House Republicans Picked a Perfectly Terrible Panel to Complain About the Iran Deal

Speaking of false narratives.

Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) and Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), the ranking Democrat and chairman of the House Oversight Committee, attend a committee hearing.Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/AP

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

After the New York Times Magazine published a controversial profile of Ben Rhodes, the White House’s deputy national security adviser for strategic communications, conservatives exploded in outrage over the article’s portrayal of Rhodes manipulating the media to secure passage of the Iran nuclear deal. Republican senators have called for Rhodes to resign, and the House Oversight Committee even held a hearing on Tuesday to look into “White House Narratives on the Iran Nuclear Deal.”

But, as our David Corn noted yesterday, one of the three witnesses has plenty of experience in planting “false narratives:” John Hannah, a former aide to Vice President Dick Cheney who played a key role in promoting the flawed intelligence behind the invasion of Iraq. Corn wrote that “Hannah was one of the architects of the speech then-Secretary of State Colin Powell gave to the United Nations in February 2003 that was designed to pave the way to war.” And he’s not the only one who noticed.

Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), the ranking Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, blasted Hannah in his opening statement at the hearing. “If our goal is to hear from an expert who actually promoted false White House narratives, then I think you picked the right person,” he said. “But if our goal is to hear from someone who was not involved in one of the biggest misrepresentations in our nation’s history, then you picked the wrong person. Listening to John Hannah criticize anyone else for pushing a false White House narrative is beyond ironic. He and Dick Cheney and their colleagues in the White House wrote the how-to manual on this.”

Hannah wasn’t the only perfectly wrong choice on the three-man panel. Another witness, Michael Rubin, was a Pentagon official during the invasion of Iraq and later worked for the Coalition Provisional Authority, the post-war American occupation government. Rubin was a strong backer of Ahmad Chalabi, the late Shiite dissident who used fake intelligence to push the war in Iraq and whom many neoconservatives promoted as a potential future Iraqi leader. Rubin backed Chalabi and defended him even after Chalabi was suspected of passing intelligence to Iran in 2004. The third witness, Michael Doran, was also a Bush-era official at the Pentagon and the National Security Council.

Cummings, for his part, couldn’t figure out why the hearing was taking place at all. “Other committees have held dozens of substantive hearings on the Iran agreement,” he said. “Do you know how many this committee has held? Zero…Yet, all of a sudden, now our committee is rushing to hold today’s hearing without even the one-week notice required by House rules.”


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend