Alan Grayson to Ground Zero mosque opponents: Hey, Bush was the one who let 9/11 happen

Hot Air ^ | August 19, 2010 | ALLAHPUNDIT

[RobinMasters]

Via Mark Finkelstein, it pains me to say it but I think Congress’s trolliest troll is getting a bad rap here. The Screw Loose Change guys read this as evidence of Trutherism, that Grayson’s saying Bush let the attack happen on purpose to advance the secret neoKKKon war agenda or whatever. What he’s actually doing, I think, is accusing Bush of negligence in having not paid more attention to the famous President’s Daily Brief on August 6, 2001 about Bin Laden’s intentions. Big difference between those two positions, of course, as the “on purpose” crowd means to accuse Bush of being a willing accomplice in the attack. But go figure that people might not be willing to give Grayson the benefit of the doubt after the insane rhetorical bombthrowing he’s engaged in this year to raise his media profile.

[RobinMasters]

Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US was the President's Daily Brief given to U.S. President George W. Bush on August 6, 2001.

[wastedyears]

CLINTON DIDN’T DO JACK YOU HORSES ARSE!!!!!

[Man50D]

The truthers should be happy with his endorsement.

[cranked]

Reminds me of a lame mule that needs to be shot....

[DBCJR]

Sometimes it is just better not to respond...

[Seaplaner]

So it this Grayson saying this on his own?

Or, did the WH put him up to it?

.

[melsec]

Using that same logic the Obama let the Global Financial Crisis happen.

Mel

[Verginius Rufus]

The Clintonistas (Gorelick) created a "wall" between the FBI and CIA to stymie investigations of Clinton's 1996 campaign finance violations (illegal foreign money and all that). The result was that information was not shared which might have led to the hijackers being caught before 9/11.

Plus Clinton turned down an offer from the Sudan to take custody of Bin Laden.

[popdonnelly]

And your evidence, Mr. Grayson, is what?

[RedMDer]

Good Grief.

[Cheetahcat]

9/11 is on Clinton and Carter Period.

[paulycy]

Grayson lacks grey matter.

[Texas resident]

grayson is sure getting a lot of publicity. Hope he and his antics become known far and wide. Ought to be a great help in his next election.

[cricket]

Yes, less than six months into his Presidency; it is Bush's fault. (And of course, Bush never blamed HIS predecessor - even though he well, could have. . .)

And yet, by same Liberal truth malaise, economy devastation is Bush's fault close to two years after Obama 'was in place'; and nearly four years after Demrat Congress took control.

Thought Franken was the worst of the worst; but think Grayson; may out 'franken' Al, himself.

What a frickin embarrassment; and if you grew up watching Jerry Springer; you will probably vote for him.

[paulycy]

If this guy isn’t a one termer then the Republic is even further gone than we all thought.

[rockabyebaby]

Oh dear Lord, Please.make.these.idiots.go.away, Amen.

[Wuli]

"What he’s actually doing, I think, is accusing Bush of negligence in having not paid more attention to the famous President’s Daily Brief on August 6, 2001 about Bin Laden’s intentions. Big difference between those two positions, of course, as the “on purpose” crowd means to accuse Bush of being a willing accomplice in the attack."

Neither position meets any standard of truth or intelligence.

Yet the ignorance about the Daily Brief of August 6, 2001 and what it meant continues, even among some who call themselves "conservative" or even just "fair minded".

Was the information - Bin Laden determined to strike in the U.S. - BRAND NEW INFORMATION that the intelligence community had just learned and was just then telling the President and his national security team for the first time? NO, IT WAS NOT !!! The August 6 Daily Brief included for the first time a compendium, a summary of all that the intelligence community believed it had learned about Al Queda up to that point, because GWBush asked that they provide such a compendium in addition to any "new" stuff for the day.

The idea and belief that Bin Laden determined to strike in the U.S. was NOT an August 6, 2001 revelation, to anyone.

And, in addition to that fact, did the entire summary include any BRAND NEW ACTIONABLE INTELLIGENCE that the intelligence community believed could provide cause for executive direction IN ANY DIFFERENT WAY for finding or knowing where, when and how such a "strike in the U.S." might come? NO IT DID NOT

The entire premise that Bin Laden determined to strike in the U.S. was an August 6, 2001 revelation, to anyone, and arrived with new actionable intelligence upon which to counter the "strike in the U.S." is a false premise because there is no factual basis for it. The date of "August 6, 2001" is the date of a report, and that is all it is and its meaning, the date, has no greater depth than that. Most all the information it contained was not new, was not a revelation and did not provide cause, did not throw any big brand new light, on a need for immediate new, different executive action; towards any intelligence and defense community actions, beyond what the executive new they were already doing. The intelligence community had the knowledge, and had been working on understanding the knowledge, that "Bin Laden was determined to strike in the U.S.", long before it was included in the report of August 6, intended as requested by GWBush, as a report to summarize all they knew in one place.

Those are the facts, but they are always omitted so that tons of false tangents can be created and cause such tangents to be pursued by ignorant people, based on a premise based on a lie about the facts.

[JohnD9207]

what are the poll numbers for this idiot Grayson, I can’t believe for a second that he is in a safe seat anymore after all of the crud he has said?

[ph12321]

Gayson is full of what he’s interviewed by. HOT AIR

[cubreporter]

Jack ASS.