The larger point is, and the fundamental question is, did Saddam Hussein have a weapons program? And the answer is, absolutely. And we gave him a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn't let them in.

As the well-worn line goes, I think it's too soon to say we know Saddam didn't have a WMD program. I thought he did. ..But I think our inability thus far to find any clear evidence of a on-going chemical, biological or nuclear weapons program would seem to leave us at least a bit short of being "absolutely" certain that he had one. Am I nitpicking here?
Like the philandering husband, he seems to be asking us, "Who ya gonna believe? Me or your lying eyes?" And remember when Saddam wouldn't let the inspectors in? I totally missed that one.
Look, you can certainly say that Saddam wasn't cooperating fully with the inspectors, that his people hadn't fully accounted for various chemical and biological munitions which the UN thought he had back in 1990s. Hans Blix said as much. It's true. But, c'mon, he let them in.
You hear this stuff and you say to yourself: "Well, you can kinda know what he meant, I guess." I find myself thinking that. But even that doesn't cut it. The disquieting fact is that these whoppers aren't even getting reported any more because it's become a given among reporters and editors that most of what the president is saying on this subject has little connection to anything that's actually going on. And the two keep diverging more and more. It's almost as if the shakier the evidence gets the more certain he becomes about what the evidence was supposed to prove.