[governsleastgovernsbest]

This is, no pun intended, a bombshell interview. Kay absolutely absolves the Bush administration of any intent to mislead the American people into war, paints Saddam as a highly dangerous man who was ardently seeking WMDs, and strongly backs the President's decision to go to war.

While only a relatively minor footnote, Lauer's supportive tone was almost as equally surprising. The rough transcript above doesn't do it complete justice. By his tone, and the way he set up the questions, it was clear that Lauer was helping position Kay to make his statements in support of the Bush administration.

If Katie and Matt keep this up, I could be out of my "job" at FR, reporting on blatant liberal bias at The Today Show!

[undeniable logic]

What I find interesting is that Saddam had the intention of developing WMDs, paid huge somes of money following his intention, and actually believed that he had them. I do think we are expecting a lot from our intelligence agency if we have the expectation of knowing more about the state of Iraq's WMD programs than Saddam himself.

[Common Tator]

Lauer and Katie have fallen to number 2 in the ratings.

You don't supose that they have discovered "Trash Bush... Tatings fall. Be fair ... Ratings rise" do you?

Nah!!! Katie and Lauer are both to perky to figure that out.

[Marie Antoinette]

Interesting info ping :-)

[cyncooper]

that Saddam was indeed a threat, and that war against him was absolutely justified.

I have been patiently pointing out for two days that in two different interviews that I know of, (NPR, then yesterday's Brokaw), Kay said what they found indicated Iraq was MORE of a threat than we thought before going in. I surmised due to terrorism when I heard it the first time, and indeed, that's what he pointed to, in part, in his Brokaw, and now Today interviews.

He's been saying it, it's been buried, and like you, I termed it a bombshell revelation.

[GraniteStateConservative]

Only kooks think Bush mislead the US and they're voting Dem anyway. What independents want to know is who is held responsible for this failure?

[prairiebreeze]

ping to Kay's remarks on Today show

[Prodigal Son]

Good read. Thanks for writing and posting that.

[Maria S]

"Lauer's supportive tone was almost as equally surprising..."


I'm not surprised. Call me a nut case, conspiratorial freak, whatever...I will continue to believe that ALL (ABCNBCCBSCNN) understand that Hillary Clinton intends to WIN in 2008, and to do that, President Bush HAS to win in 2004. So the appearance of a little "supportiveness" of the President is in order for right now.

[governsleastgovernsbest]

If you would like to be added to or removed from my ping list of semi-regular reports on liberal bias at The Today Show, please post a reply or drop me a private message.

[chatham]

Perhaps they have been given a "Heads up" to tone down their Bias ,since the networks are not in the best of shape and need to come to a more "Fair and Balanced " Position.

[1rudeboy]

Nicely done.

[DBrow]

.

[metesky]

I don't know how you can stand it day after day, but you do a damn fine job.

[onyx]

Have I told you lately that you're wonderful? Well, YOU ARE!

Your Today Show reports are beyond excellent. You needn't worry about losing your "job" --- leopards don't change spots, they just get out of the cross-fire once in a while.
Truth is hard to refute.

[petitfour]

Lauer then quoted from Kay's earlier interview with Tom Brokaw in which Kay had said that "if anyone was abused (by faulty intelligence) it was the President of the US rather than the other way around."

This bears repeating.

[reed_inthe_wind]

In two major stories the plot turns to corrupt scientists and sinister markets for WMD expertise. Pakistan scientists are seling nuclear designs, and Iraqi scientists are stealing funds from under the nose of Saddam Hussein. Folks, the story is far from over. Why should we believe that Iraqi scientists, who admit to being dishonent and greedy, spent their days filling out crossword puzzles. A sophisticated black market for WMD is available. Why wouldn't these men sell their services.

[luckydevi]

for later

[mewzilla]

Thanks so much for the thread! I heard Kay's going to be up on the Hill tomorrow. Anyone know if the hearing's going to be open and televised?

[iceskater]

Thanks for the ping. I think if this keeps up you may be able to discontinue the Nexium....

I saw/heard most of the interview. I tend to agree with you - Lauer was amazingly not biased in this interview. I kept waiting for him to slant the questions to make Bush look bad and he really didn't. And he gave Kay the time to say things like, "not just the US was misled," "Saddam really was a threat," etc. Maybe Matt has finally grown up... You know what Winston Churchill said, "if you're not a liberal when you're young, you have no heart. If you aren't a conservative when you're older, you have no wisdom."

Now, if al-Katie had done the interview, it probably would've gone down the usual DNC-inspired, left-leaning, Bush-bashing fiesta.

[RottiBiz]

Excellent synopsis!

This is one report that didn't make me furious.

Thanks for keeping us informed.