Let's try this.
"In 1998 the Clinton administration asserted that Iraq provided technical assistance in the construction of a VX production facility in Sudan, undertaken jointly with al-Qaeda. In retaliation for al-Qaeda's August 1998 truck bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, President Bill Clinton ordered destruction of the al Shifa pharmaceutical plant in Khartoum, Sudan's capital.
"Clinton's advisers released scant public evidence about al Shifa, and the Tomahawk missile attack was widely regarded as a blunder. Top Clinton administration officials, and career analysts still in government, maintained there was strong evidence behind the strike like that it remains to valuable to disclose.
"On March 16, 2003, the Observer (UK) reported that despite the Clinton administration's assertion that there was VX nerve production at the al Shifa factory,' little evidence substantiated that claim, and subsequent investigations found that the factory made veterinary antibiotics and nothing else.'"
From the Washington Post, Dec. 12, 2002
We all know how that one turned out. Was Clinton lying? or did he feel the need to act quickly and firmly with less-than-perfect intelligence?
The point is not to Clinton-bash. It's to say that this kind of thing happens, in all sorts of administrations, for all sorts of reasons, and lying ain't necessarily the one.