Danger -- Rhetorical trap dead ahead!

I was scrolling through the comments at TPM Café (the responses were to a post, "Smells Like Civil War?" by Larry Johnson) when this comment made me realized that I had thoughtlessly fallen into a Bush rhetorical trap.

On March 14, 2006 - 8:17am Dan Ksaid:

Bush is responding to the implosion of Iraq by doing what he typically does - ignore it change the subject. Now we are told he has himself all worked up into a lather about regime change in Iran. Anything to take the mind of the Big Baby-in-Chief off all the bad news.

And the serial bullshitters in his administration have a new one: Iran we learn, "has been responsible for at least some [my emphasis] of the increasing lethality of anti-coalition attacks by providing Shia militia with the capability [my emphasis again] to build improvised explosive devices in Iraq."

Bush said that there was evidence that some components in the most powerful IEDs came from Iran, and that coalition forces had "seized IEDs and components that were clearly produced in Iran."

The problem is that IED's are fashioned out of mainly non-military components, so the "components that were clearly produced in Iran" could be all sorts of innocuous things, like nails, parts of garage door openers, steel plates, etc. If Bush has the dirt on Iran, why doesn't he come right out and say which components? Because he is an inveterate liar and flim-flam artist, that's why.

Thanks for pointing that out, DanK. Bush suckered me on that one, and I should know better by now.