Posted on 09/27/2006 9:29:15 AM PDT by Mia T
HILLARY'S FECKLESS 'DEFENSE' OF BILL WILL DAMAGE BOTH CLINTONS
Was it the ugliness? The husband's seemingly feigned indignation that morphed into real gnarled-fingered, burly purplerage2 directed toward--and invading the space of--(hello Rick Lazio)-- the slight, well-mannered, evenhanded scion of feared 60-Minutes sandbagger, Mike Wallace was not a pretty picture.
Son-inherits-sins-of-father projection piled atop all the other dysfunction on display (pathological lying, thuggery, corruption, roiling rage (of the rapist kind), paranoia, pathological self-absorption, arrested development, ineptitude, cognitive confusion, delusion, latent antisemitism (witness clinton's relentless scapegoating of the 'neocons')) may have been the proverbial straw that broke her back.
Or maybe hillary was impelled by something else....
What follows is an attempt to figure out what this little bit of clinton theatre was really all about.
WHAT'D SHE SAY?
What hillary clinton did not say in her so-called defense of bill clinton is as instructive as what she did say.
What she said was, "my husband did a great job in demonstrating that Democrats are not going to take these attacks."
She did not say that her husband did a great job making sure Americans were not going to suffer attacks.
She did not say even that her husband did a great job demonstrating that he made sure Americans were not going to suffer attacks.
She then invoked the 500-page 9/11 Commission Report few have read, fewer still will check, and that even her husband acknowledges is a political document. (And this the clintons should know--it was they who brazenly inserted on the 9/11 commission Jamie Gorelick, their fixer and 9/11's efficient cause.3)
But Gorelick apparently didn't do quite enough to satisfy the husband; as he told us a thousand times Sunday morning, he prefers "Richard Clarke's book" as the last word on 9/11 and terrorism.
Note, finally, the emptiness of hillary's statement invoking the 9/11 Commission Report. She does not claim the report absolves clinton. She merely tells us to read it to find out what [if anything] he did.
PAS DE DEUX?
Was the Fox attack-and-defense a coordinated, premeditated clinton two-step? Hillary's choice of words and bill's choice of venue suggest that it was.
Hillary's words tell us hillary's concern is not whether bill clinton protected America... or even whether he made a convincing case that he protected America.
No. They tell us hillary clinton's concern is to associate herself with Fox-Bush hatred and paranoia of the alienated antiwar leftwing base that she must win over if she is to capture the nomination in '08. (Did you notice, by the way, that the smartest woman in the world repeatedly referred to notes when making the simple two-sentence statement?)
Bill's choice of venue tells us bill was more concerned with positioning hillary for the nominating season than responding to "the little Pathway to 9/11." (Note that this misnomer by clinton was deliberate and meant to convey that he not only didn't watch the ABC movie, he paid it no notice.)
Had bill clinton truly wanted to refute the movie and rewrite history, he would have chosen his interviewer from the endless supply of slobbering media lackeys who would have been more than happy to help him out. He would not have gone to Fox.
Will this work? It will depend, in part, on whether the antiwar lefties are too stupid to see through the clintons' transparent scheme. The clintons are betting that they are.
COPYRIGHT MIA T 2006 |
|
|
'The Path to 9/11'
|
"You cannot explain to me why we have not captured or killed the tallest man in Afghanistan."
"You know... the job which we should have done 1... which should have been our primary focus, to find [you know] bin Laden and eliminate al Qaeda."
hear hillary clinton
"Mr. bin Laden used to live in Sudan. He was expelled from Saudi Arabia in '91 and he went to the Sudan.
We'd been hearing that the Sudanese wanted America to start dealing with them again. They released him [bin Laden].
At the time, '96, he 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.3
So I pleaded with the Saudis to take him, 'cause they could have; but they thought it was a hot potato. They didn't and that's how he wound up in Afghanistan."
hear bill clinton
No one paid much attention to what may turn out to be even more incriminating: clinton's curious explanation of the missile strike at Kandahur that took out a phalanxlike formation of... empty tents... and allowed bin Laden (and the Mideast Muslim ego) to escape unscathed.
Ever notice how a crook volunteers way too much information when he's trying to explain away his crimes? This is especially true when the crook thinks you're an idiot and he's a genius. "When I bombed his training camp and tried to kill him and his high command in 1998 after the African -Embassy bombings, some people criticized me for doing it. We just barely missed him by a couple of hours. I think whoever told us he was going to be there told somebody who told him that our missiles might be there. I think we were ratted out.7"
bill clinton
clinton's reaction--or should I say non-reaction-- to the USS Cole bombing in 2000--an unambiguous act of war--validates Albright's assertion.
clinton's refusal to take bin Laden in 1996--validates Albright's assertion.
That clinton summarily ignored and urged all of us to ignore the first attack on American soil since Pearl Harbor, the 1993 WTC bombing--ignore the first major Islamofascist terrorist attack on the continental United States!!--validates Albright's assertion.
The fact that "our national mourner," bill "I feel your pain" clinton, never even visited the site--he was only 15 minutes away mere days after the 1993 WTC bombing--validates Albright's assertion like nothing else.
This legacy confab is in and of itself proof certain of clinton's deeply flawed character, and a demonstration in real time of the way in which the clinton years were about a legacy that was incidentally a presidency.
Madeleine Albright captured the essence of this dysfunctional presidency best when she explained why clinton couldn't go after bin Laden.
According to Richard Miniter, the Albright revelation occurred at the cabinet meeting that would decide the disposition of the USS Cole bombing by al Qaeda [that is to say, that would decide to do what it had always done when a "bimbo" was not spilling the beans on the clintons: Nothing]. Only Clarke wanted to retaliate militarily for this unambiguous act of war.
Albright explained that a [sham] Mideast accord would yield [if not peace for the principals, surely] a Nobel Peace Prize for clinton. Kill or capture bin Laden and clinton could kiss the 'accord' and the Peace Prize good-bye.
If clinton liberalism, smallness, cowardice, corruption, perfidy--and, to borrow a phrase from Andrew Cuomo, clinton cluelessness--played a part, it was, in the end, the Nobel Peace Prize that produced the puerile pertinacity that enabled the clintons to shrug off terrorism's global danger.
Feckless clinton inaction and feckless clinton action serve only to reinforce the almost universally held notion: the clinton calculus was, is, and always will be, solely self-serving.
It is the clintons' bin-Laden-emboldening inaction to the attack on the USS Cole and the clintons' bin-Laden-emboldening token, ineffectual, August 1998 missile strikes of aspirin factories and empty tents that eliminate "bin-Laden-emboldenment avoidance" as the rationale for the latter decision and support "wag the dog," instead.
In the case of the non-response to the attack on the Cole, an unambiguous act of war, the clinton rationale was a clinton Nobel Peace Prize by Arab appeasement. i.e., a clinton Nobel Peace Prize by bin-Laden-emboldenment.
And in the case of the curiously-timed, ineffectual (and, therefore, bin-Laden-emboldening) token missile strikes, the clinton rationale was Lewinsky-recantation distraction -- clearly not bin-Laden-emboldenment avoidance. (This is not to say there wasn't a Nobel factor here, too. Obsolete intelligence, bolstered by the redundancy of a clinton tipoff, ensured that both bin Laden and the Mideast Muslim ego would escape unscathed.)
"I remember exactly what happened. Bruce Lindsey said to me on the phone, 'My God, a second plane has hit the tower.' And I said, 'Bin Laden did this.' that's the first thing I said. He said, 'How can you be sure?' I said 'Because only bin Laden and the Iranians could set up the network to do this and they [the Iranians] wouldn't do it because they have a country in targets. Bin Laden did it.'
I thought that my virtual obsession 2 with him was well placed and I was full of regret that I didn't get him."
bill clinton
INTERVIEW Osama bin Laden
Describe the situation when your men took down the American forces in Somalia.
The American people, by and large, do not know the name bin Laden, but they soon likely will. Do you have a message for the American people?
"In this interdependent world, we should still have a preference for peace over war....
But sometimes we would have these debates where people would say, if I didn't take some military action this very day, people would look down their nose at America and think we were weak. And I always thought of Senator Fulbright.... 6
So anytime somebody said in my presence, 'Hey, if you don't do this, people will think you're weak,' I always asked the same question for eight years, 'Can we kill 'em tomorrow?'
I don't think we can bring 'em back tomorrow, but can we kill 'em tomorrow? If we can kill them tomorrow, then we're not weak.... 1
I learned that as a 20-year-old kid watching Bill Fulbright. Listening."
bill clinton
"Mr. bin Laden used to live in Sudan. He was expelled from Saudi Arabia in '91 and he went to the Sudan.
We'd been hearing that the Sudanese wanted America to start dealing with them again. They released him [bin Laden].
At the time, '96, he 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.
So I pleaded with the Saudis to take him, 'cause they could have; but they thought it was a hot potato. They didn't and that's how he wound up in Afghanistan."
bill clinton
"I remember exactly what happened. Bruce Lindsey said to me on the phone, 'My God, a second plane has hit the tower.' And I said, 'Bin Laden did this.' that's the first thing I said. He said, 'How can you be sure?' I said 'Because only bin Laden and the Iranians could set up the network to do this and they [the Iranians] wouldn't do it because they have a country in targets. Bin Laden did it.'
I thought that my virtual obsession 2 with him was well placed and I was full of regret that I didn't get him."
bill clinton
hillary clinton
bill clinton
Bill Schneider
Clinton Lobbies for Nobel Prize: What a Punk
AIDES PUSH CLINTON FOR THE NOBEL
Mia T
This legacy confab is in and of itself proof certain of clinton's deeply flawed character, and a demonstration in real time of the way in which the clinton years were about a legacy that was incidentally a presidency.
Madeleine Albright captured the essence of this dysfunctional presidency best when she explained why clinton couldn't go after bin Laden.
According to Richard Miniter, the Albright revelation occurred at the cabinet meeting that would decide the disposition of the USS Cole bombing by al Qaeda [that is to say, that would decide to do what it had always done when a "bimbo" was not spilling the beans on the clintons: Nothing]. Only Clarke wanted to retaliate militarily for this unambiguous act of war.
Albright explained that a [sham] Mideast accord would yield [if not peace for the principals, surely] a Nobel Peace Prize for clinton. Kill or capture bin Laden and clinton could kiss the 'accord' and the Peace Prize good-bye.
If clinton liberalism, smallness, cowardice, corruption, perfidy--and, to borrow a phrase from Andrew Cuomo, clinton cluelessness--played a part, it was, in the end, the Nobel Peace Prize that produced the puerile pertinacity that enabled the clintons to shrug off terrorism's global danger.
(DID THEY REALLY WANT TO TAKE HIM OUT ANYWAY?)
(Part One)
by Mia t, 2.15.06
Saturday, Jan. 28, 2006
Chitchat with Jane Pauley
San Francisco, CA
Sunday, Aug. 11, 2002
Clinton Reveals on Secret Audio:
I Nixed Bin Laden Extradition Offer
hen the damning tape surfaced, focus was naturally on bill clinton's (oops!) admission.
I agree. We were ratted out. bill clinton could not afford to capture or kill bin Laden. This information courtesy of none other than Madeleine Albright.
Sunday, Aug. 11, 2002
Clinton Reveals on Secret Audio:
I Nixed Bin Laden Extradition Offer
7. The ABC miniseries, 'The Path to 9/11,' reports that Albright, herself, did the ratting, which makes sense: Madeleine Albright was obviously the clintons' Nobel Peace Prize point man and facilitator.
'MAKE IT A RULE' -- PLACE YOUR ORDER FOR OSAMA WITH CLINTON and CO.
(HEAR HILLARY + BILL MAKE THEIR PITCH)
by Mia t, 2.13.06
ALBRIGHT INDICTS CLINTON FOR TERRORISM FAILURE
(and doesn't even know it)
by Mia T, 4.28.06
ALBRIGHT1: 'Bin Laden and his Network Declared War2 on the United States and Struck First and We Have Suffered Deeply'
COPYRIGHT MIA T 2006
h e a r --c l i n t o n --l o s e --i t
by Mia T, 11.11.05
Sunday, Sept 3, 2002
Larry King Live
BIN LADEN FINGERS CLINTON FOR TERROR SUCCESS (SEE FOOTAGE)
(may 1998)
I say to them that they have put themselves at the mercy of a disloyal government, and this is most evident in Clinton's administration....
THE THREAT OF TERRORISM IS AS CLOSE AS A CLINTON IS TO THE OVAL OFFICE
COPYRIGHT MIA T 2006
THE (oops!) INADVERTENT ADMISSIONS OF BILL + HILLARY CLINTON part one
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...."
CLINTON: 'Can we kill 'em tomorrow?'
(+ Albright-Fulbright-Nobel TERRORISM revelations)
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?
'The Path to 9/11' Annotated:
CLIPS, SYNOPSIS, THE CLINTON-9/11 NEXUS, THE CLINTON JACKBOOT
'The Path to 9/11': CLINTON FAILURE TO ORDER 'PURE KILL' CUT CHANCES OF GETTING BIN LADEN IN HALF
HEAR 'THE PATH TO 9/11' SCREENWRITER:
CLINTON WILLFULLY FAILED TO NAIL BIN LADEN AS MANY AS A DOZEN TIMES: CIA
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...."
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?)
ALBRIGHT INDICTS CLINTON FOR TERRORISM FAILURE (and doesn't even know it)
'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)
HILLARY GOES NUCLEAR
PROLIFERATION IN THE AGE OF CLINTON
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?')
CHENEY: CALL THEM REPREHENSIBLE
THE DEMOCRATS ARE GONNA GET US KILLED (kerry, clinton + sandy berger's pants) SERlES5
sandy berger haberdashery feint
(the specs, not the pants or the socks)
CLINTON TREASON + THE GORELICK WALL
Reverse Gorelick
THE LEFT'S RECKLESS TET-OFFENSIVE-GAMBIT REPLAY:
the left's jihad against America is killing our troops, aiding + abetting the terrorists and imperiling all Americans
CLINTON RAPES, REVISIONISM, USEFUL IDIOTS AND ENTROPY (an update)
pro-islamofascist-terrorist radical chic
WHY THE LEFT IS DANGEROUS FOR AMERICA
The Left's Fatally Flawed "Animal Farm" Mentality
(Why America Must NEVER AGAIN Elect a Democrat President)
WAR AND TREASON AND THE NEW YORK TIMES
(Please see post 65)
IN A 'PINCH': RETHINKING THE FIRST AMENDMENT
(Which came first, the 'journalist' or the traitor?)
PINCH SULZBERGER, PEARL HARBOR + TREASON
WHY WE MUST PROSECUTE THE NEW YORK TIMES
'MISBEGOTTEN' TIMES
(NARROWNESS, MR. SULZBERGER, NOT WIDTH)
WHY BIN LADEN WANTS HOME DELIVERY OF THE NEW YORK TIMES
MORE
THE ADDRESS
Fulbright Prize address
April 12, 2006
Sunday, Aug. 11, 2002
Clinton Reveals on Secret Audio:
I Nixed Bin Laden Extradition Offer
Sunday, Sept 3, 2002
Larry King Live
Saturday, Jan. 28, 2006
Chitchat with Jane Pauley
San Francisco, CA
Fulbright Prize address
April 12, 2006
CNN
reporting on the Fulbright Prize
April 14, 2006
White House Lobbied For Clinton Nobel Peace Prize Updated
Friday, October 13, 2000
By Rita Cosby
Buddy Death Report Raises More Questions Than It Answers
h e a r --c l i n t o n --l o s e --i t
by Mia T, 11.11.05
I M P E A C H M E N T
h e a r --c l i n t o n --l o s e --i t
by Mia T, 11.11.05
MIDDLING
Twenty presidents rank higher than bill clinton and 20 rank lower. But this placement assumes equal weight for each of the presidential dimensions. And therein lies the flaw.
If 9/11 taught us anything, it is that presidential character and moral authority count, and count most.4 If the variables are properly weighted, bill clinton will always come out dead last.
That is, unless Americans are dumb enough to make the same mistake twice.5
AFTERWORD
This legacy confab is in and of itself proof certain of clinton's deeply flawed character, and a demonstration in real time of the way in which the clinton years were about a legacy that was incidentally a presidency. Madeleine Albright captured the essence of this dysfunctional presidency best when she explained why clinton couldn't go after bin Laden.
According to Richard Miniter, the Albright revelation occurred at the cabinet meeting that would decide the disposition of the USS Cole bombing by al Qaeda [that is to say, that would decide to do what it had always done when a "bimbo" was not spilling the beans on the clintons: Nothing]. Only Clarke wanted to retaliate militarily for this unambiguous act of war.
Albright explained that a [sham] Mideast accord would yield [if not peace for the principals, surely] a Nobel Peace Prize for clinton. Kill or capture bin Laden and clinton could kiss the accord and the Peace Prize good-bye.
If clinton liberalism, smallness, cowardice, corruption, perfidy--and, to borrow a phrase from Andrew Cuomo, clinton cluelessness--played a part, it was, in the end, the Nobel Peace Prize that produced the puerile pertinacity that enabled the clintons to shrug off terrorism's global danger.
Historian massages clinton numbers, ego + legacy at revisionist confab
click on "loser," (clinton's middle finger)
Mia T, 11.10.05
Upstaged, clinton Recycles Tired Canard, Tries New Revisionist Tack
- Biography lends to death a new terror.--Oscar Wilde
- Hypocrisy abounds in this Age of Clinton, a Postmodern Oz rife with constitutional deconstruction and semantic subversion, a virtual surreality polymarked by presidential alleles peccantly misplaced or, in the case of Jefferson posthumously misappropriated...
Mia T, THE OTHER NIXON
Yesterday, Daniel Patrick Moynihan died. Today, the clintons are arrogating his soul. Hardly surprising. In 1999, the clintons were not at all shy about seizing his still-warm senate seat.
One has merely to recall the Jefferson double-helix hoax to understand that posthumous misappropriation is, for the obvious reason, the clintons' preferred method of legacy inflation .
Standard-Issue clintonism
- If misappropriation of Jefferson's alleles hinged on a broken line of descent, misappropriation of Moynihan's endorsement depends on a broken line of dissent. Like Sally Hemmings' progeny, Moynihan's later acquiescence is of dubious lineage
Mia T, Moynihan Myths
by Mia T, 11-03-03
by Mia T, 4.15.04
QUINN IN THE MORNING (ESSAY DISCUSSED)
(MP3, REAL, WINDOWS MEDIA, WINAMP)
e would have it backwards and miss the point entirely if we were to attribute The Gorelick Wall and the attendant metastasis of al Qaeda during the clintons' watch, (which, incidentally, was then in its incipient stage and stoppable), to the '60s liberal mindset.
Rampant '60s liberalism was not the underlying rationale for The Gorelick Wall.
Rather, The Gorelick Wall was the underlying rationale for--The Gorelick Wall was (insofar as '60s liberalism was the Wall's apparent impetus) a cynical cover for --the willful, methodical malpractice and malfeasance that was the product of the virulent clinton strain of rampant '60s liberalism.
While it is true that The Gorelick Wall was the convenient device of a cowardly self-serving president, The Wall's aiding and abetting of al Qaeda was largely incidental, (the pervasiveness of the clintons' Nobel-Peace-Prize calculus notwithstanding).
The Wall was engineered primarily to protect a corrupt self-serving president. The metastasis of al Qaeda and 9/11 were simply the cost of doing business, clinton-style.
Further confirmation that the Wall was cover for clinton corruption:
- Gorelick's failure to disclose the fact that she authored the memo that was the efficient cause of 911
- Gorelick's surreal presence on the 911 commission investigating Gorelick's Justice Department, a maneuver that effectively removes from the universe of witnesses a central witness, Gorelick, even as it uniquely positions a central player, Gorelick, to directly shape the commission's conclusions. (Is there any question which two people are responsible for Gorelick's insertion on the commission?)
Conversely, that it never occurred to anyone on the commission that Gorelick's flagrant conflict of interest renders her presence on the commission beyond farce calls into question the commission's judgment if not its integrity. Washington's mutual protection racket writ large, I suspect....
The Gorelick Wall is consistent with, and an international extension of, two essential acts committed in tandem, Filegate, the simultaneous empowering of the clintons and disemboweling of clinton adversaries, and the clinton Putsch, the firing and replacement of every U.S. attorney extant.
Filegate and the clinton Putsch,
committed in tandem,
the product of a careful criminal calculus,
at once empowered clinton
and disemboweled his opponents.
clinton was now free to betray with abandon
not only our trust,
but the Constitution as well.
The Common Man
Mia T
February, 1998
Allegations of international clinton crimes swirling around the White House in 1995 and beyond support The-Wall-as- cover thesis.
Once the clintons' own U.S. attorneys were in place, once the opposition was disemboweled by the knowledge that their raw FBI files had been in the possession of the clintons, once domestic law enforcement was effectively blinded to foreign data by Gorelick's Wall, the clintons were free to methodically and seditiously and with impunity auction off America's security, sovereignty and economy to the highest foreign bidder.
We can only hope...
Thanks for the video :)
ping
;)
ping
ping
Self-ping to read later
Self-ping for later.
thanx :)
;)
ping
Truth crushed to the earth will rise again.
ping
thank you :)
ping
ping
ping
ping
I'm hoping the dems put Hill at the top of the ticket, we need to face this threat to western civilization, meet the threat head on and destroy it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.