Larry Elder on Joe Wilson's credibility...

A nice snappy Q&A.

Question: Why does Wilson claim the President lied?

Answer: Ambassador Wilson himself went to Niger, Africa in February 2002 to investigate the alleged connection between Niger, uranium and Saddam Hussein.

Question: What did Wilson find?

Answer: Here's where things get interesting. Several months after the President's speech, Wilson wrote in a New York Times column called "What I Didn't Find in Africa" that he returned from his trip "highly doubtful" about whether any such connection between Saddam Hussein, Africa and uranium existed, and that intelligence had been "twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat."

Question: If Wilson could not find such a connection, why did the President include those words in his speech?

Answer: Wilson now claims no such connection existed. But Robin Butler, head of the British investigation of prewar intelligence, concludes, "It is accepted by all parties that Iraqi officials visited Niger in 1999. The British government had intelligence from several different sources indicating that this visit was for the purpose of acquiring uranium. … We conclude also that the statement in President Bush's State of the Union Address … was well-founded." Furthermore, the bipartisan U.S. Senate Committee on Intelligence, before which Wilson testified, concluded that when Bush spoke those 16 words in his State of the Union speech, his statement was based on credible intelligence — both then and now. The Senate Committee found that Wilson, upon his return from his Niger trip, gave an oral report to the CIA, which provided "some confirmation" that Iraq had sought uranium in Niger.

Question: So Wilson lies when he now claims he found no such connection?

Answer: It appears Wilson changed his story. He also states, regarding his wife and his Africa trip, " … Valerie had had nothing to do with the matter." Turns out, according to the Senate Committee, Wilson's wife — a CIA agent, known as Valerie Plame or Valerie Wilson — "suggested his name for the trip."

Question: Why is this relevant?

Answer: Wilson told the New York Times' Nicholas Kristof that the Vice President sent him on the trip. If so, this suggests that the Vice President knew about Wilson's skepticism. But the Senate Committee determined that the CIA sent him, after his wife recommended him for the trip.

Question: Doesn't all this make Wilson a liar, someone not to be believed?

Answer: Yes, but many in the media still believe that Bush did indeed lie to the nation, and consider Wilson a noble "whistle-blower." For example, the Washington Post recently wrote, "Wilson's central assertion — disputing President Bush's 2003 State of the Union claim that Iraq was seeking nuclear material in Niger — has been validated by postwar inspections ." [Emphasis added.] No it hasn't. Again, both the Senate Commission and the Butler report considered the intelligence on which the President based that part of the speech to be credible.