Iran NIE: The Wingnut Pushback Begins

The latest NIE findings on Iran stuck a pin in the neoconservative's tumescent dreams of war with Tehran. In a sane world, the combined, vetted judgement of the the country's 16 spy agencies-- namely that Iran dropped its covert enrichment program more that four years ago-- would cause even the most bellicose necons to back off the crazy-talk, at least for a while.

Unfortunately, we don't live in a sane world.

Case in point, from today's El WaPo:

Senate Republicans are planning to call for a congressional commission to investigate the conclusions of the new National Intelligence Estimate on Iran as well as the specific intelligence that went into it, according to congressional sources.

The move is the first official challenge, but it comes amid growing backlash from conservatives and neoconservatives unhappy about the assessment that Iran halted a clandestine nuclear weapons program four years ago. It reflects how quickly the NIE has become politicized, with critics even going after the analysts who wrote it, and shows a split among Republicans.

In other words, the process didn't give the neocons what they wanted this time so they want to flyspeck the intel in order to muddy the waters; to call the NIE and the agencies that produced it into question. The evidence that further investigation is warranted? None, but they didn't get the answer they wanted so something must be wrong, right?

Now about that commission:

Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) said he plans to introduce legislation next week to establish a commission modeled on a congressionally mandated group that probed a disputed 1995 intelligence estimate on the emerging missile threat to the United States over the next 15 years.

"Iran is one of the greatest threats in the world today. Getting the intelligence right is absolutely critical, not only on Iran's capability but its intent. So now there is a huge question raised, and instead of politicizing that report, let's have a fresh set of eyes -- objective, yes -- look at it," he said in an interview.

Right, because, the best way to ensure that the intel isn't politicized is to impanel a Senate commission based on zero evidence in an election year. I think Ensign missed his calling as a stand-up comic.

Although administration officials say they are very comfortable with the intelligence that produced the new NIE, conservative commentators challenge its veracity. Norman Podhoretz, a conservative commentator who has advocated air strikes on Iranian sites, said he does not think the NIE is "very credible because it is a 180-degree turn in two years based on new discoveries. I don't see any strong reason why in two years they won't reverse themselves."

Poor Norman; he sounds like a kid with a broken toy, doesn't he?

So why the desperate attempt to pressure the Intel folks after the NIE's release?

For the True Believers™ like NPod and Cheney, the NIE does indeed take away their favorite toy-- war with Iran-- for the foreseeable future. Cheney's "go back and check your work until you can give me the answer that I want" tactics, that largely succeeded in the run-up to the war in Iraq, have utterly failed this time and the neocons have to be bummed. For them, throwing mud on the spy agencies is just a sad attempt to exact some political payback while pretending that they are looking for the "whole truth".

However, for vulnerable Repubs on the Hill (and some GOP presidential candidates) the release of the NIE was far more devastating. See, impending war with Iran was to be the GOP's main platform plank in the 2008 elections. Just as they did in 2002, they were going to use the manufactured drumbeat for war as an election strategy; to try to resurrect their role as the Big Daddy Protector Party and paint any Democrat who opposed the craziness as "weak", "appeasers", etc. It worked for them in 2002, and they were banking on it to work in 2008.

Remember this from a few weeks ago?

ROVE: I just did. I told you the administration was opposed to voting on [the Iraq AUMF] in the fall of 2002.

ROSE: Because?

ROVE: Because we didn’t think it belonged in the confines of the election. We thought it made it too political. We wanted it outside the confines of the election. It seemed it make things move too fast. There were things that needed to be done to bring along allies and potential allies abroad and yet–

"Too political"? From Karl Fucking Rove? That's just comedy gold, right there.

But Rove's absurd assertion (since contradicted by everyone involved, including his colleagues in the Bush White House) was a "tell". He knows good and well that the GOP used war as an election strategy in 2002 and that, had things gone as planned, they were going to use it again in 2008, substituting "Iran" for "Iraq". He also knows that anyone with half a clue would put two and two together and notice that the drumbeat for war was conveniently timed for election season. His ridiculous assertion was only a way to get the "counter-argument" out there before anyone started making the connection too explicitly.

Too bad for Rove and the rest of the Repubs, the whole landscape changed overnight with the release of the NIE. "Saving" the country from the hyped threat of a nukular Iran was the only hope the GOP had in 2008. With war with Iran as a non-starter, all they have is Bush's record, two years of Congressional obstruction, and a honking clown car of unelectable presidential candidates to run with.

Poor babies.

Expect more pushback on the NIE from the usual suspects. The hyped threat of war with Iran was all they had left and they aren't going to let it go without a fight.