Why Does Clinton Escape 9/11 Blame?

FrontPageMagazine.com ^ | 4/20/04 | Joel Mowbray

[King Prout]

Why Does Clinton Escape 9/11 Blame?

because the info culled from 900-odd FBI dossiers on one's political rivals gives one a hella big stick to wave around in the smoky backrooms where serious discussions take place, that's why.

DUH!

[PBRSTREETGANG]

Bcause escaping blame is what he does best.

[Roy Tucker]

Because Jamie Gorelick (Clintonlick is more like it) sits on the panel. The guy is probably ROFLHAO.

[leadpenny]

LOL. Jamie Clintongorelick.

Take a bow, RT.

[jonno]

bump

[R. Scott]

Why does Clinton escape 9/11 blame?
Simple - because he is a liberal Democrat.

[Right_in_Virginia]

The Clinton legacy, however, cannot be dismissed in any analysis of 9/11. The United States was struck repeatedly under his watch—and our inaction did not go unnoticed.

Rational people understand this. Clinton may be getting a free ride in the elite media, but not in the hearts and minds of Americans.

[Michael81Dus]

No, Clinton has such a nice smile. You just cannot distrust this man:

UUPS, I forgot the BARF Alert. ;-)

[SpyGuy]

Why Does Clinton Escape 9/11 Blame?

Because 99% of the "journalists" and "news" agencies are dyed-in-the-wool Leftists who will praise and rally behind Clinton no matter how many treasonous or criminal acts he commits.

[jedi150]

Same thoughts here, these files also kept the Klintons acts of treason well under control from exposure also.

[R. Scott]

You’re right. I forgot that for our “esteemed” news media appearance and intentions are for far more important than substance and actions.

[prairiebreeze]

The job of the 9/11 Commission should not be to delve into high-profile finger-pointing. What matters is what lessons we need to learn—and what mistakes we must not repeat.

If Mowbray is looking to this commission for guidance about these lessons, I suspect that he (and all of us) stand to be very disappointed.

Prairie

[Republican Red]

According to the latest Gallup-CNN poll:

In the survey, 53% say the Bush administration deserves a great deal or "moderate amount" of blame for not taking warnings about the al-Qaeda threat more seriously before Sept. 11. Even more, 60%, give the Clinton administration a fair amount of blame.

[driftless]

I wish to heck that the geniuses who dream up the Republican ads for Bush would start creating ones laying facts like these out to the American public. The public remains woefully ignorant of the details of the dereliction of duty during Clinton's reign. They should also make some explaining how the free-market works.

Despite ad experts claims that most Americans can only handle short, easy-to-grasp messages (ie. Bush-good, Kerry-bad), I'm convinced that there are sizable numbers of fence-sitters and reasonably intelligent Americans who can be persuaded by a little more complex message. I'm not against beating on Kerry, but why not beat on the whole screwball lib-Dem system?

[SpinyNorman]

The Gore-Lick mole.

[hobbes1]

The Clinton legacy, however, cannot be dismissed in any analysis of 9/11. The United States was struck repeatedly under his watch—and our inaction did not go unnoticed.

In all fairness, and even though he acts like a pr!*k to current administration witnesses, Bob Kerrey has been making that point repeatedly, throughout the hearings.

But the "Objective" media obviously figures that since he carries a (D) in front of his name, he just Caaaaaaan't mean X42.

[Doctor Stochastic]

Why Does Clinton Escape 9/11 Blame?

Clinton wasn't president then.

[bvw]

Clinton disrupted all Federal investigations, and then once disrupted, politiczed them. It started with his initial actions in March 1993 of hiring incompetent corrupt fop Reno and then having her fire every single US Attorney -- 93 of them. And replacing them all -- nearly all -- with political operatives. That was unprecented.

And forgotten! Just a year or so ago NY Senator Chuckie Cheese Schumer complained about Bush's firing of one lout of a US Attorney claiming that Clinton had kept all the sitting US Attorneys in a spirit of bipartanship. What bunk! Yet that is how the Democrats operate -- lies and lies and lies. Truth is buried, hidden from the network news watching doofuses.

[maica]

From the article ----
And when 17 servicemen were killed and 39 injured in what could only be construed as an act of war on the U.S.S. Cole in 2000, the response was an FBI investigation. ----


which was stonewalled and effectively stopped by the Clinton State Dept "Ambassador" in Yemen, who said the FBI were too heavy-handed and not "culturally sensitive" enough in their dealings with Yemenis.

John O'Neill headed this investigatory team, and he was the FBIs best authority on al Queda.

Yes, there are a lot of questions that the Clintonistas should be forced to answer.