Will ABC Cave on "The Path to 9/11" (Clinton pressuring ABC)

NRO ^ | Andy McCarthy

[hipaatwo]

I’m hearing all kinds of disturbing, though predictable, stories about a Clintonista offensive against “The Path to 9/11,” an ABC documentary written and produced by Cyrus Nowrasteh ("Into the West"), and directed by David Cunningham ("To End All Wars").  I haven’t seen it yet (although I hope to this weekend), but it is already drawing rave reviews from people who have (the piece is reviewed at FrontPage, here).

  

Apparently, the documentary recounts the bureaucratic bungling and lack of action against al Qaeda that was pervasive prior to the September 11 atrocities.  It is by no means, I understand, pro-Bush.  It is, instead, an effort to present history accurately.  This evidently has many former Clinton officials and apologists in their default kill-the-messenger mode.  Great pressure is being brought to bear on ABC and Disney to reopen the editorial process at this late stage (the documentary is supposed to air on September 10-11) so that the years 1993-2001 may remain forever airbrushed.

  

Will they succeed?  This bears watching.

[SE Mom]

We'll see. Even though the pressure will be intense on ABC- I think there will be even MORE pressure on them to show it...reverse PC:)

[popdonnelly]

"BUT THIS TRUE STORY OF THE EVENT PRIOR TO 911 IS NOT APPROPIATE??

Haven't you noticed, when you tell the truth about a Democrat, it's a smear. For example, Joe Wilson's wife did work for the CIA, and was instrumental in getting him sent to Niger, but to say so is a smear.

[popdonnelly]

"If one door is closed, they try another, like a burgler."

That's very appropriate for a discussion of Sandy Berger.

[popdonnelly]

"Rush said that Ben-Veniste got up in his face and yelled at him....LOL"

Did Ben-Veniste stand on a chair? Take away his expensive suits, and you've got a little nimrod.

I see that Ben-Veniste has gone from Clinton lawyer, to member of the 9/11 Commission, and back to Clinton lawyer. Maybe someone can investigate how the Clintons managed to get two of their lawyers on a "non-partisan" commission.

[CFC__VRWC]

On a more practical note. I, and I am sure many others, have been sent the entire six hour program to preview and review, which I will be doing over the weekend. Edits post-distribution of the review DVDs would invite scrutiny of the very portions sent down the black hole, underscoring the episodes the censors hoped to hide.

I agree that an eleventh-hour edit is out of the question - too many reviewers DVDs are in circulation, too many people have seen the original version by now. If ABC tried to hack it up now, there would be a huge firestorm of protest.

Really, Clinton's (and ABC's) only hope now is to spike the whole thing. And this is what I think they'll do, in about a week or so. After spending the next week angrily denying that Clinton ever even called them, while the DNC's flying monkeys make the media rounds screaming that the whole Clinton story was another right-wing Republican lie, they'll come up with some BS about how they've decided, based on the e-mails and calls they've gotten, that "the American people just aren't ready" for this miniseries and that "to foster closure and healing we really should be looking forward and not back." They won't be able to completely stuff the sh!t back into the goose, but they can makes sure that only a few conservatives will ever see it, and that they can laugh off and marginalize.

Frankly, I don't believe for even a second that the ABC spokeswoman quoted here hadn't heard a peep about a pressure campaign to change the miniseries. Sorry, this story has been all over the world by now, thanks to Rush and Drudge. ABC has to have been getting swamped with phone calls and e-mails from both sides, and for someone in the role of a spokesperson to claim complete ignorance of that strains credibility way beyond the breaking point. She was stonewalling; I'll bet if some Kommie had talked to her right after that, she would have assured him that the network is "carefully reviewing its position" on showing the miniseries as-is. That makes me suspect that ABC is even now looking for a way out of showing it.

[Mia T]

thanks :)

WHY DID BILL CLINTON IGNORE TERRORISM?
Was it simply the constraints of his liberal mindset, or was it something even more threatening to our national security?


IT TAKES A CLINTON TO RAZE A COUNTRY


BIN LADEN FINGERS CLINTON FOR TERROR SUCCESS (SEE FOOTAGE)
THE THREAT OF TERRORISM IS AS CLOSE AS A CLINTON IS TO THE OVAL OFFICE


UNITED 93:THE CLINTON-9/11 NEXUS
"We have to do it now. We know what happens if we just sit here and do nothing...."


ALBRIGHT INDICTS CLINTON FOR TERRORISM FAILURE (and doesn't even know it)



MISSING CLINTON AUDIO! 'Can we kill 'em tomorrow?'
(+Albright-Fulbright-Nobel TERRORISM revelations)


WHY THE CLINTONS FAILED "TO CAPTURE OR KILL THE TALLEST MAN IN AFGHANISTAN"
(DID THEY REALLY WANT TO TAKE HIM OUT ANYWAY?)


'MAKE IT A RULE' -- PLACE YOUR ORDER FOR OSAMA WITH CLINTON and CO.
(HEAR HILLARY + BILL MAKE THEIR PITCH)


THE (oops!) INADVERTENT (TERRORISM) ADMISSIONS OF BILL + HILLARY CLINTON (HEAR HILLARY IN SF)


THE FAILED, DYSFUNCTIONAL CLINTON PRESIDENCY
(DECONSTRUCTING CLINTON'S HOFSTRA SPEECH) -- part1: clinton's "Brinkley" Lie


AFTERWORD: ON CLINTON SMALLNESS
(BRINKLEY MISSES THE POINT)


PRESIDENTIAL FAILURE, 9/11 + KATRINA


Carpe Mañana: The (bill + hillary) clinton Terrorism Policy
('Can we kill 'em tomorrow?')

[Peach]

I'd completely forgotten that, prairiebreeze. So many people have previewed this film already; if ABC caves, the conservative media will make sure that everyone knows that Clinton has ABC in his back pocket. And that will just add fuel to the fire in terms of a biased media.

[ladyinred]

Ah ha, so it isn't really the offensive language after all!

[Mia T]

fyi
thanx. :)

[Earthdweller]

"...if ABC caves, the conservative media will make sure that everyone knows that Clinton has ABC in his back pocket. "

No doubt. ABC has always been "on the edge" in my book. If they cave on this one, they are in CBS lies all the time category.

[California Patriot]

Yes. It is really quite frightening when you sit back and think about it, which is probably why many people prefer to stick their heads in the sand. Human nature.

[California Patriot]

The "conservative media" can't "make sure that everyone knows." It can make sure that some conservatives know. That's better than nothing, but it's the dopes in the middle who need to be educated, and I don't see much of that happening.

[Txsleuth]

I am thinking blackmail..

[mcg2000]

PING

[finnman69]

FYI to all

the DUmmies are going bananas over this show and are trying to get it stopped. They have a lot of nerve since DU has an open forum for all of the kook 9/11 conspiracy wackos to tell each other the towers were downed with demolition charges.

FYI to all

the DUmmies are going bananas over this show and are trying to get it stopped. They have a lot of nerve since DU has an open forum for all of the kook 9/11 conspiracy wackos to tell each other the towers were downed with demolition charges.

[RedEyeJack]

Absolutely right... Berger was caught destroying evidence. He was covering up incompetence and criminality in the Clinton White House. They were guilty or he would not have taken such a risk. The only shame is that he wasn't crucified for his actions. Sandy did the crime but not the time.

[NutCrackerBoy]

Clintonista panic. They can't possibly paint ABC as a "partisan gunslinger." Will ABC cave? Yes, but this story is out and THEY WILL PAY A PRICE.

[Peach]

We here on FR aren't doing enough to e-mail friends who are in the middle.

[California Patriot]

I think that's probably true. I try with my few friends who are in the middle, but I get intelligent responses from only one of the three.

It's probably most useful to think hard about what the friend is truly interested in, not what he or she is only somewhat interested in, let alone what we think they should be interested in.

Whatever we send should closely reflect that friend's deepest interests -- such as his/her livelihood, family members' safety, the community where he/she lives, or some extensive or unforgettable experience he/she has had. Most other things are likely to be unread, or, if read, to make no real impression.

[Peach]

Those are good points.