Chris Wallace: "I felt as if a mountain was coming down in front of me. "

Media Bistro ^ | 09.24.06 | Patrick W. Gavin

[rface]

Following today's buzz generating conversation with Bill Clinton, Chris Wallace shared some of his post-interview thoughts with FishbowlDC:

I was delighted to get the chance to interview former President Clinton. This was the first one-on-one sitdown he's ever given "Fox News Sunday" during our 10 years on the air.

The groundrules were simple--15 minutes--to be divided evenly between questions about the Clinton Global Initiative and anything else I wanted to ask.

I intended to keep to the groundrules. In fact--I prepared 10 questions--5 on the CGI and 5 on other issues.

I began the interview with 2 questions about Mr. Clinton's commitment to humanitarian causes. His answers were cogent and good-humored.

Then--I asked him about his Administration's record in fighting terror--fully intending to come back to CGI later (as indeed I did).

I asked what I thought was a non-confrontational question about whether he could have done more to "connect the dots and really go after al Qaeda."

I was utterly surprised by the tidal wave of details--emotion--and political attacks that followed.

The President was clearly stung by any suggestion that he had not done everything he could to get bin Laden. He attacked right-wingers--accused me of a "conservative hit job"--and even spun a theory I still don't understand that somehow Fox was trying to cover up the fact that NewsCorp. chief Rupert Murdoch was supporting his Global Initiative. I still have no idea what set him off. Former President Clinton is a very big man. As he leaned forward--wagging his finger in my face--and then poking the notes I was holding--I felt as if a mountain was coming down in front of me.

The President said I had a smirk. Actually--it was sheer wonder at what I was witnessing.

I tried repeatedly to adhere to the ground rules--to move the President along--and back to the CGI. But he wanted to keep talking about his record fighting terror.

When it became clear he wanted to throw out the ground rules--then I just went with the flow of the interview.

[MinuteGal]

That screen capture of Bully Clinton in #226 is just in time for Halloween.

Warning: Don't show it to your little kiddies.

BOO!

Leni

[top 2 toe red]

I smell it, and my political instincts are pretty fine tuned.

Could be...we'll see. Either you're right or you're wrong. ;^)

Anger and "unhingeness" didn't work too well for Howard Dean if that's the pattern he's using. I have no doubt the Dims were leaping for joy when he came down on Fox, Chris and President Bush and his administration...but, somehow, I highly doubt the manner in which he did it will be extremely appealing to the normal voter.

You are forgetting how angry he and his lemmings have been over the airing of The Path to 9-11. I agree that more than likely the attack was planned, the lack of control in the delivery of the attack...no.

[Miss Behave]

And that mountain would be known as Muchcrap Mountain. The avalanche must have created a very stinky situation on set.

[Eagles Talon IV]

"Do you always underestimate your opponent? Clinton is a very bright, cunning man with a tremendous amount of media savvy.....Everything is scripted down to the last finger wag....."

I don't underestimate anyone. You have apparently bought into the "infallibility" of Clinton's as portrayed by the liberal media. I have not. There can be no benefit that accrues to Clinton for losing his composure on national TV and the subsequent berating of his staff in public.

As for the "dozen talking heads" comment that it was staged. If it was staged it doesn't mean it benefited him in anyway. Yesterday there were at least 4 pundits on CNN that all agreed he blew it in that interview.

[LZ_Bayonet]

"The President said I had a smirk. Actually--it was sheer wonder at what I was witnessing."

Yep, the sheer wonder of having Clinton giving him a big bump in name recognition, and associated big pay raise from Fox come contract time. "Ho!, is today my lucky day or what!!!"

[spectre]

I know there are many intellects out there who would have us believe Clinton staged this whack attack on purpose.

That said..I don't buy it. It's simply a James Carvelle tactic to make Clinton look good... He clearly lost his temper and had a melt-down.

sw

[nevergore]

Geez...talk about a leap of logic....to state that I bought an argument of infallibility from the MSM regarding Clinton because I questioned the sincerity and the spontaneity of his response???

Clinton was a crappy president, no guiding morals only media spin based on polling results. He may not be many things but you will find few that argue (except you) that he with his staff (no pun intended) was almost gifted in manipulating the media.....

This was clearly contrived from start to finish, all he needed was the starting question to be asked which was almost guaranteed by Chris Wallace.....

Match, set, win!

[Eagles Talon IV]

"...you will find few that argue (except you) that he with his staff (no pun intended) was almost gifted in manipulating the media.....

What planet are you from? What is the "gift" involved in manipulating a media that is 90% liberal to begin with?

"This was clearly contrived from start to finish, all he needed was the starting question to be asked which was almost guaranteed by Chris Wallace..... Match, set, win!"

You have indeed been brainwashed.

[Sacajaweau]

Right now, the point is: This is a former Preseident with a bad rep, morally and duty wise. NO ONE can give him a free pass on his moral conduct. It was NOT a private matter. That was MY HOUSE he was in.

AND AFTER ALL IS SAID AND DONE, HIS FRIGG'n WIFE is going to run for POTUS???

Where are the minds of the Dems?? Can women voters be so stupid as to say "She'd be wonderful".

She believes in killing babies for ALL not just the rich.

She believes that husbands can mess around and "it's nothing".

[La Enchiladita]

Chris did well, but he's also fortunate -- and I think he's aware of this now -- that the cameras were running all the while or the Big Creep (BC) would have ripped into him more viciously.

It looked, in fact, like the BC wanted to jab that big long finger into Wallace's privates. I certainly wondered why Chris didn't order him to back off and stop touching him.

Otherwise, Wallace maintained himself very well and his surprise at Clinton's tirades was genuine.

[La Enchiladita]

I think Wallace should be watching his back forever after now, not just through the 2008 election.

[La Enchiladita]

By now I expected that the only time I would see Bill Clinton on TV would be in episodes of "Cops".

Stay tuned . . .

[phoenix0468]

"I still have no idea what set him off.",
He said as he was smirking, hehe.

[nevergore]

Ya' know Eagle Talon IV....

Your posts are beginning to become personal rather than opinion.....

Is this about you and me or a difference of opinion regarding our old Commander is Sheets????

BTW, the people that knew Clinton on a professional level in the past, Dick(the toe-sucker)Morris, David Gergen etc. have all come out and said this was totally contrived by Clinton....including his " off camera outburst" to his staff.....

[Eagles Talon IV]

"BTW, the people that knew Clinton on a professional level in the past, Dick(the toe-sucker)Morris, David Gergen etc. have all come out and said this was totally contrived by Clinton....including his " off camera outburst" to his staff.....

Unlike you, I never bought into the "infallibility" b.s, put out by the media and subscribed to by so many, such as you. I couldn't care any less what Gergen, Morris, et al have to say about this. Besides that, even if I did care what your "experts" had to say, there are equal numbers who have said exactly the opposite, namely the entire panel on CNN's Sunday show "Reliable Sources"

Your constant fall back to what the media says merely makes my point that you have been brainwashed by them. Clinton is a genius? Go back and check during his 8 year reign how many Governorships, States Legislatures,and Congressional seats were lost under his "brilliant leadership". After that go and check how many Democrats switched Party's after bathing in the light of his media ordained "genius" In case you are missing my point here, the media is totally full of sh*t and biased beyond even what you think you know.

Don't take what I say as a personal attack. I simply do not like to see people on my side I am assuming you are a conservative,(if you are not then I quite understand why you believe as you do) fall prey to the manipulations of left wing weasel media

[nevergore]

They keep mounting on my side (see below)....willing to throw in the towel or make a concession yet? :^)

Gingrich: Clinton Blow Up and Debate Over Bin Laden Premeditated
ABC News ^ | Sept 27, 2006


Posted on 09/27/2006 9:25:42 AM EDT by jdm


Sept. 27, 2006 — Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich believes former President Clinton's blow up during an interview on "Fox News Sunday" — and the escalating war of words over whether he or President Bush mishandled opportunities to catch or kill Osama bin Laden before the Sept. 11 attacks — was premeditated to shore up support for Democrats ahead of the November midterm elections.

"I think that as the most experienced professional in the Democratic Party, he didn't walk onto that set and suddenly get upset," Gingrich said. "He probably decided in advance he was going to pick a fight with Chris Wallace."

[Eagles Talon IV]

Theirs is nothing but an opinion and one I do not share.

[nevergore]

Keep watching.......I believe you will modify your stance over time....

[Eagles Talon IV]

I'm not sure you understand what I'm trying to say.

What we have is many people (pundits) offering opinions on what motivated Clinton's childish and paranoid outburst in front of the entire political world. Since Clinton will never admit one way or the other the libs are left with 2 choices. First choice is to admit their "hero" and leader simply embarrassed himself and the Party by making a total and utter fool of himself and in doing so handing his enemies tons of ammunition in the form of the many lies he told during his rant. This is happening as we speak.

Second, they can take this disaster and send out the troops (Carville, Podesta, the Forehead) and praise Clinton to the skies for his "brilliance" and thank him for showing the Party the way to defeat the Rep. This is what you claim was the intent of Clinton's "planned" meltdown.

The problem with your take is that Clinton, by invoking the 9/11 report and imploring people to read Clarke's book to see the truth, has opened himself up for even more criticism because most everything he said exonerates him from the claim he did not do enough, in fact shows he lied and did not do much of anything.

How is this the work of a man who is "brilliant"? If he had a clue what was in Clarke's book to begin with he never would have used it in his defense, likewise the 9/11 report.

Like I said. Those who believe that this was intentional on the part of Clinton do so because they have fully swallowed the media's claim of his infallibility. In other words, Clinton is a political genius and if Clinton is a political genius and never makes political mistakes then what he did on Sunday was not a mistake. If it was not a mistake then it must have been designed from the start and if it was designed from the start then that proves Clinton is a political genius. And round and round we go.

[nevergore]

It's not about fact with Clinton it's about spin......

How many people are going to read Clarke's book.....

How many people heard Clinton state forcefully that the book exonerates him?

It's always been about spin with Clinton and never fact....why should he change now?

You're trying to intellectualize a professional liar....can't happen...