Not saying that Obama being at meetings would have made any difference. It's the blatant double-standard being applied here. If a Republican were president this information would be the lead headline on the Yahoo entry page, the pundits on TV would be demanding answers, mainstream newspapers would be calling for his resignation, and the local chapter of Code Pink and others would be planning protests.
It's so blatant and yet so many people choose not to see it, because you'd have to be a total moron to not recognize this double-standard.
I've read the accounts, and there doesn't seem to be much in them other than the usual hyperventilating of the liberal press. The CIA was clearly worried that a major attack was scheduled for the summer or fall of 2001, and there was a strong suspicion that the attackers might try to strike the US mainland, but there was nothing specific about an actual plot. As president, Bush continued to receive these CIA briefings, and kept pushing for more actionable intelligence.
How ironic that the same beacons of journalism who rush to smear Bush uphold an entirely different standard when the president is a Democrat, and not only fail to notice their utter hypocrisy, but become unhinged when its pointed out to them.
You are 100% correct. This 9/11, the slimes again had to mention the august 16(?) presidential daily briefing (PDB) about Osama plans an attack on America and if Bush had just acted on that briefing, 9/11 would never had happened.
Over at the DUmpster, they actually think under algore’s leadership, 9/11 would not have happened.
The double standard is disgusting.