Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

LIVE THREAD: Chris Wallace's interview with former President Bill Clinton ... FNC 6pm eastern
FNC | sept., 24, 2006 | me

Posted on 09/24/2006 2:07:59 PM PDT by blogblogginaway

Thought it would be a good idea to discuss the upcoming interview where we already know Clinton loses it with Wallacae here. I for one am anxious to see it.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Extended News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: chriswallace; clinton; clintonlegacy; fnc; hetriedhefailed; notbreakingnews; outfoxed; vrwc
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 101-150151-200201-250 ... 501-547 next last
To: ET(end tyranny)

"I mean, because tomorrow when I get up, if there's a bad headline in the paper, it's President Bush's responsibility, not mine"

it looked like he was going to say FAULT instead of RESPONSIBILITY...I taped it, going to check it again, but I believe he make a quick word change there...


151 posted on 09/24/2006 3:31:35 PM PDT by tina07 (In Memory of my Father - WWII Army Air Force Veteran)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

Comment #152 Removed by Moderator

To: ark_girl
Does anyone wonder if he lost some of his touch after his health problems?

Not any less or any more than any other liberal progressive whack-job....:-)

But I am convinced he is posting at DU.:-0

153 posted on 09/24/2006 3:31:40 PM PDT by Cold Heat (I just analyze it, I did not create the mess...so go pound sand:-))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: rightwingintelligentsia
Boy oh boy, as he kept citing Clarke and kept citing Clarke, I was thinking that clinton well knew that Richard Clarke was one of those little "surprises" that his administration left for the Bush admin.

You could just tell by the way he was so ANGRY that clarke got demoted right away. Bubba and crowd have their gang of token blackmailable "pubbies", and they wave them around like a bloody scarf.

154 posted on 09/24/2006 3:31:40 PM PDT by A Citizen Reporter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: tina07

I believe the word that he used was Bull!


155 posted on 09/24/2006 3:31:50 PM PDT by Coldwater Creek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: FarRightFanatic

I think he only consented to the interview because it was Chris Wallace. If it had been Tony Snow, Brit Hume, or even Jim Angle, he never would have agreed to appearing because he knows they would have asked some hardball questions. He thought Wallace would lob softballs like Russert. When Chris didn't, he went ape.


156 posted on 09/24/2006 3:32:08 PM PDT by ABG(anybody but Gore) ("By the time I'm finished with you, you're gonna wish you felt this good again" - Jack Bauer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: Crawdad

I was watching the show on an old, small screen tv. The picture is pretty dark. I kept seeing these flashes of white, and wondered if he was wearing white socks. I couldn't ignore it until I figured it out. Yuk!

Who else would do that?


157 posted on 09/24/2006 3:32:11 PM PDT by speekinout
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: txroadkill
Did we really elect a hot-headed dork to the Presidency - twice????

By less than 50% each time, which says more about a disturbance in the Republican force (to use a Star Wars analogy), than about people's desire for the 'Toon.

158 posted on 09/24/2006 3:32:23 PM PDT by hsalaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: tsmith130

A man's leg should never be seen when wearing a suit.


159 posted on 09/24/2006 3:32:42 PM PDT by Crawdad (My kingdom for a real conservative without a conscience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

How do we tell the President to get away from that evil man??


160 posted on 09/24/2006 3:32:47 PM PDT by Krodg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: blogblogginaway

Wow! Clinton is a sick man, physically and mentally, but he hasn't lost his ability to lie, lie, lie. I want to see juan try to defend him.


161 posted on 09/24/2006 3:32:58 PM PDT by ozzymandus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RasterMaster

Speaking of the Branch Dividians, Isn't it strange that the original BATF assault there happened two days after the WTC bombing in 1993. BATF were the bomb people right?

You would think that all the BATF people would be in NYC working on that rather than rural TX.

Shows priorities.

g


162 posted on 09/24/2006 3:33:14 PM PDT by 11x62
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf
If Bill really did order BL's assassination, wasn't he in violation of the prohibition against direct assassination enected by Ford and Carter, and upheld by Reagan????

Nope. What a President puts in place another Presidential finding can over rule.

163 posted on 09/24/2006 3:33:30 PM PDT by null and void (There's no nothing. End of report. Any questions?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: rightwingintelligentsia
I heard him start to say "fault" as well. I guess he's used to saying "It's Bush's fault," just like everyone else in his party.

I'm glad someone else heard it! I couldn't believe it. I wish Wallace would have said something. Imagine what Clinton would have done then! lol

164 posted on 09/24/2006 3:33:54 PM PDT by ET(end tyranny) (John 8:40 But now ye seek to kill me, a MAN that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God:)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: Baynative
Do Admirals have stars like Generals?

Yes, three stars is a Vice Admiral.

165 posted on 09/24/2006 3:34:25 PM PDT by Michael Goldsberry (Lt. Bruce C. Fryar USN 01-02-70 Laos)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: Baynative

The one thing that Clinton said that was correct!


166 posted on 09/24/2006 3:34:38 PM PDT by Coldwater Creek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: misterrob

"I really liked how he kept claiming people said he was too fixated on OBL....

What a joke."


That's exactly what I thought. All I can remember from those days was how Bubba was fixated on how to get his sorry a$$ out of telling the truth about Monica. "Depends on what your definition of 'is' is." What a POS!


167 posted on 09/24/2006 3:34:53 PM PDT by FarRightFanatic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: ark_girl
wasn't he Commander in Chief??? Wasn't it his JOB...one of his sole purposes in life to be the final decision maker on things of that nature?

Harry Truman said 'The buck stops here".

Clinton said "Yeah!' and whistled past the graveyard.
168 posted on 09/24/2006 3:35:40 PM PDT by BIGLOOK (Keelhauling is a sensible solution to mutiny.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: pillut48
Does he think the average American is reaaaaaaaaalllly that stupid?! >:-(

We elected him twice.

He doesn't think we are stupid. He is certain we are.

169 posted on 09/24/2006 3:36:29 PM PDT by null and void (There's no nothing. End of report. Any questions?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Krodg

Very good question. It's way past the point of giving Clinton the benefit of the doubt or any more chances to stab him in the back.


170 posted on 09/24/2006 3:36:53 PM PDT by jazusamo (DIANA IREY for Congress, PA 12th District: Retire murtha.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: Txsleuth

In a dramatic moment on November 16, 1997, Cohen appeared on ABC News's This Week with a five-pound bag of sugar to illustrate the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's weapons. "This amount of anthrax could be spread over a city—let's say the size of Washington," Cohen said. "It would destroy at least half the population of that city."


On August 25, 2006, William Cohen appeared on Fox & Friends First primarily to promote his new novel, but towards the end of the broadcast declared the following while being interviewed by Brian Kilmeade: "I think there should be a commitment to universal service. I think that only a few people are really committed to this war against terrorism... We ought to have a real call to national service to commit ourselves to some form of public service ... to put us on a war footing mentality".


171 posted on 09/24/2006 3:36:57 PM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: FarRightFanatic
""I really liked how he kept claiming people said he was too fixated on OBL.... "

Did you just hear Wallace read the Richard Clarke quotes? It was Richard Clarke who said clinton was obsessed with getting bin Laden.

LOL!

172 posted on 09/24/2006 3:37:20 PM PDT by A Citizen Reporter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: null and void
Two words to describe Bubba's two terms....

LIP SERVICE!

173 posted on 09/24/2006 3:37:30 PM PDT by RasterMaster (Winning Islamic hearts and minds.........one bullet at a time!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: rightwingintelligentsia

LOL..I thought I was the only one that thought he started to say "Bush's fault" instead of Bush's "responsibility"..


174 posted on 09/24/2006 3:37:35 PM PDT by Txsleuth (,((((((((ISRAEL)))))) Pray for the release of the Israelis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: BIGLOOK

Clintoon's legacy is solid now... A liar that diddled while OBL grew. He admitted his FAILURE and THAT will be his legacy, one of hatred and self delusions.


175 posted on 09/24/2006 3:38:29 PM PDT by GRRRRR (Love America? Protect Her, VOTE GOP...they're better than nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: A Citizen Reporter

ROFLOL!!!!!


176 posted on 09/24/2006 3:38:51 PM PDT by Coldwater Creek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: Txsleuth

Clinton never went to war with Iraq?

I suppose that would be news to Bill Clinton who atuhorized Operation Desert Fox in 1998

let's take a closer look...

In December 1998, Bill Clinton authorized the SecDef to take the U.S. to war against Iraq. The formal language of the mission Clinton approved was:

To strike military and security targets in Iraq that contribute to Iraq's ability to produce, store, maintain and deliver weapons of mass destruction.

Now, that's odd right? Since "everyone knows" father Saddam never had any WMD Yet for some reason Oliver's hero signed off on a mission with the stated goal:

to degrade Saddam Hussein's ability to make and to use weapons of mass destruction. To diminish Saddam Hussein's ability to wage war against his neighbors. To demonstrate to Saddam Hussein the consequences of violating international obligations.

Well maybe Clinton was too busy fumbling with his belt buckle to have read the authorization for war he gave to SecDef. Bill Cohen. Maybe Cohen was confused. Let's go to the Pentagon on the night Operation Desert Fox began when Cohen said:

President Clinton's decision to strike Iraq has clear military goals. We want to degrade Saddam Hussein's ability to make and to use weapons of mass destruction. We want to diminish his ability to wage war against his neighbors. And we want to demonstrate the consequences of flouting international obligations.

Saddam Hussein has been an outlaw for some time. In the 1980s he used chemical weapons against Iran and against his own Kurdish minority. In 1990 he invaded Kuwait. In 1991 he fired SCUD missiles at his neighbors. At the end of the Gulf War the United Nations Security Council demanded that Iraq fully disclose and dismantle its program to build deadly biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons and the missiles to deliver them. But Saddam has used a combination of denials, deceptions and delays to evade Security Council mandates.

At nearly every turn Iraq has chosen obstruction over openness, and confrontation over cooperation.


http://tinyurl.com/qp7o5


177 posted on 09/24/2006 3:39:24 PM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: digger48

"do a shot of sumthin with every Clinton lie.

You won't make it past the first break."



The bottle would be empty before the first break.


178 posted on 09/24/2006 3:40:15 PM PDT by FarRightFanatic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: ozzymandus
I have just one question for Mr. Clinton.

If you were trying sooooo hard to get AQ and Bin Laden, then why the Hell were they openly thumbing their noses at us from the streets of Kabul - and the whole of Afghanistan - for at least five of your eight years in office, you SOB!!?

179 posted on 09/24/2006 3:40:16 PM PDT by TeddyCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: ET(end tyranny)
The bolded portion, instead of 'responsibility', Clinton started to say 'fault'. My son and I both heard 'fau' before he corrected himself.

That was my impression when I first watched it this morning, that when he paused he was about to utter 'fault'.
180 posted on 09/24/2006 3:40:56 PM PDT by TomGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: All
Clinton was full of crap when he said:

"The people on my political right who say I didn't do enough spent the whole time I was president saying, "Why is he so obsessed with bin Laden? That was "wag the dog" when he tried to kill him."


http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MmQyZWYyNGZiYzIwZmM4MGNkMTIyODA0NTMwNDk4MjA=

From Newsday, August 21, 1998:

Washington - Congressional leaders strongly supported President Bill Clinton's decision to strike targets in Sudan and Afghanistan yesterday, although a Republican senator raised questions about the timing and the motive of the attack.

Some of Clinton's most consistent critics endorsed the decision to retaliate for the Aug. 7 embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania that killed more than 200 people, including 12 Americans.

House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.), Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Jesse Helms (R-N.Ca.), who had been alerted by the White House before the attack, praised the operation.

"I think the United States did exactly the right thing. We cannot allow terrorist groups to attack embassies and do nothing," Gingrich said.

Lott called the action "appropriate and just."

Helms struck a rare bipartisan chord: "Sooner or later, terrorists will realize that America's differences end at the water's edge and that the United States political leadership always has, and always will, stand united in the face of international terrorism."

Sen. Dan Coats (R-Ind.), who has called for Clinton's resignation in light of his admission of an improper relationship with a White House intern, said the "timing is certainly suspect."

"I believe, given the extraordinary situation we're now in, these are the questions that are on the minds of the American people," Coats said. "I'm raising questions . . . on what was the president's role on this, and whether the president was in a position to make a sound judgment call in light of the speculation that would arise worldwide and the consequences of that in calling for this strike . . . a day and a half after his speech," a reference to Monday's televised speech on the Monica Lewinsky scandal.

But Rep. Dan Burton (R-Ind.), who has been aggressively investigating Clinton's campaign-funding practices, took the opposite view. "I take the action for what it was - to stop the terrorists and to make them pay for what they did," Burton said. "And that was the right thing to do. That's coming from one of the president's severest critics."





http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZTNhMTM1NTNhYzYwZmU4NWI1YTMyOGUyMTM0YWI3YjQ=

Then Speaker Newt Gingrich, interviewed on CNN, August 28, 1998:

ALLEN: We are interrupting that story because we have now on the phone with us Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich. Speaker Gingrich, your reaction to the U.S. attacks today on Osama bin Laden's terrorist network.

REP. NEWT GINGRICH (R), HOUSE SPEAKER: Well, I think the United States did exactly the right thing. We cannot allow a terrorist group to attack American embassies and do nothing. And I think we have to recognize that we are now committed to engaging this organization and breaking it apart and doing whatever we have to to suppress it, because we cannot afford to have people who think that they can kill Americans without any consequence. So this was the right thing to do.

We have not yet gotten assessments of the damage, but I hope that it's been very decisive. And I think it's very important that we send a signal to countries like Sudan and Afghanistan that if you house a terrorist, you become a target. And if you want to get rid of the target, you've got to get rid of the terrorist.

ALLEN: So you say the right thing to do at the right time? Senator Arlen Specter said a moment ago he question the timing of this.

GINGRICH: I think based on what I know, it was the right thing to do at the right time. And I think that it — I've been involved in briefings for the last two weeks, and I think it's been done in a methodical, professional way. And I strongly support the United States government having acted that way.





http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YmQxMDYyMGMzYzkwMDVkZDMyMjg4MDI2ZGJjMjRjM2U=

Bill Clinton in his interview today seemed to be suggesting that conservatives uniformly opposed and denounced him when he launched his "wag the dog" strike in 1998. For the record, here's the NR editorial in response to the attacks, dated9/14/98:
COMEDY Central's The Daily Show called it "Operation Desert Shield Me from Impeachment." Funny, but too cynical. The U.S. missile strikes against terrorist facilities in Afghanistan and Sudan were a response to a real threat: They targeted the operations of Osama bin Laden, the terrorist mastermind who, according to U.S. intelligence, was responsible for the brutal bombing of the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania and was plotting further attacks on Americans.

Congressional leaders were therefore right to support President Clinton's action. The last thing Republicans should do is add to the inhibitions and hesitations of an Administration congenitally averse to the forthright use of American military power. The White House's blatant exploitation of the crisis for its own political purposes-dragging Mr. Clinton back from vacation for a portentous Oval Office address to the nation-should be a source of amusement only. Richard Nixon, too, tried to claim indispensability for his foreign-policy expertise-a much more valid claim in his case, and at the height of the Cold War to boot. It didn't help him.

Launching 75 Tomahawk cruise missiles at the training camp in Afghanistan and the chemical-weapons plant in Sudan was, by Clinton standards, a strong performance. In June 1993, responding to an Iraqi assassination attempt against ex-President George Bush, Mr. Clinton launched 23 cruise missiles at a military-intelligence headquarters in Baghdad-in the middle of the night, so that no one would get hurt! This time, the strike in Afghanistan was aimed at a gathering of terrorist leaders reported to be taking place on that day. Admirably cold-blooded, that.

Bin Laden, the terrorist kingpin, is a new phenomenon, but we should not exaggerate either his novelty or the difficulty of defeating him. (There is a canard that he is an American creation. There is no evidence that he is. He did win his spurs in the Arab world's equivalent of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade-the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan-but U.S. money and arms went to the Afghan freedom fighters through the Pakistani military.) While he is a freelancer, bin Laden is dependent on the support of renegade governments, such as Afghanistan's and Sudan's, against which we have leverage. We can target his physical assets by military or covert means and his financial assets through other controls (as Mr. Clinton has also done). His Islamist revolutionary ideology is increasingly discredited in the Muslim world, even in Iran. Defeating him will take time, but it will be done.


http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZjUyM2IxOTcwOGRkNDBkZGI3MzVjOWY2OTMxM2MxNTM=
From the AP coverage, August 21, 1998:


Lawmakers from both parties rallied behind Clinton's decision. House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., called it "the right thing to do."

"We just had to do it, we just had to," said Rep. Ike Skelton, ranking Democrat on the House National Security Committee. "We're quite sure the attacks in Africa came from these two places, and we had to strike back."

Clinton telephoned several congressional leaders before the strikes, including Gingrich and Senate Republican leader Trent Lott of Mississippi. En route to Washington, Clinton again called congressional leaders as well as British Prime Minister Tony Blair, said White House press secretary Mike McCurry.

In a confluence of dramatic moments, Clinton announced the U.S. bombings on the same day that former White House intern Monica Lewinsky testified for a second time to the grand jury investigating her relationship with Clinton. On Monday, Clinton had made a nationally televised admission of having had sexual relations with Ms. Lewinksy.

Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., suggested that Clinton may have acted precipitously in an attempt to "focus attention away from his own personal problems."
181 posted on 09/24/2006 3:40:59 PM PDT by finnman69 (cum puella incedit minore medio corpore sub quo manifestu s globus, inflammare animos)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: daylate-dollarshort
Aw double fudge!!! Comcast cable here in the Atlanta area has been breaking up all day!! Called them and OFCOURSE they claim THEY aren't having any problems. Looks like we'll be missing the show. Damn, damn, double-damn....AW SHI...................................... :^(

FOX is replaying this at 10pm tonight.

182 posted on 09/24/2006 3:41:34 PM PDT by Dianna
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Txsleuth

Text Of Clinton Statement On Iraq

Text of President Clinton's address to Joint Chiefs of Staff and Pentagon staff:


snip


If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program. We want to seriously reduce his capacity to threaten his neighbors.

I am quite confident, from the briefing I have just received from our military leaders, that we can achieve the objective and secure our vital strategic interests.

Let me be clear: A military operation cannot destroy all the weapons of mass destruction capacity. But it can and will leave him significantly worse off than he is now in terms of the ability to threaten the world with these weapons or to attack his neighbors.


http://tinyurl.com/q55or


183 posted on 09/24/2006 3:42:14 PM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: WVNan

I agree with you...he was acting...he loved every minute of it.


184 posted on 09/24/2006 3:42:25 PM PDT by ladiesview61
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: paltz
I wish chris asked him which republican "IN PARTICULAR"

Yes, questions about the GORLICK WALL & Sandy Berger

A British Muslim trained to be a 9-11 hijacker told an FBI counterterrorism taskforce in 2000 of a plot by terrorists to fly passengers planes into buildings, but the agents did not believe him.

Check out this Funny Movie

185 posted on 09/24/2006 3:42:29 PM PDT by Major_Risktaker ("If a fence doesn't work then why does Bush have one around the White House?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Dianna

Sure it will be on YouTube within the hour if it is not already.


186 posted on 09/24/2006 3:42:49 PM PDT by RasterMaster (Winning Islamic hearts and minds.........one bullet at a time!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: finnman69

Good research. Yes, it looks like those "right-wingers" are the ones who actually supported Clinton's actions against terrorism, and it was the RINOs who objected.


187 posted on 09/24/2006 3:42:57 PM PDT by rightwingintelligentsia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: DTogo

"You did your nice little Conservative hit-job."


Hit-job..that's rich coming from Clinton. The name Vince Foster comes to mind...


188 posted on 09/24/2006 3:43:26 PM PDT by FarRightFanatic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: ark_girl

Apparently, both billy and his wife are real hot-heads. When he was President, the media covered up for his outbursts. They don't all feel the need to do so anymore (although I think CNN, ABC or NBC wouldn't have aired that interview).

Bush, Cheney and Condi are all a lot cooler. They give respect to the opposite opinions (although I often wish they wouldn't)


189 posted on 09/24/2006 3:43:52 PM PDT by speekinout
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: blogblogginaway

2 years or so from now, when this interview is long forgotten, and we read about Chris Wallace's demise in a mysterious plane crash, then we'll know how upset Der Schlickmeister REALLY was.


190 posted on 09/24/2006 3:44:19 PM PDT by golas1964 ("He tasks me... He tasks me, and I shall have him!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Humidston

According to Rich Miniter, author of "Losing Bin Laden," Clinton's top national security advisers made the following classic Democrat excuses for doing nothing in response to the Cole attack:

# Attorney General
Janet Reno "thought retaliation might violate international law and was therefore against it."

#
CIA Director George Tenet "wanted more definitive proof that bin Laden was behind the attack, although he personally thought he was."

# Secretary of State
Madeleine Albright "was concerned about the reaction of world opinion to a retaliation against Muslims and the impact it would have in the final days of the Clinton Middle East peace process." (How did that turn out, by the way? Big success, I take it? Everybody over there all friendly with one another?)

# Secretary of Defense William Cohen "did not consider the Cole attack 'sufficient provocation' for a military retaliation."

Less than a year after Clinton's final capitulation to Islamic terrorists, they staged the largest terrorist attack in history on U.S. soil. The Sept. 11 attack, planning for which began in the '90s, followed eight months of
President Bush -- but eight years of
Bill Clinton.

Clinton's own campaign adviser on Iraq, Laurie Mylroie, says Clinton and his advisers are "most culpable" for the intelligence failure that allowed 9/11 to happen.


http://tinyurl.com/onp2d


191 posted on 09/24/2006 3:45:34 PM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: tina07
Unfortunately, John O'Neill lost his life on 9/11 and is unable to counter Clinton's deceptions. Condi didn't fire Clark for nothing. But Clinton has reenlisted him to lend credence to his legacy.

Don't mean to sound harsh but 'Dead men don't tell tales'.
192 posted on 09/24/2006 3:46:40 PM PDT by BIGLOOK (Keelhauling is a sensible solution to mutiny.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: sirchtruth

Sorry Bill...
The LIBERAL LEFT destroyed your legacy....

The 24/7 never-ending parade of hatred and LIES,Lies,lies, forces Americans to look back at that period to find the truth.....


193 posted on 09/24/2006 3:46:47 PM PDT by tcrlaf (VOTE DEM! You'll Look GREAT In A Burqa!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: A Citizen Reporter
Did anyone here him say that after the Cole he could not get the CIA or FBI certify that it was bin laden. He said this twice. What did he want some sort of sworn certification?

What a putz
194 posted on 09/24/2006 3:47:46 PM PDT by truthandlogic (you are a free individual, with a free will, endowed by your creator with certain inalienable rights)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Funny stuff.


195 posted on 09/24/2006 3:49:52 PM PDT by Krodg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers

"It's tough trying to clean up your "legacy"."


Are you referring to Monica's "spinach dip" stain?


196 posted on 09/24/2006 3:51:25 PM PDT by FarRightFanatic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: the invisib1e hand

If by ''staged'' you mean that he had this all planned out(to have an angry, over the top outburst) in case he got asked a question like this about 911. Then yeah, I agree. Just go to some of the DUmmie web sites today to see how wonderful they think it is that someone finally told Fox News off! The left hates and despises Fox News with a passion! So by going off on Chris Wallace he does two things, he pleases the left,(who is angry at Hillary for their perceived notion that she supports the war in Iraq)! And he gets the left for the last 3 days to talk of nothing else but the name ''Clinton'')! Every move this guy makes is calculated in my opinion!


197 posted on 09/24/2006 3:52:00 PM PDT by Bush gal in LA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: BIGLOOK
Don't mean to sound harsh but 'Dead men don't tell tales'.

No, but if the moonbats had their way, they'd be able to vote too.

198 posted on 09/24/2006 3:53:26 PM PDT by TeddyCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: truthandlogic
The Cole was bombed in Oct. right before the election, and I guarantee that Bubba never once gave it another thought after he appeared at Norfolk for the memorial service.
199 posted on 09/24/2006 3:53:41 PM PDT by Coldwater Creek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: kcvl
You know what I find strange about this interview?

clinton had a large cabinet of advisors, which he never once mentioned by name. Did you hear him say Maddy Allbright, Janet Reno, Jamie Gorelick, Sandy Berger, Bill Richardson???

No, the names that he used were "Bill Cohen".....and he wanted some kind of points for appointing a Repub Sec Def, he mentioned Richard Clarke, Richard Clarke, Richard Clarke.

He spoke of Republican senators who are going against the administration.

He certainly didn't help the democrat party with this tirade. It was, as usual, all about him, and what is crumbling around him.

200 posted on 09/24/2006 3:53:58 PM PDT by A Citizen Reporter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 101-150151-200201-250 ... 501-547 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson