If Dick Durbin is correct, and the Senate Intelligence committee knew it was being lied to in 2002, then these four Democrats have to explain their votes to authorize force against Iraq:
John Rockefeller
Diane Feinstein
Evan Bayh
John Edwards
The above members were on the US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in 2002. The above four Democrats voted to authorize force against Iraq. If Durbin is correct, and Keith Olbermann's inference is correct – that the entire committee knew it was being lied to, or more precisely, that the entire committee knew the American people were being lied to, then how the hell do these four Democrats vote to authorize force?
I understand the need to maintain secrecy for what is divulged to the committee, even if I think that an Administration blatantly lying to Congress and/or the American people strains to the breaking point the need to maintain that trust. But the above four Democrats did not need to divulge anything to vote against force.
Am I missing something here? Am I being overly harsh?
I don’t think I am. I'm not judging these Senators until I hear from them. But their votes and their membership on the Intelligence Committee demand that hard questions are asked, and thorough answers provided. Especially of John Rockefeller who now chairs the committee. And especially John Edwards, who is asking for the American people's trust and vote to become President.
I am not reaching any conclusions. Yet. But I need to hear very clear answers to these two questions: "Were you aware of the Administration's lies as described by Senator Durbin? And if so, how do you justify the authorization to use force based on those lies?"
I'll be waiting.