This a must-read article in Saturday's Washington Post, front page. They eviscerate Bush's arguments of only yesterday that Congress saw the same intelligence he saw before voting to authorize force in Iraq (they didn't), and that a bipartisan Senate committee exonerated Bush from misrepresenting the intelligence (it didn't).
But outright lied yesterday in an attempt to - what? - convince us that he didn't lie about why we needed to invade Iraq. And the Washington Post caught him on it and detailed every single lie. It's an amazing article. Only a year ago, I fear the Post would have simply quoted Bush opponents disagreeing with Bush, rather than going through each argument on their own and blasting it out of the water.
An amazing piece of journalism. Read it and share it.
President Bush and his national security adviser have answered critics of the Iraq war in recent days with a two-pronged argument: that Congress saw the same intelligence the administration did before the war, and that independent commissions have determined that the administration did not misrepresent the intelligence.
Neither assertion is wholly accurate....
Bush and his aides had access to much more voluminous intelligence information than did lawmakers, who were dependent on the administration to provide the material. And the commissions cited by officials, though concluding that the administration did not pressure intelligence analysts to change their conclusions, were not authorized to determine whether the administration exaggerated or distorted those conclusions.
