Dick Morris: Clinton Attack 'Outrageous'

NewsMax ^ | 8 September 2006

[FreeKeys]

make sure your blog and website entries have "The Path to 9/11" "miniseries" "ABC" "9-11" "WTC" "twin towers" and anything else you can think of, and submit your site at http://www.google.com/addurl/?continue=/addurl.

Oh -- and put in a link to the following:
THIS is from the REAL site for the miniseries (the DNC has a fake one) -- CLICK THIS TO SEE THE WHOLE THING:

[FreeKeys]

It's high time the public understands the true disaster that was the Clinton administration.

Well said.

“Aside from scandals and investigations, [former FBI Director Louis] Freeh says Clinton let down the American people and the families of victims of the 1996 Khobar Towers terror attack in Saudi Arabia.

“After promising to bring to justice those responsible for the bombing that killed 19 and injured hundreds, Freeh says Clinton refused to personally ask Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah to allow the FBI to question bombing suspects the kingdom had in custody — the only way the bureau could secure the interviews, according to Freeh. 

“Freeh writes in the book [My FBI], 'Bill Clinton raised the subject only to tell the crown prince that he understood the Saudis’ reluctance to cooperate and then he hit Abdullah up for a contribution to the Clinton Presidential Library.' ” -- 60 Minutes, Oct. 6, 2005

Interview On Orange TV  7-15-2003:

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher: "We didn't need to have 9-11.  9-11 happened because during the last administration Mr. Clinton didn't do his job.  I was just talking to an ambassador from Sudan who tried to give us all of the records on bin Laden.  He had all of the details of the entire terrorist network, and Madeleine Albright and Bill Clinton personally turned it down -- wouldn't even let the FBI copy them!"

Rep. Tom Feeney:  "In fairness, they were busy building nuclear plants for North Korea."

Rep. Rohrabacher:  "Right.  Precisely."

"Remember, Osama Bin Laden was offered to the United States on a silver platter and the Clinton administration said no." -- Neal Boortz, 3-2-2004 HERE   and: "A former CIA official told NBC News last week that [Clinton] White House orders to spare Bin Laden's life cut the chances of getting him in half.  Once again, they viewed terrorism as a law enforcement problem, worrying about Bin Laden's rights instead of just unleashing the CIA to exterminate  him." -- Boortz, 3-25-2004 HERE

"I've been to Sudan. And I was in Khartoum and met with some of the higher- ranking people with the Sudanese government. They told me personally -- I had heard that before -- that they actually offered [him] up to the Clinton administration  -- that is, Osama bin Laden -- if they wanted him." -- Sen. Richard Shelby of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence to Chris Matthews 7-22-2004

"A strict observance of the written laws is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self- preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation.  To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to written law would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property, and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the end to the means."
                   -- Thomas Jefferson to John Colvin, 1810

---

"... when you see a rattlesnake poised to strike, you do not wait until he has struck before you crush him."-- FDR 

"At the time, 1996, [bin Laden] had committed no crime against America so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America." -- W.J. Clinton as quoted by Mansoor Ijaz in an editorial in the Los Angeles Times Dec 5, 2001

Peter M. Leitner, a senior strategic trade adviser at the Defense Department ... says the previous [Clinton] administration rubber-stamped the shipment of top-end military-related telecommunications equipment to Syria, which is on the FBI's list of sensitive countries that pose a threat to U.S. security. ... 'We're giving them spread-spectrum radios, which are almost impossible to break into. We're giving them fiber optics. We're giving them a high level of encryption. We're giving them computer networks that can't be tapped,' Leitner said.  ... Leitner posits that the NSA wasn't able to detect the Islamic terrorists' plot because of the 'high quality of the communications gear that they've been acquiring over the last couple of years, thanks to the Clinton administration's decontrols on advanced telecommunications equipment.' " -- Paul Sperry, Sept. 12, 2001

"No president did more to ignore the mounting threat of Islamic terrorism than did Bill Clinton, and 3,000 people paid for his policies with their lives." 
-- Neal Boortz, 8-10-2005

-- EXCERPTED from THIS page

[beyond the sea]

"The underlying theme of the ABC coverage, that he was distracted by impeachment, is of course true. But more so, he was gun-shy"

I think most FReepers know that (not so) down deep, Bill Clinton is a lying coward.

The abilities that he has been given in life he has used for very bad purposes.

What a complete BUM.

[Aussie Dasher]

YEP!

[Sea2ShiningSea]

"I really do think that's what this ALL is about, whatever Sandy stole. I hope I live long enough to find out what it was/is"

I'm with you on that Howlin. We don't know what he stole but we do know that he did and on that point nobody can disagree. Wish they'd do a fade out at the end of the movie showing him sneaking out of the National Archives like a criminal! The public needs to be reminded of his actions again and again.

[Suzy Quzy]

Amen...Morris is Hillary's agent.

[Suzy Quzy]

I'm afraid you are right...we've been taken before, and I think we are about to be again.....they don't call him "Slick Willy" for nothing. They HAD to know this movie was being made....why did they wait til now??? To sucker us in...the director suckered ALL conservatives into watching it...Rush, Hugh, et al, and PLUG it as being great!! We are fools.

[Suzy Quzy]

Good stuff.

[danamco]

They were, and still are today, largely creatures of media invention. What has changed, is that the media "sold their collective souls" to keep their Frankenstein's monster in power, and now, their well of credibility is bone-dry, in a time where they no longer reign unchallenged in the ability to inform the public...

Only now, are they beginning to realize the devil's bargain they made back in 1992. Now, their wailing, and gnashing of teeth will begin...

Here's finally one "sane" man from the "drive-by" L.S.M. media whores:............................

One Leak and a Flood of Silliness By David S. Broder

Thursday, September 7, 2006; A27 Conspiracy theories flourish in politics, and most of them have no more basis than spring training hopes for the Chicago Cubs. Whenever things turn dicey for Republicans, they complain about the "liberal media" sabotaging them. And when Democrats get in a jam, they take up Hillary Clinton's warnings about a "vast right-wing conspiracy." For much of the past five years, dark suspicions have been voiced about the Bush White House undermining its critics, and Karl Rove has been fingered as the chief culprit in this supposed plot to suppress the opposition. Now at least one count in that indictment has been substantially weakened -- the charge that Rove masterminded a conspiracy to discredit Iraq intelligence critic Joseph Wilson by "outing" his CIA-operative wife, Valerie Plame. I have written almost nothing about the Wilson-Plame case, because it seemed overblown to me from the start. Wilson's claim in a New York Times op-ed about his memo on the supposed Iraqi purchase of uranium yellowcake from Niger; the Robert D. Novak column naming Plame as the person who had recommended Wilson to check up on the reported sale; the call for a special prosecutor and the lengthy interrogation that led to the jailing of Judith Miller of the New York Times and the deposition of several other reporters; and, finally, the indictment of Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Vice President Cheney's chief of staff -- all of this struck me as being a tempest in a teapot. No one behaved well in the whole mess -- not Wilson, not Libby, not special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald and not the reporters involved. The only time I commented on the case was to caution reporters who offered bold First Amendment defenses for keeping their sources' names secret that they had better examine the motivations of the people leaking the information to be sure they deserve protection. But caution has been notably lacking in some of the press treatment of this subject -- especially when it comes to Karl Rove. And it behooves us in the media to examine that behavior, not just sweep it under the rug. Sidney Blumenthal, a former aide to President Bill Clinton and now a columnist for several publications, has just published a book titled, "How Bush Rules: Chronicles of a Radical Regime." It is a collection of his columns for Salon, including one originally published on July 14, 2005, titled "Rove's War." It was occasioned by the disclosure of a memo from Time magazine's Matt Cooper, saying that Rove had confirmed to him the identity of Valerie Plame. To Blumenthal, that was proof that this "was political payback against Wilson by a White House that wanted to shift the public focus from the Iraq War to Wilson's motives." Then Blumenthal went off on a rant: "While the White House stonewalls, Rove has license to run his own damage control operation. His surrogates argue that if Rove did anything, it wasn't a crime. . . . Rove is fighting his war as though it will be settled in a court of Washington pundits. Brandishing his formidable political weapons, he seeks to demonstrate his prowess once again. His corps of agents raises a din in which their voices drown out individual dissidents. His frantic massing of forces dominates the capital by winning the communications battle. Indeed, Rove may succeed momentarily in quelling the storm. But the stillness may be illusory. Before the prosecutor, Rove's arsenal is useless." In fact, the prosecutor concluded that there was no crime; hence, no indictment. And we now know that the original "leak," in casual conversations with reporters Novak and Bob Woodward, came not from the conspiracy theorists' target in the White House but from the deputy secretary of state at the time, Richard Armitage, an esteemed member of the Washington establishment and no pal of Rove or President Bush. Blumenthal's example is far from unique. Newsweek, in a July 25, 2005, cover story on Rove, after dutifully noting that Rove's lawyer said the prosecutor had told him that Rove was not a target of the investigation, added: "But this isn't just about the Facts, it's about what Rove's foes regard as a higher Truth: That he is a one-man epicenter of a narrative of Evil." And in the American Prospect's cover story for August 2005, Joe Conason wrote that Rove "is a powerful bully. Fear of retribution has stifled those who might have revealed his secrets. He has enjoyed the impunity of a malefactor who could always claim, however implausibly, deniability -- until now." These and other publications owe Karl Rove an apology. And all of journalism needs to relearn the lesson: Can the conspiracy theories and stick to the facts.

[goresalooza]

It's been awhile since an Arkancide has occured.

[Dante3]

My thoughts also.

[Blackirish]

Funny I thought everyone here hated Moris....you know ...the toe licking ..toad...insults that are usually thrown at him.

He's got some pretty fair weather friends here.

[Don Corleone]

WHAT DID HILLARY KNOW AND WHEN DID SHE KNOW IT??

Everything...and probably BEFORE Bill did.

[FreeKeys]

I'm afraid you are right...we've been taken before, and I think we are about to be again.....they don't call him "Slick Willy" for nothing. They HAD to know this movie was being made....why did they wait til now??? To sucker us in...the director suckered ALL conservatives into watching it...Rush, Hugh, et al, and PLUG it as being great!! We are fools.

The editing is still going on and the cover story is already in the works. See THIS column.

[MHGinTN]

To Blumenthal, that was proof that this "was political payback against Wilson by a White House that wanted to shift the public focus from the Iraq War to Wilson's motives." Then Blumenthal went off on a rant: The reason people like Blumenthal see so clearly this type of conspiratorial behavior when there is none to see is that the twisted minds which ran the clinton slime machine did exactly what the Blumenthals accuse others of, because the Blumenthal's are so familiar with using such tactics to smear and destroy people. Chris Hitchens had first-hand experience with same and spoke out against it immediately ... one of the reasons we know Christopher has character even if he doesn't always have clear vision.

The same machine is now operating to try and do damage control to the contrived legacy of the degenerate clinton administration, and because the media is filled with leftist hacks who worship at the altar of such liars and degenerates, the campaign will likely succeed with ABC/Disney. And THAT twisting is THE legacy of the clinton years and the degeneration of America with liberals ruling our nation. It will be much worse when the democrats ascend to control again. The Federal Judiciary will get packed to last for twenty years as a liberal cesspool worse than now, and they won't even try to mask the lies and anti-constitutional acts of subjugation, and destruction for our courageous and critical military currency. You would think a man like Colin Powell would have some loyalty to those who serve, but apparently he lacks that final vestige of character.

[FreeKeys]

Here it is:

IT LOOKS LIKE ABC IS GOING TO CAVE

What drama!

ABC has a five-hour miniseries coming up titled "The Path to 9/11."  The first episode airs this coming Sunday night at 8:00 p.m. Eastern.  This docu-drama is causing quite a stir in Washington ...  and especially in the Clinton camp. 

                      The problem, you see, is that in this movie the Clinton Administration is portrayed as treating Islamic terrorism as nothing more than a law enforcement problem.  There is one scene in the move where Intelligence officials are discussing an attempt to kill or capture Osama bin Laden.  The Clinton administration is refusing to authorize the action.  Permission denied.  The Clinton aide says that the problem is that Clinton views terrorism as largely a law enforcement problem.  The intelligence official asks "How do you win a law and orderly war?"  The aide responds "You don't." 

                      You can sputter and spin all you want about President Bush and his handling of the war on Islamic fascism, you cannot deny that since 9/11 he has been dedicated to the cause of crushing Islamic terrorism over there before they bring it back over here.  Sounds like a good plan to me.

                      Similarly -- there is no way in hell that any reasonable man can argue that the Clinton administration was dedicated to crushing Islamic terrorism.  Clinton did indeed treat it like a law enforcement program.  After the first Islamic terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 Clinton did not even bother to visit New York City to view the damage, talk to survivors and the families of those who lost their lives, or meet with NYC officials and first responders. 

                      And what of the attack on the U.S. Cole?  This was an attack on a U.S. Navy warship.  Clinton was the Commander in Chief.  The response?  At best, lob a few cruise missiles.  That's it.  Nothing more.

                      So ... now the battle is joined.  ABC has this miniseries ready to run.  The producers say that it's largely based on the findings of the 9/11 Commission report as well as interviews with the people involved.  Apparently the miniseries shows Clinton to be relatively unconcerned about terrorism, and not dedicated to the cause of bringing in bin Laden.

                      Will  the Democrat pressure work?  My guess is that it will, at least in part.  ABC is already issuing statements to the effect that "The editing process is not yet complete."  The Los Angeles Times is reporting that changes were made in the program this week after the Clintonistas started howling.  Specifically targeted, according to the Times, was the scene where Clinton National Security Adviser  Sandy Berger declines to give an order to kill bin Laden.

                      By the way ... this really makes you wonder just what documents Sandy Berger stole from the National Archives, doesn't it? 

                     Democrats sent a letter to Robert Iger, the President and CEO of The Walt Disney Company, the owner of ABC.  That letter contained this interesting paragraph:

                      

     "The Communications Act of 1934 provides your network with a free broadcast license predicated on the fundamental understanding of your principle obligation to act as a trustee of the public airways in serving the public interest.  Nowhere is this public interest obligation more apparent than in the duty of broadcasters to serve the civic needs of a democracy by promoting an open and accurate discussion of political ideas and events." 

                      Now what is this paragraph really saying?  Can you read between the lines?   Here ... let me rewrite the paragraph by adding a few words.  Perhaps it will be clearer to you.

                           

     "The Communications Act of 1934 provides your network with a free broadcast license predicated on the fundamental understanding of your principle obligation to act as a trustee of the public airways in serving the public interest.  Nowhere is this public interest obligation more apparent than in the duty of broadcasters to serve the civic needs of a democracy by promoting an open and accurate discussion of political ideas and events.  The licenses granted to the television stations you own and operate are not permanent.  They are periodically subject to renewal.  You may wish to remember this fact, and consider the probability that by the time those licenses come up for renewal the Democrats may be in control of both houses of Congress, and the wife of the man your miniseries defames may well be the President of the United States"

Get the message?

-- from THIS column.

[pepsionice]

The blame here is different...Clinton has never had a network news team or a network itself come out against him except for Fox and Limbaugh...and he was willing to accept that situation.

To have ABC tag him with the Monica icon and leave nothing for the legacy...probably just eats the guy up totally. Hillary is sitting there...and just mad as heck...and I will be he spends the weekend away from her...drinking booze and chasing blondes. Its a sad life to live...if you are Bill Clinton.

[FreeKeys]

RELATED THREADS:

The Truth about Bill Clinton and Terrorism (FR Compilation Thread) at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1697884/posts

Senate Democratic leadership threatens Disney with legal and legislative sanctions at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1697413/posts

Democratic Bloggers Plan to 'Google Bomb' Controversial 9/11 Docudrama at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1697579/posts

Dems Send Threatening Letter to ABC - and misspell word in second paragraph. at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1697561/posts

Letter from Dem Leaders to Disney to Cancel 'Path' Broadcast at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1697777/posts

Thwack! Will Democrats Never Learn? at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1697676/posts

Accuracy aside, ABC's '9/11' deserves to bomb (LEFTY 'TV CRITIC' ISSUES WARNING) at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1697680/posts

KEYWORD: 911 http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=911

BASIC OLDER POST: Berger rejected four plans to kill or capture bin Laden at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1177555/posts

[vincentjay]

It would be nice if this movie or some other similar vehicle were to show the public the middle-east connection to the OK City Murrah Bldg attack, as detailed in The Third Terrorist written by journalist Jayna Davis.