[Senator Hillary Clinton] said she consulted widely before that vote and found that U.S. intelligence “from Bush I to Clinton to Bush II was consistent” in concluding that there was “a continuing presence of biological and chemical weapons programs” in Iraq and that the Iraqis were seeking to develop a nuclear capacity.

But she said the failure to uncover weapons of mass destruction raised troubling questions about U.S. intelligence, particularly for an administration that has invoked the doctrine of preemption to justify going to war last spring. “We cannot expect the American public or, frankly, the world community to be convinced or united if we’re acting on intelligence that has proven to be so wrong,” she said.

Intriguing. The RNC Research Department sent this quote via e-mail, minus the rather important second paragraph.

FILED UNDER: US Politics, , , , ,
James Joyner
About James Joyner
James Joyner is Professor and Department Head of Security Studies at Marine Corps University's Command and Staff College. He's a former Army officer and Desert Storm veteran. Views expressed here are his own. Follow James on Twitter @DrJJoyner.


  1. The paragraph just prior to this excerpt also says that HRC stands by her vote last fall in favor of the war, saying that based on what they knew and believed at the time, the vote was merited.

    It is likewise fascinating that all of this reasonable-sounding talk was buried at the very end of the article, after all the “Bush stinks” rhetoric we usually hear.

  2. James Joyner says:

    True; I’d likely have stopped reading by then. Although the main point of the piece was the charge that the Clintons were using Clark as a stalking horse. The WMD thing seems to be a different piece altogether.