In an update to a post on the Bush lied business by Dale Franks, Jon Henke rebuts Josh Marshall‘s argument that the supposedly “unanimous bipartisan” Senate Intelligence Committee report on 9-11 is really a Republican report since Democrats on the committee take exception with parts of it. Jon notes, correctly, that the disagreement isn’t over substance but over interpretion.
This reminds me, though of a point that has occured to me several times while watching television or listening to the radio but not until now while in front of a computer: The Democrats have very shrewdly joined onto two different “bipartisan” panels (this one and the 9/11 Commission) with the understanding that there be a unanimous report issued. The ostensible rationale for this is to lend crediblity to the report: The Democrats and Republicans are unanimous here; it must be right.
Instead, however, the intention is something far less conciliatory. They have given the Republicans incentive to be as honest as possible in their criticism of the Bush Administration in exchange for keeping the Democrats to only those that are demonstrably true. A fair enough bargain if kept. However, the Democrats rather clearly never intended to keep this bargain but rather to use the very moderate “bipartisan” reports as a “Republican” baseline from which to assail the Administration.