Blame Game

The wheels of the Iran bamboozlement train are officially off.

After initially hyping and standing behind the blockbuster briefing in Iraq detailing how the highest levels of the Iranian government were funneling explosive material to Shiite militias, the White House not only backed off, but blamed those who handled the briefing they had hyped:

HENRY: Some new information coming from my colleague Barbara Starr at the Pentagon that General Peter Pace is expected to have a media availability later today. All eyes will be on that to see exactly how he puts this given this confusion over the last couple of days.

Other information we have gotten is that apparently this anonymous intelligence briefer went a little too far in saying that the highest levels of the Iranian government were behind this. But that begs the question why the administration has taken so long to clarify those comments, Soledad.

O’BRIEN: And that’s a big going too far. I mean, that’s a critical piece of information.

HENRY: Especially given what happened in the run-up to the Iraq war. The administration knows full well about the credibility questions. And you would think in this case they would want to make sure they have all their ducks in a row.

They thought the lesson of the Iraq war was that they could successfully fool the media and the public into thinking there was an imminent threat without any fear of consequences. Why wouldn't they do Iran in the exact same way?

But sadly, 2007 isn't 2002. And this attempt to blame the "rogue briefer" is laughable. The government approved the briefing. They quoted it all week. They used it as evidence. They even delayed the initial briefing to make sure that the intelligence was rock-solid. Now it's all the briefer's fault?

It's also amusing that the Bush Administration has no problem blaming rogue officials and claiming plausible deniability for themselves, but not for their enemies. Salon's Tim Grieve had the riposte of the day:

Wednesday, President George W. Bush: "What we do know is that the Quds force was instrumental in providing these deadly IEDs to networks inside of Iraq. We know that. And we also know that the Quds force is a part of the Iranian government. That's a known. What we don't know is whether or not the head leaders of Iran ordered the Quds force to do what they did. But here's my point: Either they knew or didn't know, and what matters is, is that they're there. What's worse, that the government knew or that the government didn't know?"

Maybe it's reasonable to assume that people in the highest levels of Iran's government know what members of the al-Quds unit are doing. Maybe it's not. Our view? We'll start making the leap of faith about what high-level Iranian officials must know just as soon as the White House starts accepting the same sort of arguments about itself.

How does this one sound, Mr. President? What we do know is that members of the U.S. military were responsible for acts of torture at Abu Ghraib. We know that. And we also know that the U.S. military is part of the U.S. government. That's a known. What we don't know is whether or not the head leaders of the U.S. government ordered the U.S. personnel at Abu Ghraib to do what they did. But here's our point: Either they knew or didn't know, and what matters is, is that they did it. What's worse, that the government knew or that the government didn't know?

The White House has so destroyed their own credibility that I wouldn't believe a "The Sun is Hot" briefing from them.