Yes, another WMD thread. Different angle (I hope). John Dean (of Nixon counsel during Watergate fame) is far from a left-wing rabble rouser. He is one who probably knows a scandal when he sees it. He writes on CNN:
The WMD search goes on, and it is gradually becoming obvious that no large scale program will be found. It either has been erased or moved or never existed. John Dean points out some very direct comments Bush made on WMDs. These include statements without hedges in them:
If this turns out not to be the case, this statement is thousands of times more repugnant than the vile “I did not have sexual relations with that woman” quote.
I personally agree with this column to the letter. Leading a nation into war is the most important and dire thing a president can do. If WMDs don’t pitch up, he acted on bad information. At the very least, this shows a profound lack of judgement from the President. In all likelihood, he deliberately misled America and her allies, and brought us a war (and reconstruction) costing tens of billions of dollars (minimum), with a cost of many thousands of lives.
I’m not arguing that Saddam should have been left in power. We all agree he was a Very Bad Man. Overthrow of Saddam has potential to be a major turning point for the better for the entire region. This does not change my opinion that fabricating a casus belli is the worst possible thing a President can do, far worse than committing domestic criminal acts to sabotage political enemies. As John Dean points out, it rises to the level of conspiracy or “high crime”.
So, without WMDs, do you think that this is impeachable? If evidence of knowing misinterpretation and falsification of data comes out, do you think that the President could be in for some legal fireworks? Do you think that this could rise to the level of an impeachment?