Although he is (as long as he votes for the Democrats to organize the Senate) vastly, vastly preferable as a Senator to any Republican, this does not mean that Joe Lieberman is not an ignorant, underbriefed, mendacious dork. We saw this on Social Security. Now we see it on Iraq:
Greg Sargent reports:
CT-SEN: Lieberman Suggests Terrorists Were In Iraq Before U.S. Invasion | TPMCafe: This one almost slipped through the cracks. Buried at the end of a long article in today's Hartford Courant, Joe Lieberman is quoted suggesting that one reason for the decision to wage war on Iraq was that terrorists were there before the U.S. invasion:
Even the news about the National Intelligence Estimate, which found that the Iraq war had spread terrorism, did not deter Lieberman.
"Are there terrorists in Iraq? Of course there are. That's a reason we went in," he said.
But he would not comment on the report itself, saying, "We don't know what it says. We have to see it."
The terrorists were in Iraq before "we went in"? Anybody have any idea who Lieberman's referring to? Our best guess is that he's talking about al Zarqawi, whose presence in Iraq has been held up at times by various Bush administration officials as proof of "ties" between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda. But the recently-released Senate Intelligence Committee report concluded that there were no ties between the two men, that Saddam didn't "harbor" him, and that Saddam viewed Al Qaeda as an enemy.