As much as the focus was on Clinton was having sex with an intern, the crux of the accusation was that he lied under oath

Now I know the President is not under oath during the State of the Union addresss or nationally televised speeches, so there is a lot more latitiude, but it has been admitted that the speech was vetted by two agencies (State and CIA) that knew the Nigerian claim was false, one of his staff (I believe it was Rove) admitted to the press that they decided to talk up the WMD connection for political reasons, so I find it beyond belief that the president was unaware of the misinformation and if he truly was than not only is he incompetent, but those you misled him should be fired and tried for treason. It appears to me that the Iraqi threat to America and the types of weaposn they had was grossly overstated to send America to war. Turn things around, if Clinton had made exaggerated claims or absolute false claims in the S of U or any other speech to promote a war, how would the average conservative react? much less a Limbaugh zealot? As it was the right was screaming wag the dog regarding Bosnia, Somalia, and the Iraqi sorties conducted under Clinton . . .