Right now we’re watching the Bush people do the same two-step they’ve done before when they get caught in their bullshit.

The last time it was the weapons of mass destruction which, we were all told prior to the invasion, the Iraqis had amassed in lethal stockpiles. When this turned out not to be the case, Bush could have been honest and said we were wrong. He could have said a mistake was made. Instead, he played wordgames. We had found “weapons of mass-destruction-related program activities” (whatever the hell that means, and that is an exact quote from his last SOTU address). And that justified things. A shift in language, a bit of parsing and re-adjusting, and he squirmed off the hook.

Would you have sacrificed your loved ones for “weapons of mass destruction-related program activities”? Of course not, and that’s not what he said before the attack. It was deadly stockpiles posing a threat that needed to be dealt with at once.

Now it’s whether or not he ever led us all to believe there was a connection between al Qaeda and Saddam. Same thing all over again — Bush and Cheney never really said that, what they really said was parse parse parse….

But we all know that drawing a connection between al Qaeda and Saddam was a major factor in the administration’s convincing the American people that this was a war worth fighting, a war worth sacrificing the blood of their children and husbands and fathers. Bush needed to wrap it in the immediacy of September 11, as a centerpiece of his imaginary war on terror.

But today, with the bipartisan commission’s statement that there was no connection of any significance between Saddam and al Qaeda, Bush has to move the furniture around again. The new line is we never said Saddam was involved in 911 — and while that’s technically true, they definitely embarked on a disinformation campaign to foment the idea and then did nothing to set the record straight.

This is all documented by Spencer Ackerman, sitting in for Josh Marshall and doing a great job. He gives Bush’s and Cheney’s exact quotes with the dates and the links. There is simply no argument. These two shysters consciously and consistently campaigned to convince the man on the street that Saddam was a terrorist threat with deep and meaningful ties to al Qaeda.

Now that it’s many months later, they’re trying to say we never really said that, just like we never really said Saddam’s weapons posed an imminent threat. They could prove in court they didn’t actually say the precise words — but the record shows that they did indeed say it, though they chose their words with legalistic care. These guys are good. They’re smooth — especially Cheney. I admire them, even as I’m repulsed by them.

Whatever you do, check out the actual record of what was said, both by Cheney/Bush and the 911 Commission. It’s all in the TPM post, which is essential reading for those who really want a sense of perspective. The record speaks for itself: Bush and Cheney are liars and scoundrels.

Update: As Billmon mulls over the same topic of Bush-age doublespeak, he offers this quote, that says it all:

George Orwell
1984

In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense.