said he was not informed that the tapes were being destroyed instaed of saying i don't recall

2007-12-07 10:04:35 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 5 1

his security clearance is not high enough ,
to be told everything that goes on.

bet Kissinger knew all about it.

2007-12-08 10:28:46 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers