Replies

I share your concern with the statement, but in fact everyone knew a "9-11" was coming. The "unknown" was only when and where -- and of course the magnitude -- of the terrorist attack.

Just like today ... we all know that because of our unsecured southern border another -- likely even bigger -- attack is coming ... we just don't know when or where.

I'm reluctant to lump Donald Trump in with the "Truthers" who believe the U.S. Government was a party to 9-11 ... that's not what Trump said at all ... it's just an inference by those who want to take down Trump.

This is not good. Not good at all. Trump’s initial statement would stand, but this is getting into a territory I do not think I can support.

That doesn't really make any sense. It's a fact that Bush received multiple warnings about an impending attack. Even Donald Trump, one year before 911, was saying an attack was inevitable. What was anybody doing about it? Nadda. In fact, the same immigration policies that let the terrorists in under shoddy Visa applications were kept in place.

I do not listen to Rush any more, but I do sometimes read the transcripts from his show that are posted on this forum. It appeared to me the other day that Rush was trying to defend/excuse W, and create the idea that somehow Trump's statement about W not keeping us safe was going to protect Hillary from Benghazi. I did not quite get what I considered to be rather tortured logic about that, perhaps if I had the entire discussion to read I would have. But here is what I got out of what I did read: Rush was trying subtly to damage Trump. Rush made the statement that all of the 911 terrorists were here on legal visas, which is simply not true. Many visas had expired, many were misused, and the visas applications were improperly filled out would not hold up to scrutiny, in short they should not have been granted in the first place, and 9 months into the Bush administration, these terrorists on their 6-month expired visas were STILL in this country! Secondly, Rush spoke about the holdovers from the Clinton era which Bush had retained. Rush excused this stating that Bush had done this in the spirit of bipartisanship, (which I find inexcusable.) And so the foolish Clinton policy of not allowing the sharing of law enforcement agencies to communicate with each other was STILL IN PLACE!!! It is one thing perhaps to not immediately replace personnel, but Bush could have ordered the the CIA and FBI, as well as other agencies share information, and institute other sane changes, but instead chose to continue the same policies. So, NINE MONTHS into the Bush administration, and knowing something was likely to happen, Bush, like Clinton, was not allowing information to be shared among the law enforcement and intelligence agencies. In short, Bush and Clinton had exactly the same national security policies, and I was forced to conclude, based on Rush's statements, that Bush was every bit as responsible as Clinton for 911 because his national security policies and people were exactly the same as his predecessor. If I am mistaken about this, please set me straight. If not, Trump is absolutely right.

This is not good. Not good at all. Trump’s initial statement would stand, but this is getting into a territory I do not think I can support.

Bush never defending himself. That being case, no reason for anybody else to. Trump taking down the Bush family will only help conservatives in the long run.