Not Hard To Predict the Reaction to This EditorialThe WaPo editorial board tells
it like it is:
PRESIDENT BUSH was right to approve the declassification of parts of a National Intelligence Estimate about Iraq three years ago in order to make clear why he had believed that Saddam Hussein was seeking nuclear weapons. Presidents are authorized to declassify sensitive material, and the public benefits when they do. But the administration handled the release clumsily, exposing Mr. Bush to the hyperbolic charges of misconduct and hypocrisy that Democrats are leveling.Let's see, Jane Hamsher will not doubt write one of the "Dear Jim" posts, for which she is so well known. Glenn Greenwald will say this proves why censure is necessary. And Oliver Willis will mutter something about the corporate media.
Dan Riehl
foresees a full scale "China Syndrome" over this editorial.
Thank God we don't have to worry about the fallout. Most of the Libs are lightweights and are bound to be carried away on the wind by some other nonsense before tonight. Either that, or they'll go back to screaming about Bush's plans to nuke Iran.Daily Kos features a
pushback from Joe Wilson, using an
article from the news section of the Post:
Here we have a two-fer in terms of self-debunking: (1) There was indeed total validation of Mr. Wilson's charges of persecution, despite what the editorial says; and (2) The news story confirms that there was "no support for charges that Iraq tried to buy uranium there" - in direct contradiction to the editorial's claim that Wilson's report supported the purchase effort.What does the news article say? The poster at Kos highlights this:
Cheney, in a conversation with Libby in early July 2003, was said to describe Wilson's CIA-sponsored trip to Niger the previous year -- in which the envoy found no support for charges that Iraq tried to buy uranium there -- as "a junket set up by Mr. Wilson's wife," CIA case officer Valerie Plame. (Boldface added by Kos poster)
Except of course as
we have covered extensively, Wilson did not find "no support" for those charges. As the Senate Intelligence Committee reported:
So it is plain that the news article has it wrong and the editorial has it right.
See also
Rick Moran's take on this:
Why the sudden love note about the Post? I read this editorial this morning and remembered why the Post is still a fairly honest voice in our national debate. We might not like some of the news they write but that’s not their fault; events can be unwelcome and they are, after all, just the messengers.I also like
Blue Crab Boulevard's point:
This is, I think, enough for reasonable people to let this matter go. Though I rather doubt a lot of people will.Nope, they sure won't. The key word there is "reasonable".
Hat Tip:
MemeorandumUpdate: Check out Bookburner Jane Hamsher's comment (first one) on
Jeff Goldstein's post. Can you say clueless liberals have zero sense of humor?
