Josh Marshall points to a press release on the White House web site that attempts to defend against Milbank's and Pincus' charge of the misuse of intelligence:
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/...
Here's the article critical of the Bush administration's handling of intelligence:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
White House rebuttal:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/...
From the White House press release "defending" the Bush administration's position:
The Robb-Silberman Commission Reported That The Intelligence In The PDB Was Not "Markedly Different" Than The Intelligence Given To Congress In The NIE. "It was not that the intelligence was markedly different. Rather, it was that the PDBs and SEIBs, with their attention-grabbing headlines and drumbeat of repetition, left an impression of many corroborating reports where in fact there were very few sources. And in other instances, intelligence suggesting the existence of weapons programs was conveyed to senior policymakers, but later information casting doubt upon the validity of that intelligence was not." (Charles S. Robb And Laurence H. Silberman, The Commission On The Intelligence Capabilities Of The United States Regarding Weapons Of Mass Destruction, 3/31/05, Pg. 14)
Wow. If that's a defense, what the hell does an admission of guilt look like?
And has anyone in the MSM directly addressed the disconnect between "the intel was not politically twisted" and "no one has looked at the administration's use of the intelligence" in any detail yet?