Cherry-picking the intel

Stephen Hayes takes a good clean whack at Carl Levin this week, and lands a pretty good one. The money quote:

The Phase I report criticized Tenet for his failure to note that the intelligence on Iraqi training of al Qaeda had come from sources of "varying reliability." It may be a reasonable criticism. But if Levin and his colleagues want to show that statements from senior Bush administration officials went "way beyond the intelligence," this seems like an odd way to do it. The head of the U.S. intelligence community made the same claim Bush did--using almost exactly the same words--some four months after Bush's speech.

Put on the thinking-caps and tell me why that poses a problem for anyone making Levin's argument.