Keith Olbermann: "Bush" Report A Sham

The following video is from MSNBC's Countdown, broadcast on September 6.



posted on Rawstory.com

we should FRAME this as the "Bush" Report:

Shall we take a look at the relevant section about the reports? Here were go:
(2) REPORTS REQUIRED-
(A) The President shall submit an initial report, in classified and unclassified format, to the Congress, not later than July 15, 2007, assessing the status of each of the specific benchmarks established above, and declaring, in his judgment, whether satisfactory progress toward meeting these benchmarks is, or is not, being achieved.
(B) The President, having consulted with the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the Commander, Multi-National Forces-Iraq, the United States Ambassador to Iraq, and the Commander of U.S. Central Command, will prepare the report and submit the report to Congress...
(D) The President shall submit a second report to the Congress, not later than September 15, 2007, following the same procedures and criteria outlined above....
(3) TESTIMONY BEFORE CONGRESS- Prior to the submission of the President's second report on September 15, 2007, and at a time to be agreed upon by the leadership of the Congress and the Administration, the United States Ambassador to Iraq and the Commander, Multi-National Forces Iraq will be made available to testify in open and closed sessions before the relevant committees of the Congress.
Got that? The law calls for the President -- you know, Bush -- to prepare the report. Petraeus will offer Congress what's known as testimony. So the "Bush report" is far and away the more accurate way to describe the report, unless Petraeus engineered a military coup and installed himself as President when I wasn't looking.
It gets better. As Think Progress notes, The Washington Times is actually reporting today that according to a senior military official, Petraeus won't even be giving any written testimony at all to the White House in helping it prepare the Bush report, let alone giving any "Petraeus report" to Congress. This comes literally one day after WashTimes whacked the Democrats for their refusal to falsely describe the coming assessment as the "Petraeus report."
Dems aren't trying to "undermine" Petraeus' credibility. They are pointing out that this report's credibility should already be seen as questionable, because, yes, it in fact will be the "Bush report."