Bill Clinton’s Excuses (No matter what he says, the record shows he failed to act against terrorism)

National Review/ The Corner ^ | Byron York

[mkjessup]

The fact is, Bill Clinton proved that he was NOT up to the job of Commander in Chief in '93 when he failed to respond to the FIRST al Qaeda attack on the World Trade Center, he (and his so-called Justice Dept under Janet "Dammit" Reno) made a conscious decision to treat that bombing as a law enforcement issue, not as an actual attack upon the United States by a terrorist entity.

Emperor Billigula can spin it any way he wants, he can point his finger, glare, snarl and growl about "neo cons" and all that noise, but the fact is that Bill Clinton was not mentally or emotionally stable enough to be an effective President and Commander In Chief.

His legacy of incompetence, corruption and immorality testifies to that.

[RKV]

Clarke is full of it when he says "Clinton 'put in place the plans and programs that allowed America to respond to the big attacks when they did come, sweeping away the political barriers to action.'" Can you say "Gorelick and the 'wall'?" Clarke is engaged in big time CYA, and the factual record doesn't make him (or Slick) look good.

[Rocko]

Bumpitttt.

[shankbear]

Do not make the mistake of making Clarke out as a boy scout hero.

[shooter223]

watching Fox News Sunday right now .........looks like he's losing it ..........he hasn't actually said the words "vast right wing conspiracy",but it's clear who he blames for his problems

[adm5]

So far, watching this Chris Wallace/Clinton interview, it's pretty clear that Bill Clinton is right and the 'right-wingers' & 'neocons' & especially the Rupert Murdock controlled Fox News is wrong.

Any question that Bubba doesn't like, he just wags that finger, apparently taps it on Chris's (leg?) to assert control, and maintains that he can't have any responsibility in 9/11 etc based on the fact that those who ask any question are 'right-wingers', neocons and Fox News.

This guy was a Rhodes Scholar? Can you imagine W getting away with this strategy when asked a question regarding ANYTHING?

Bush: Uhh, this question is absurb, you are afterall the NYT.

[johnny7]

“Does al Qaeda have to attack the Pentagon to get their attention?”

They have... and it didn't. If allowed back in power... the Dhimmicrat party will take this Republic to its destruction!

[TomGuy]

Clinton-FNS Interview 09-24-06

File name: ClintonFNS-FullInterview.wmv
File size: 24.4 meg
File description: Wallace interview with Clinton
File type: WMV (Windows Media Video)

Download link at Megaupload.com: http://www.megaupload.com/?d=ZAXEL6HR
File length: approximately 30 minutes


Transcript posted by defconw at post #350:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1707296/posts?page=350#350

[what's up]

He had given the CIA unprecedented authority to go after bin Laden personally and al Qaeda, but had not taken steps when they did little or nothing.

CIA did nothing? Isn't Clinton the one who refused taking Bin Laden from the Sudanese gov't because he felt that legally he did not have the authority?

[Beckwith]

His wife ought to buy him some over-the-calf- socks.

His pasty white legs look like crap.

[mewzilla]

Bump for later.

[no-to-illegals]

clinton's legacy is and forever will be 911.

[fishergirl]

And he knows it, too. Hence, the lame excuses, the explosive anger, The Finger Wag, etc. Even with the cut scenes, The Path To 911 hit too close to home for Clinton.

[Obie Wan]

Just give the mainstream media time, they'll have Bill Clinton in Tora Bora with a machine gun in one hand and a hand grenade in the other personally chasing Bin Laden and his buddies down all by himself !!!

[fishergirl]

LOL! His legs go with his pasty face.

[JLS]

Plus there is that little part of being a liar. When a known liar is setting you up to do something in way that if it goes wrong, he can easily lie and claim he had nothing to do with it, you tend to smell a rat and hessitate.

Also a habitual liar operates the way described in Clark's book. That is someone who is a habitual liar and responsibility shirker, avoids direct orders. That leave open the possibility of taking credit if it works out and lying and shifting blame when it does not.

Liars as chief executive officers do not lead to confident underlings carrying out policy. So it is not surprising the CIA, FBI and military reacted to Cliton possibly trying to set them up, possibly ordering them, possibly not ordering them, etc by not acting boldly.

[hellinahandcart]

review