Uh, But What About The Facts?

This Administration has had a very convenient way of avoiding answering questions it doesn't like. And the whole National Guard document issue has been another example of that.

Even if you agree that the documents are forgeries, what about the fact that Killian's secretary stated that the documents are forgeries, BUT they accurately reflect what he thought and said at the time about Bush? (It's also really telling that the night of the CBS News story, the White House was not disputing that the documents were authentic, increasing the likelihood that they knew, as Killian's secretary stated, that the information contained in them was accurate.)

Let's remember, back when the Richard Clarke bombshell hit in March 2004 that the Administration had been negligent in dealing with Al Qaeda pre-9/11 and that it had been obsessed with Iraq, the White House stated that Clarke was lying when he stated that he had a private meeting with Bush on September 12, when Bush agressively told Clarke to "find out" if there was a link between Saddam and 9/11. The White House said that it had no record that any such meeting took place. Well, since that meeting was with the President, Bush must have said that no meeting took place for them to issue that statement.

We now know, based on the 9/11 Commission Report, Rice's testimony, and the White House's own withdrawal of that initial statement, that Bush was lying, all in an effort to discredit Clarke. So let's remember that when we think about Bush and his statements about his service in the National Guard.

When are we going to hear answers to these questions? My guess is not before January 2005.


- posted by Joshua @ 5:47 PM