[Amelia]

In fairness, I think it should be pointed out that, if she believed the statement was mistaken, the White House shared her view on that question

True, but apparently for different reasons.

The White House didn't say that the statement was based on "faulty intelligence", just intelligence that our sources had been unable to verify.

Indeed, the Brits still stand by their intelligence, and the administration seems to believe it valid as well.

I believe the White House's point currently is not that the statement was untrue in any way, but that statements based on foreign intelligence shouldn't be included in the SOTU address?

[Scenic Sounds]

The White House didn't say that the statement was based on "faulty intelligence", just intelligence that our sources had been unable to verify.

"[I]ntelligence that our sources had been unable to verify" is, in my opinion, "faulty intelligence" for purpose of inclusion in a president's State of the Union address.

I agree with the White House that it would have been much better to have excised those 16 words.