JOHN KERRY LIES WHILE ACCUSING BUSH OF LYING

Sen. John Kerry, pompous bad-haired French-looking Democrat from Massachusetts, says that President Bush "misled" the entire country about Iraq's WMDs as a justification for war.

Kerry said Bush made his case for war based on at least two pieces of U.S. intelligence that now appear to be wrong that Iraq sought nuclear material from Africa and that Saddam's regime had aerial weapons capable of attacking the United States with biological material.

To the first charge, maybe, but probably not. It's more likely that the President never knew that the Nigeria documents were forgeries. To the second, not proven yet. Bush never said that Iraq would use its drone aircraft to attack the US, just that given the chance to smuggle such a plane to within striking distance, that it might. And that it would use its stores of anthrax and other toxins--stores which no one seriously doubted existed prior to the war--as the cargo in those planes. Kerry also says Bush lied because he said he'd build a broad international coalition before the war, but that he didn't--that the war coalition wasn't broad enough. Is Kerry seriously trying to argue that French back-stabbing caused President Bush to lie? It was the French veto threat that essentially kept the UNSC from supporting, however relunctantly, the war. The French position was consistent, that it opposed the war and was willing to do just about anything to stop it. And that's President Bush's fault...how?

I say that no one really doubted that those Iraqi anthrax, etc stores existed because President Clinton himself used those very weapons as the justification for Operation Desert Fox. That bombing campaign took place in December 1998 (coinciding suspiciously with various impeachment votes), and the Clinton administration said it was intended to get Saddam to comply with UN weapons inspections. Why?

In a televised address, Clinton accused Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein of failing to live up to his commitment to allow unrestricted access to U.N. weapons inspectors.

"We had to act, and act now," he said.

"Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors with nuclear weapons, poison gas or biological weapons," Clinton said from the Oval Office.

Clinton believed Saddam had or was developing WMDs back in 1998. Desert Fox didn't accomplish its goal though--it ended with Saddam kicking out the UN inspectors and ending any charade of complying with the inspections regime (the impeachment vote was also over). So is Kerry saying that Saddam didn't keep pursuing WMDs after Saddam kicked out the inspectors? It would seem illogical, but that's one viable intepretation of Kerry's remarks.

Kerry also lied in his anti-Bush statement today. Here's what he said:

''He misled every one of us,'' Kerry said. ''That's one reason why I'm running to be president of the United States.''

Kerry's talking specifically about Bush and WMDs, saying that Kerry's decision to run for president is based on Bush having "misled" us about those WMDs. But there's a kink--Kerry's timeline doesn't work. He went public with his presidential aspirations on December 2, 2002. For anyone keeping score at home, the Iraq war didn't even start until March 2003, and ended in April. President Bush couldn't have been proven to have misled us about Iraq's WMDs until after that. So it can't be a reason that Kerry wants the White House.

Unless...is Sen. Kerry saying that he already knew that Bush was misleading us way back in December? Then why did he vote in favor of the war? Or is Kerry saying that French stubborness leading to a smaller coalition is the reason he's running for president? If that's the case, perhaps Sen. Kerry should run for president of France.

MORE: Drudge fact-checks Kerry's @$$.