“Congressional Democrats are warning U.S. Iraq commander General David Petraeus, and the U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, not to attempt to minimize the seriousness of the situation in Iraq when they testify to Congress next week. VOA's (Voice of America) Dan Robinson reports from Capitol Hill.”
Nancy Pelosi issued a warning to General Petraeus to not report anything Democrats don’t want to hear. “We’ve been consistent in telling the American people that we’ve lost the war in Iraq, so don’t you go telling them anything different,” Nancy Pelosi would have said if truthfulness was a Democrat option.
Since truthfulness is not in the Democrat’s best interest, what Nancy actually said was "We have to know the real ground truths of what is happening there, not put a shine on events because of a resolution [of the situation in Basra] that looks less violent when it has in fact been dictated by someone [Iraqi Shiite cleric Moqtada] al-Sadr who can grant or withhold that call for violence or not."
“In other words, if things are less violent, don’t say they are less violent. If things in Iraq improve, our Democrat image will suffer, since our position all along is that it’s hopeless,” I hear Nancy Pelosi saying as I read between the lines of her protestations against the report from General Petraeus she hasn’t heard yet.
For those who protest me reporting what Pelosi and the Democrats haven’t said, let me remind you that Pelosi and the Democrats have already protested against what General Petraeus hasn’t said.
I’m just trying to catch up. It’s obvious that if anyone waits to find out what General Petraeus actually says, they’ll miss an entire news cycle. As soon as the General finishes his report, the Democrats will start telling us what he really meant or should have said, and the Democrat’s preemptive strike against truth telling would have gone unnoticed.
Except I noticed, and now you have too.