Corydoras
12-04-2007, 08:52 PM
Subject: SEN. JOE BIDEN ON "HARDBALL": "I WOULD MOVE TO IMPEACH HIM"
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
SEN. JOE BIDEN ON "HARDBALL": "I WOULD MOVE TO IMPEACH
HIM"
NEW YORK - Dec. 4, 2007 - On tonight's "Hardball with Chris
Matthews," Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Joe Biden said if
President Bush attacked Iran without congressional approval, he "would
lead an effort to impeach him." Sen. Biden also said he thinks the Bush
Administration's hard line on Iran is "about our ability to try to
dominate that region of the world and control oil. I don`t think we
went to war because of oil, but I think there was an absolute belief."
Following is a rush transcript of tonight's interview. A complete
transcript will be available tomorrow at tv.msnbc.com. "Hardball with
Chris Matthews" telecasts weeknights, 5-6 p.m. ET and 7-8 p.m. ET on
MSNBC. John Reiss is executive producer.
"HARDBALL" HOST CHRIS MATTHEWS: We`re going to have Joe Biden joining us
right now. Here he is, the
chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee. Senator Biden, I know
you`ve
been the foreign affairs expert for the Democratic Party. Were you
snowed?
Were you shocked to hear we do not face a weapons system under
production
in Iran?
Sen. JOSEPH BIDEN (D-DE), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: No. I never
believed we were. And I said it. I`ve been trying to engage Iran way
back
five years ago with Dick Lugar and others, trying to engage them.
Look, this is not -- you know, if this weren`t so deadly earnest
--
this isn`t about curiosity, it`s about credibility. This administration
has damaged us to a degree that no other administration has in American
history. We have no credibility, Chris. It`s amazing, absolutely
amazing
to me. Were it not for the fact, your point about it making it
virtually
impossible for them to go to war now, were it not for that silver
lining,
which is immense, this is unconscionable. It`s unconscionable.
(CROSSTALK)
BIDEN: What are we talking about here?
MATTHEWS: Did you think -- what did you think about the policy
and
how it`s changed? Let`s go to -- you`re a critic, as well as a
candidate.
The policy of this administration was to scare the bejesus out of
everybody
in the world that we were going to face a World War III -- those are the
president`s phrases there...
BIDEN: Right.
MATTHEWS: ... World War III. And now, what do you think the
policy
is now? Despite what he said today at the press conference, what is our
policy now, do you think?
BIDEN: The policy`s no different now. The policy -- the
rhetoric is
going to change. The policy`s no different. I made a major speech
yesterday on Iran. I`ve laid out in detail over the last five years
exactly what we should be doing with Iran, which is diametrically
opposed
to everything this president is doing.
Now look what`s happened, Chris. In terms of our allies being
willing
to stay with us on other really critical issues, it`s going to be
virtually
impossible. The Russians are running around the world, touting the fact
that now it`s proven that they`ve been right and we`ve been wrong. Now
it
undercuts our ability to deal with the real problem.
The real problem is their continued effort to deal with
Hezbollah and
Hamas, their continued effort to deal with trying to find -- being able
to
produce highly enriched uranium. That`s real. That`s real. And now
what`s happened?
Now -- and secondly, what have we done? We have added to the
urban
legend in the streets of all the Muslim capitals in the world that this
is
a war against Islam. We have made it more difficult for every moderate
Muslim leader, from Karzai on, to be able to deal directly with us.
This
is incredibly devastating to our interests in the Middle East, from Iraq
through Pakistan, as well as our credibility around the world. It is
going
to cost us in a way that no one`s calculating it.
The good news is it makes it harder for these cowboys to go to
war.
The bad news is we have been further damaged, and that hurts America`s
interests in a big way.
MATTHEWS: Well, this propaganda war that`s been fought now for
years
now, their phrases like "weapons of mass destruction" that you and I
never
heard of growing up, "regime change," all the rest of it, "homeland,"
all
the rest of the new language we`ve learned from this crowd that came in
a
few years ago, around the late `90s they started pushing this -- if
their
motive is not to find weapons of mass destruction, which don`t seem to
materialize when they`re supposed to in either Iraq or the Iranian case,
what is the grand motive for war? Why did we invade Iraq? Why were we
threatening World War III with Iran? Why did this administration,
Cheney
and the president, keep pushing the war? Why do they always want to
fight
or scare somebody? What`s it about, if it`s not weapons?
BIDEN: Let me tell you what I think it`s about. I can`t prove
it. I
think it`s about our ability to try to dominate that region of the world
and control oil. I don`t think we went to war because of oil, but I
think
there was an absolute belief. The only thing I can fit together with
Cheney and his gang is that they went to war -- they`re smarter than
they`re acting. They`re smarter than they`re acting. What they do --
they
went to war in the hope they would be able to do two things. One, have
a
government that sat on a whole bunch of oil that still exists in the
world
that would be indebted to us.
MATTHEWS: Right.
BIDEN: Two, have permanent military bases in Iraq to dominate
that
part of the world to be able to control oil. Not to go steal it for
American oil companies, but to be able to control the pricing, control
the
access of it, a very Machiavellian view. There`s nothing idealistic
about
Cheney.
I don`t know what President Bush thinks, but I think he`s bought
hook,
line and sinker the Cheney rationale that the only way for us to be able
to
be dominant in the 21st century is to use our overwhelming power in the
face of the moral disapprobation of the rest of the world, threaten the
rest of the world and that`s how we avoid war in the future.
I think these guys are irresponsible. But the thing that angers
me
the most -- and it angers me, Chris -- is how incomprehensible it is for
anyone to think that the president did not know that his intelligence
agencies didn`t believe what he was saying. I believe that`s why these
guys came out with now 16 American intelligence agencies uniting,
saying,
I`m not going to wear the jacket again on this one.
And I disagree with only one thing that Andrea said. The
intelligence
community didn`t misread what was going on in a major way in Iraq, they
misused the intelligence they were given.
(CROSSTALK)
MATTHEWS: I keep waiting for that second part of that
intelligence
analysis...
BIDEN: Me, too.
MATTHEWS: ... to show how it was manipulated. But I want to
ask you
about something you`ve been involved with. You said that if the
president
of the United States had launched an attack on Iran without
congressional
approval, that would have been an impeachable offense.
BIDEN: Absolutely.
MATTHEWS: Do you want to review that comment you made? Well,
how do
you stand on that now? Do you think...
BIDEN: Yes, I do. I want to stand by that comment I made. The
reason I made the comment was as a warning. The reason I made -- I
don`t
say those things lightly, Chris. You`ve known me for a long time. I
was
chairman of the Judiciary Committee for 17 years, or its ranking member.
I
teach separation of powers and constitutional law. This is something I
know.
So I got together and brought a group of constitutional scholars
together to write a piece that I`m going to deliver to the whole United
States Senate, pointing out the president has no constitutional
authority
to take this nation to war against a country of 70 million people,
unless
we`re attacked or unless there is proof that we are about to be
attacked.
And if he does -- if he does -- I would move to impeach him. The House
obviously has to do that, but I would lead an effort to impeach him.
The reason for my doing that -- and I don`t say it lightly. I
don`t
say it lightly. I say it because they should understand that what they
were threatening, what they were saying, what was adding up to be what
looked like to the rest of the world what we were about to do would be
the
most disastrous thing that could be done at this moment in our history
that
I can think of.
MATTHEWS: OK. You know, Senator, the great thing about you
being
elected to the Senate when you were about 29 years old is that you were
a
senator back when there were real senators there, like Wayne Morse and
J.
William Fulbright, who understood the constitutional importance of what
you
just said. I wonder whether a lot of people who watch this show don`t
even
get what you`re talking about. They don`t even remember when there were
senators that understood the checks and balances of our government, of
our
Constitution. I am so impressed you said it.
Thank you very much, Senator Joe Biden, candidate for president.
BIDEN: Thanks for having me.
# # #
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
SEN. JOE BIDEN ON "HARDBALL": "I WOULD MOVE TO IMPEACH
HIM"
NEW YORK - Dec. 4, 2007 - On tonight's "Hardball with Chris
Matthews," Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Joe Biden said if
President Bush attacked Iran without congressional approval, he "would
lead an effort to impeach him." Sen. Biden also said he thinks the Bush
Administration's hard line on Iran is "about our ability to try to
dominate that region of the world and control oil. I don`t think we
went to war because of oil, but I think there was an absolute belief."
Following is a rush transcript of tonight's interview. A complete
transcript will be available tomorrow at tv.msnbc.com. "Hardball with
Chris Matthews" telecasts weeknights, 5-6 p.m. ET and 7-8 p.m. ET on
MSNBC. John Reiss is executive producer.
"HARDBALL" HOST CHRIS MATTHEWS: We`re going to have Joe Biden joining us
right now. Here he is, the
chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee. Senator Biden, I know
you`ve
been the foreign affairs expert for the Democratic Party. Were you
snowed?
Were you shocked to hear we do not face a weapons system under
production
in Iran?
Sen. JOSEPH BIDEN (D-DE), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: No. I never
believed we were. And I said it. I`ve been trying to engage Iran way
back
five years ago with Dick Lugar and others, trying to engage them.
Look, this is not -- you know, if this weren`t so deadly earnest
--
this isn`t about curiosity, it`s about credibility. This administration
has damaged us to a degree that no other administration has in American
history. We have no credibility, Chris. It`s amazing, absolutely
amazing
to me. Were it not for the fact, your point about it making it
virtually
impossible for them to go to war now, were it not for that silver
lining,
which is immense, this is unconscionable. It`s unconscionable.
(CROSSTALK)
BIDEN: What are we talking about here?
MATTHEWS: Did you think -- what did you think about the policy
and
how it`s changed? Let`s go to -- you`re a critic, as well as a
candidate.
The policy of this administration was to scare the bejesus out of
everybody
in the world that we were going to face a World War III -- those are the
president`s phrases there...
BIDEN: Right.
MATTHEWS: ... World War III. And now, what do you think the
policy
is now? Despite what he said today at the press conference, what is our
policy now, do you think?
BIDEN: The policy`s no different now. The policy -- the
rhetoric is
going to change. The policy`s no different. I made a major speech
yesterday on Iran. I`ve laid out in detail over the last five years
exactly what we should be doing with Iran, which is diametrically
opposed
to everything this president is doing.
Now look what`s happened, Chris. In terms of our allies being
willing
to stay with us on other really critical issues, it`s going to be
virtually
impossible. The Russians are running around the world, touting the fact
that now it`s proven that they`ve been right and we`ve been wrong. Now
it
undercuts our ability to deal with the real problem.
The real problem is their continued effort to deal with
Hezbollah and
Hamas, their continued effort to deal with trying to find -- being able
to
produce highly enriched uranium. That`s real. That`s real. And now
what`s happened?
Now -- and secondly, what have we done? We have added to the
urban
legend in the streets of all the Muslim capitals in the world that this
is
a war against Islam. We have made it more difficult for every moderate
Muslim leader, from Karzai on, to be able to deal directly with us.
This
is incredibly devastating to our interests in the Middle East, from Iraq
through Pakistan, as well as our credibility around the world. It is
going
to cost us in a way that no one`s calculating it.
The good news is it makes it harder for these cowboys to go to
war.
The bad news is we have been further damaged, and that hurts America`s
interests in a big way.
MATTHEWS: Well, this propaganda war that`s been fought now for
years
now, their phrases like "weapons of mass destruction" that you and I
never
heard of growing up, "regime change," all the rest of it, "homeland,"
all
the rest of the new language we`ve learned from this crowd that came in
a
few years ago, around the late `90s they started pushing this -- if
their
motive is not to find weapons of mass destruction, which don`t seem to
materialize when they`re supposed to in either Iraq or the Iranian case,
what is the grand motive for war? Why did we invade Iraq? Why were we
threatening World War III with Iran? Why did this administration,
Cheney
and the president, keep pushing the war? Why do they always want to
fight
or scare somebody? What`s it about, if it`s not weapons?
BIDEN: Let me tell you what I think it`s about. I can`t prove
it. I
think it`s about our ability to try to dominate that region of the world
and control oil. I don`t think we went to war because of oil, but I
think
there was an absolute belief. The only thing I can fit together with
Cheney and his gang is that they went to war -- they`re smarter than
they`re acting. They`re smarter than they`re acting. What they do --
they
went to war in the hope they would be able to do two things. One, have
a
government that sat on a whole bunch of oil that still exists in the
world
that would be indebted to us.
MATTHEWS: Right.
BIDEN: Two, have permanent military bases in Iraq to dominate
that
part of the world to be able to control oil. Not to go steal it for
American oil companies, but to be able to control the pricing, control
the
access of it, a very Machiavellian view. There`s nothing idealistic
about
Cheney.
I don`t know what President Bush thinks, but I think he`s bought
hook,
line and sinker the Cheney rationale that the only way for us to be able
to
be dominant in the 21st century is to use our overwhelming power in the
face of the moral disapprobation of the rest of the world, threaten the
rest of the world and that`s how we avoid war in the future.
I think these guys are irresponsible. But the thing that angers
me
the most -- and it angers me, Chris -- is how incomprehensible it is for
anyone to think that the president did not know that his intelligence
agencies didn`t believe what he was saying. I believe that`s why these
guys came out with now 16 American intelligence agencies uniting,
saying,
I`m not going to wear the jacket again on this one.
And I disagree with only one thing that Andrea said. The
intelligence
community didn`t misread what was going on in a major way in Iraq, they
misused the intelligence they were given.
(CROSSTALK)
MATTHEWS: I keep waiting for that second part of that
intelligence
analysis...
BIDEN: Me, too.
MATTHEWS: ... to show how it was manipulated. But I want to
ask you
about something you`ve been involved with. You said that if the
president
of the United States had launched an attack on Iran without
congressional
approval, that would have been an impeachable offense.
BIDEN: Absolutely.
MATTHEWS: Do you want to review that comment you made? Well,
how do
you stand on that now? Do you think...
BIDEN: Yes, I do. I want to stand by that comment I made. The
reason I made the comment was as a warning. The reason I made -- I
don`t
say those things lightly, Chris. You`ve known me for a long time. I
was
chairman of the Judiciary Committee for 17 years, or its ranking member.
I
teach separation of powers and constitutional law. This is something I
know.
So I got together and brought a group of constitutional scholars
together to write a piece that I`m going to deliver to the whole United
States Senate, pointing out the president has no constitutional
authority
to take this nation to war against a country of 70 million people,
unless
we`re attacked or unless there is proof that we are about to be
attacked.
And if he does -- if he does -- I would move to impeach him. The House
obviously has to do that, but I would lead an effort to impeach him.
The reason for my doing that -- and I don`t say it lightly. I
don`t
say it lightly. I say it because they should understand that what they
were threatening, what they were saying, what was adding up to be what
looked like to the rest of the world what we were about to do would be
the
most disastrous thing that could be done at this moment in our history
that
I can think of.
MATTHEWS: OK. You know, Senator, the great thing about you
being
elected to the Senate when you were about 29 years old is that you were
a
senator back when there were real senators there, like Wayne Morse and
J.
William Fulbright, who understood the constitutional importance of what
you
just said. I wonder whether a lot of people who watch this show don`t
even
get what you`re talking about. They don`t even remember when there were
senators that understood the checks and balances of our government, of
our
Constitution. I am so impressed you said it.
Thank you very much, Senator Joe Biden, candidate for president.
BIDEN: Thanks for having me.
# # #