Did Bush Lie to Congress About Invading Iraq In Writing? Yes and No

The Left Coaster, via Tom Tomorrow

It appears so.

Text of a Letter from the President to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate

March 18, 2003

Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:)

Consistent with section 3(b) of the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107-243), and based on information available to me, including that in the enclosed document, I determine that:

(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic and other peaceful means alone will neither (A) adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq nor (B) likely lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and

(2) acting pursuant to the Constitution and Public Law 107-243 is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.



The Left Coaster says this about paragraph (1).
The failure to find any imminent WMD threat has now negated Article 1 of the rationale Bush used above.
Bush neglects to mention that it was his narrow-minded rush to war that shored up his statements. But there was existing intelligence of WMD that convinced a lot of people on both sides of the aisle. The error of Saddam's WMD is a bipartisan error (one, I note, that will not split the Republican Party). Bush's cynicism in making this claim is duly noted, but he's got wiggle room. His determination in (1) is based on information available to him, and only the claim of information is being made, not that the WMD are actually there.

By this same token, however, (2) is clearly proven a lie by Bush's recent admission of no 9/11-Iraqi link. The use of force against nations is narrowly focused to those nations who planned, authorized, committed or aided the 9/11 attacks, and Bush said there is no evidence and never has been. The invasion of Iraq was therefore unjustified by Public Law 107-243, and it's a clear implication that such "information" was available to him. But:

No information about Iraqi plans of the 9/11 attacks existed when this letter was signed.

No information about Iraqi authorization of the 9/11 attacks existed when this letter was signed.

No information about Iraqi commission of the 9/11 attacks existed when this letter was signed.

No information about Iraqi aid to the 9/11 attacks existed when this letter was signed.

Paragraph (2) is a lie. Bush rolled the dice, expecting to find the evidence when they took over Baghdad. It was a high stakes gamble, and he lost.

It's time to take the football away from the influence of Bush's gut instinct.