On tonight’s Hardball, David Shuster got away with three lies in a report that warrants a major correction from MSNBC:

SHUSTER: [B]ased on Libby’s grand jury testimony, much of what Libby told New York Times reporter Judith Miller about the intelligence document was wrong. In their crucial July 8th, 2003 meeting, Libby told her, quote, “One key judgment of the NIE held that Iraq was vigorously trying to procure uranium.” But that was not a judgment at all, much less a key judgment, according to CIA officials who wrote the document. And they said the “vigorously trying to pursue” language was not in the document at all. In other words, it may have been the same selective use of intelligence to justify the war that was used to sell the war, ignoring the views of several government agencies while accepting the views of one. [emphasis added]

Shuster should have read the document in question — the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate — himself. On page 24, it reads:

Iraq also began vigorously trying to procure uranium ore and yellowcake; acquiring either would shorten the time Baghdad needs to produce nuclear weapons.

True, this sentence wasn’t in the “key judgments” section. But this was:

Although we assess that Saddam does not yet have nuclear weapons or sufficient material to make any, he remains intent on acquiring them.

And, the only intelligence agency that dissented from the NIE was the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research. The rest agreed, writing in the first sentence, “We judge that Iraq has continued its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs in defiance of UN resolutions and restrictions.” Shuster stated that Bush ignored all but one intelligence agency. In fact, Bush listened to all but one.

Here are the facts David Shuster got wrong, either wholly or in large part:

1) While the “vigorously trying to procure uranium” is not a key judgment, a similar key judgment says: “Although we assess that Saddam does not yet have nuclear weapons or sufficient material to make any, he remains intent on acquiring them.”
2) The “vigorously trying to procure uranium” phrase is in the NIE (page 24): “Iraq also began vigorously trying to procure uranium ore and yellowcake; acquiring either would shorten the time Baghdad needs to produce nuclear weapons.” Shuster said that the phrase was “not in the document at all.”
3) Bush did not ignore several agencies. He listened to several agencies and only discounted the views of one.

This is not a question of interpretation. These are facts that Shuster got wrong. MSNBC viewers deserve the truth — and a correction.

Video here.