http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,92068,00.htmlBut Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., said the issue wasn't why Tenet failed to keep the information out of the speech but who was so determined to put it in and why.
"All roads still lead back to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue," he said, referring to the White House address. "The question is, who in the White House was so determined to put information in the State of the Union which had been discounted so dramatically by American intelligence sources?"
Durbin and other Democrats said Tenet had named White House officials who had sought to include the information in the speech, but the Democrats declined to identify them, citing the confidentiality of the proceedings.
---------------------------
But this is priceless-
Democrats say the question comes down to whether the intelligence supported the urgency of the threat the White House portrayed and whether Bush ignored caveats and qualifiers that may have made the case for war less compelling.
But Republican Sen. Christopher "Kit" Bond (search), R-Mo., said that intelligence is supposed to be non-partisan and not second-guessed.
"
ultimately proved successful for winning the war in Iraq, and number two, pointing out the fact of weapons of mass destruction, had we not intervened, might have in the future resulted in nuclear weapons. So this is regrettably a politicization of intelligence," Bond told Fox News
Riiiight....we had to invade because maybe in the fuure some country might have nuclear weapons and they might want to use them on us....a perfect pre-emptive policy to invade any country we decide might be a future problem. I'm sure Kit would have come to Clinton's defense if he had done these very same things...