Posted 4:01 PM by Robert

Very Specific Terms

Astute reader Daniel Aronstein e-mails to ask why John Kerry is not being specific about this charge, reported in the New York Times:

"And we were misled in very specific terms about the evidence that we were showed within those briefings to the Congress of the United States. "

But CIA Chief Tenet swore under oath before Congress that the briefings were truthful. Since the Senator says he is now aware in very specific terms of how the evidence showed within those briefings to the Congress was "misleading" why doesn't he say what those very specific terms are? Isn't his charge that the CIA lied to the Congress a matter of great national urgency?

Maybe those nameless foreign (er, "other") leaders who looked at the Senator and said they support his candidacy and the need to replace Mr. Bush also provided to him in very specific terms the who, when and where of how the evidence within those briefings misled Congress? Will Congress have to subpoena Senator Kerry? Just kidding.

On a more serious note, is Senator Kerry or Mr. Tenet lying? MUST ONE OF THEM BE LYING?