Of course it’s political: there’s ALWAYS a political angle.
From the Bush Administration’s perspective, probably, the stories of old stockpile remnants were already out there. The press wasn’t covering them. If the Admin started pushing for coverage the story would have been that the Bush Admin was exaggerating old and unusable, pretty much lost and forgotten weapons into an actual usable combat capability.
IOW trying to cover a “lie” with another “lie.”
So there was certainly a political calculation that playing up these things would do more harm than good. Which, given the political environment at the time was a fair argument.
It wouldn’t matter what the counter-story would have been to Bush’s claim that there were WMDs.
It’s the same with any political issue; abortion, for example. They have their points and we have our points and the debate rages. But at least there’s a debate.
Pres Bush’s supporters would not have stood on the sidelines saying “oh my, they have points, so we better not repeat our own being advocated by our leader.”
We would have shouted from the housetops, AND we would have won the hearts and minds of many Americans who were 100% behind the president at the outset of this war and would have at least acknowledged a debate was raging with facts on our side.
But, Pres Bush chose NOT to argue at all. He gave ZERO information on these WMDs to his supporters and potential supporters. It was his biggest FAIL. He owns it.
From the Bush Administration’s perspective, probably, the stories of old stockpile remnants were already out there. The press wasn’t covering them. If the Admin started pushing for coverage the story would have been that the Bush Admin was exaggerating old and unusable, pretty much lost and forgotten weapons into an actual usable combat capability.
Based upon my recollections, and perceptions from some of the more reasonable liberals I come into contact with...that seems to be exactly what was going on.