Here's Ron Suskind on NPR's Fresh Air today, text of transcript below starting at about 29:00:

SUSKIND: Ultimately you feel a kind of humbleness as a reporter. There are some things books can take you up to the gates of, the precipice of, but can't go all the way, just in terms of these issues of people having to testify under oath, hopefully with immunity and also the threat of perjury...And some people in Congress of course are getting ready to do that at this point.

NPR: One person that people are going to want to talk to is you. Are you prepared to play recordings which substantiate what you have in this book?

SUSKIND: If it comes to that, of course. I would hope it wouldn't, frankly. And my estimation is that everything in this book is true, and findable. And other reporters are out on the hunt right now. There are other sources that, uh, are near to the surface, let's just say. And I think lots of these things will be moot fairly quickly. I have not a shadow of a doubt, having spent hours with Maguire and Richer and others—Buzzy Krongard, the number three guy at CIA, talks also about some of these issues of Habbush—other people in the know know bits about it...

NPR: ...As a journalist—and you're not some hack who's come up with a scoop here, you have a long record, you've won a Pulitzer Prize—but if in one of the most controversial parts of the book—one which, as you say, could have grave legal implications—two of the most prominent on the record sources are saying, it's just not true, what do you say to those who say, why should believe other parts of the book?

SUSKIND: Sadly, this is the way the world works. These guys are under stress, this sometimes happens when that's the case, and I think people are looking at it in terms of the context of the situation. I've been at this for a long time, and I have sources who spend a long time with me, we tape their conversations, I put it in a book or a magazine piece. And then the heat comes, of public attention. And it's startling for them, especially at the beginning. It's quite jarring. I'm used to it. But for private citizens, even tough guys, like both of these are—and both of them, frankly, are big believers in the truth process. And I've talked to both of them: "You're never going to feel heat quite like this." And they said, both of them, Richer and Maguire, I'm ready to go in front of Senate committees, and House committees, I'm ready to have my moment. They knew everything that was in the book. Once they get there and the moment arrives, sometimes their knees buckle. And then you say, all right, let's take a deep breath, and you get them upright, and they tend to often then walk forward...They're reacting to that first blast.

I heard the interview yesterday on NPR and it was very provoking. I truly believe that Dick Cheney should be impeached (or at least go through the process) at the very least based on that interview. Suskind makes Bush seem kind of clueless to the goings on in the executive office. He puts blind faith in Cheney and the mobilization to war.

I agree jfrancais, now I read that the Darth Vader is going to speak at the RNC convention.  I guess that is because Pres. Bush is also speaking Monday night, and the puppet master has to be there anyway.

Since the author has so much credibility, other media and government officials should investigate it further. If it ever comes out that the war started on false documents, the American people will lose even more faith in government. Suskind is right in that the document didn't pass the "smell test". It is just too convenient in linking all the pieces. There is no other corresponding evidence and all parties (Niger, Saddam Hussien, Al-Qaeda, and 'yellow-cake') are tied to one document by one official. How likely is that?

CBS has picked up the story, the link

here

also includes a video of their newsreport

.

Since the author has so much credibility

He also has tapes of the conversations. You don't need credibility when you have solid proof.

It will be interesting to what Richer testifies to in front of Congress. He's quoted as saying he's looking forward to telling the truth.

Very true, TSM. I would just like to hear them. I know that Suskind is trying to keep the confidentiality of those that he interviewed by not playing them but until then, I respect his credibility as a journalist.

I respect his credibility as a journalist

The White House sure doesn't.

White House press spokesman Tony Fratto attacked Suskind today, stating that he “makes a living from gutter journalism” and calling the book one of Suskind’s “bizarre conspiracy theories.”

As if the WH has any credibility.

They can attack all they want, the guy is respected in the profession and, as you previously stated, has the tapes to prove it. What more do they want? His allegations (at this point) can't be discredited as a conspiracy theory. The burden is slowly creeping on them to disprove it.

Thanks for this montfred.While the burning question for some is all about who got *onto *who's pants ....this is the story we should be paying attention to.ROFLOL.......make that into....

I think we all we will be talking about this story for a real long time, the story got new legs today -- and additional details -- from Joe Conason's

column in Salon

Conason takes us back to the time of the bogus letter's first appearance.