NoApparentMotive

OK, does anyone believe that the US Congress had access to the "same intelligence" that the President had before the invasion of Iraq? By anyone, I don't necessarily mean you, I mean does anyone in the country actually believe this?

I can see the logic behind other administration lies --say, that Iraq is somehow linked to Al Qaeda, or that Saddam Hussein was on the brink of possessing nuclear weapons before we invaded. Those kinds of lies not only justify the invasion, but, just as importantly, they work well as lies. The average voter is simply not in a position to verify or falsify these kinds of claims. And, of course, in matters of national security, the typical American voter gives the President the benefit of a very large doubt. As a result, a host of talking heads and White House correspondents can say that the CIA and other US intelligence agencies have concluded that Iraq, in fact, had no significant ties to Al Qaeda (or as Murray Waas reports today in the National Journal, that Hussein was keeping tabs on Al Qaeda because he saw the fundamentalist group as a threat to his secular dictatorship). But, Dick Cheney can still muddy the waters by saying last Monday (as he has done many times before): "By the time Congress voted to authorize force [against Iraq] in late 2002, there was broad-based, bipartisan agreement that the time had come to enforce the legitimate demands of the international community. And our thinking was informed by what had happened to our country on the morning of September 11th, 2001." The two sentences link Iraq and September 11th, but, of course, in a way that allows Cheney to deny in polite company that he is trying to suggest any real link at all.

The claim, which President Bush voiced himself in his recent Veteran's Day speech, that Congress had the "same intelligence" as the White House, however, just doesn't work at either level. To begin with, the argument provides no justification for the war. If anything, the whiff of back-pedalling and ass-covering works to undermine the case for war. "No, I didn't borrow your lawnmower. I returned it yesterday. It was already broken when I borrowed it." We all know that we went to war to stop "Saddam's WMD" --for most Americans this is the only argument, except for "revenge" for 9-11, that would have led them to support the war before it began. So, saying that "everyone was wrong" about WMD works primarily to undermine the administration, not its opponents.

But the "same intelligence" claim is far worse than other administration lies (as a tactic) because it is so hard to believe. The President and Vice President and Secretary of Defense and Joint Chiefs of Staff don't know more than the 535 members of Congress? Are you high? No one believes that. If someone tells a pollster they believe that, its only because that person knows how the game is played and doesn't want to appear to be undermining the President.

The fundamental problem for the White House is that this particular lie works against them in the same way that Cheney's subliminal linking of Iraq with 9-11 works for them. At a time when the President's credibility is in serious doubt, he and his staff are out saying something that nobody believes could possibly be true, and saying it emphatically and often. People see this and walk away just a little more convinced that you can't trust this guy after all, that he's in this a little too deep, and flailing around, mostly trying to avoid being "blamed".

Thank god Karl Rove doesn't read my blog because I really want the White House to keep hammering away on this particular lie for as long as they can.