But deliberately misrepresenting the data in order to support a particular conclusion, that which the memo alleges, is lying about the state of the evidence, whether he and other members of the administration believed the conclusion or not.

This is interesting, in that having reread the memo, I still don't see it as saying that the data was deliberately misrepresented, and having just reread the Wikipedia page, I still don't get that attitude. I don't think this is due to bias on my part, since if I have any biases in this regard it would be biases that would make me want to think that Bush lied.

The memo says things like:

Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.

That doesn't sound like deliberate lying to me. The administration had massive systemic problems. This isn't the only example of this problem. A substantial fraction of the administration seemed to think that their personal wishes effectively determined what reality would do. (See for example Rove's comment about the "reality-based community").

It is difficult to underestimate human capacity for mendacity but it is equally hard to underestimate human capacity for self-deception.