John and Scott are dead wrong, of course: Clinton knew there was danger to Americans from a terrorist group called Al Qaeda and did do something about it, if perhaps not all the right things, whatever those might have been
What specifically did Clinton do about Al Qaeda in response to their greater than half dozen attacks on American interests while he was President? (Bombing an aspirin factory while Monica is testifying, which the owner of later won in court millions of dollars from US taxpayers to rebuild doesn't count.)
And, if Clinton knew Al Qaeda was such danger to the US, and clearly the most pressing threat facing us, why did his Administration not discuss Bin Laden or AQ a single time in any of the security briefings given to the incoming Bush admin?
And why did their written security assesment given to the Bush admin not mention Bin Laden a single time and AQ only once in passing?
Further, why did Clinton admin hacks, post 9/11, repeatedly claim that they gave indepth briefings and warnings regarding Bin Laden and AQ being a threat to America when infact they did no such thing? Wasn't that clearly a coordinated effort at trying to rewrite the Clinton legacy?
If Democrats are trumpeting President Clinton's achievements against terrorists, then why aren't they absolutely ecstatic about President Bush's achievements? After all, they are in favor of Presidents fighting terror aren't they?
I just read your "Wal-Mart Voter" article. Have a question. You wrote...
John and Scott are dead wrong, of course: Clinton knew there was danger to Americans from a terrorist group called Al Qaeda and did do something about it, if perhaps not all the right things, whatever those might have been
What specifically did Clinton do about Al Qaeda in response to their greater than half dozen attacks on American interests while he was President? (Bombing an aspirin factory while Monica is testifying, which the owner of later won in court millions of dollars from US taxpayers to rebuild doesn't count.)
And, if Clinton knew Al Qaeda was such danger to the US, and clearly the most pressing threat facing us, why did his Administration not discuss Bin Laden or AQ a single time in any of the security briefings given to the incoming Bush admin?
----
Well, there was the New Year's arrests, the Sudan missile attacks-- Newt Gingrich was effusive in his praise about the latter, though Senator Ashcroft called it wag-the-dog.
History is a funny thing.
February 26th, 1992 = First WTC Bombing
February 28th, 1992 = WACO
Clinton had no problem telling his General (wess clarke) to roll his tanks, he just had trouble pointing them in the right direction.