Fraters Libertas

The Truth About The "Lies"

Faithful reader Rick from California e-mails to clear the air on the SOTU "lies" controversy:

What I've read being reported in the blogosphere is not quite accurate about the SOTU address where Bush has been accused of lying. The basic facts are not getting out, and someone needs to set the record straight. Even the RCP(Real Clear Politics) commentary today gets it wrong when they say,

"Based on what we know so far, you can either believe that a mistake was made by allowing a claim based on questionable intelligence into Bush's State of the Union OR you can believe the President of the United States got up in front of the world and knowingly used information that had already been proved to be completely fraudulent to bolster the case for going to war.

In my mind the more plausible answer is that the administration failed to properly coordinate and vet the intelligence used in the speech. A mistake was made. The administration has admitted such. Does the fact that it was the SOTU magnify the mistake? Yes. And does the fact that it was related to the issue of going to war magnify the error even more? Of course."

Bush didn't lie. His direct quote , from the SOTU was,:

"The International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed in the 1990s that Saddam Hussein had an advanced nuclear weapons development program, had a design for a nuclear weapon and was working on five different methods of enriching uranium for a bomb. The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production. Saddam Hussein has not credibly explained these activities. He clearly has much to hide."

Note that Bush says "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sough significant quantities of uranium from Africa". If you read the RCP commentary, our spies say we need to nix any comment along these lines, but Tony Blair's spies tell us they have information we are not privy to. That is why Bush says this information comes from the British.

Terry McAuliffe is a silly, little man and behind this foolish attempt to smear our president's good name. I honestly believe that our progeny is going to study our current political history and point to the Democratic party as an example of how not to act. If they lose the next election, what are they going to do then, run further to the left?

Accusing a man of lying and then pleading with the public to demand that he comes clean when the facts can be so readily produced to the contrary is NOT political genius.