I imagine the apologists, for years to come, will continue to grab at every straw to try and prove that the invasion and occupation was justified. (Which probably drives them nuts because it takes time away from blaming everything on Clinton) However, the administration has flip-flopped so many times on the "whys" for invasion that it's laughable to even debate further.

But just for the sake of argument let's say someone does spin a link between Saddam and Osama. Does that excuse all the mistakes made by the administration after the invasion because they wouldn't listen to expert advice? Does that excuse the repercussions from their ill-planned, ill-conceived folly? Does that excuse the relationship with Chalabi? How about being duped by Iraqi dissidents? Oh, and does that exonerate Saudi Arabia and their involvement?

Does that now mean there's a connection between Iraq and 9/11? There really are mobile chemical labs hidden somewhere? And huge stockpiles of WMDs?

Sheesh, that means the White House has to flip-flop again!