VANITY FAIR LIES? OH NO....

Yesterday I posted parts of the Vanity Fair "interviews" with the neo-cons in the Bush administration, and urged you to read them. Today there are some rebuttals to that article, basically saying that remarks were twisted and put into a context contrived by Vanity Fair. David Frum, one of those supposedly quoted said in part:

Vanity Fair then set my words in its own context in its press release. They added words outside the quote marks to change the plain meaning of quotations. When I talk in the third quotation above about failures "at the center," for example, I did not mean the president. If I had, I would have said so. At that point in the conversation, I was discussing the National Security Council, whose counter-productive interactions produced bad results.

At this early AM times nobody else has stepped up to the plate; which says reams about the brain dead Republican so-called leadership. Ask yourself, if you were head of the RNC, how long would it have taken you to reply to that Vanity Fair hit piece? More reason to stay home on Tuesday provided by none other than the Republican "leaders(?)" themselves. Stay tuned----

5:30AM Add:
Michael Ledeen lays into Vanity Fair big time over at The American Thinker. After blasting Vanity Fair for their repeated libels, lies, and distortions, he says in part:

I do not feel “remorseful,” since I had and have no involvement with our Iraq policy. I opposed the military invasion of Iraq before it took place and I advocate “as I still do”support for political revolution in Iran as the logical and necessary first step in the war against the terror masters.

He says that the mag editors have re-written the piece that the original writer wrote and that he was always opposed to the Iraq policy because he says our major enemy is Iran:

So it is totally misleading for Vanity Fair to suggest that I have had second thoughts about our Iraq policy. But then one shouldn’t be surprised. No one ever bothered to check any of the lies in the first screed, and obviously no fact-checker was involved in the latest “promotion.” I actually wrote to David Rose, the author of the article-to-come, a person for whom I have considerable respect. He confirmed that words attributed to me in the promo had been taken out of context.