What fun! I found the transcript, so I'll give my review of Clinton's comments:
WALLACE: How do you rate, compare the powers of being in office as president and what you can do out of office as a former president?
CLINTON: Well, when you are president, you can operate on a much broader scope. So, for example, you can simultaneously be trying to stop a genocide in Kosovo and, you know, make peace in the Middle East, pass a budget that gives millions of kids a chance to have afterschool programs and has a huge increase in college aid at home. In other words, you've got a lot of different moving parts, and you can move them all at once.
Oh that makes me gag. I had forgotten how shallow Clintonspeak sounds, even though I had to listen to it for 8 years. "I saved the world, Jesus and Buddha, eat your hearts out, I am soooooo wonderful by comparison!"
WALLACE: When we announced that you were going to be on "Fox News Sunday," I got a lot of e-mail from viewers. And I've got to say, I was surprised. Most of them wanted me to ask you this question: Why didn't you do more to put bin Laden and Al Qaeda out of business when you were president?
There's a new book out, I suspect you've already read, called "The Looming Tower." And it talks about how the fact that when you pulled troops out of Somalia in 1993, bin Laden said, "I have seen the frailty and the weakness and the cowardice of U.S. troops." Then there was the bombing of the embassies in Africa and the attack on the Cole.
CLINTON: OK, let's just go through that.
WALLACE: Let me — let me — may I just finish the question, sir?
And after the attack, the book says that bin Laden separated his leaders, spread them around, because he expected an attack, and there was no response.
Ooooooo. Sounds like Clinton or his friends have been reading the Leftist blogs, and Clinton is just rarin' to go on protecting his 'legacy'. Why didn't those other networks ask him about Al-Queda? Aren't they in the news? Ooops, I forgot, the media template is that all terrorism started with President Bush, so of course it would be CRAZY to ask Bill Clinton about Al Queda. Wallace should have been the THIRD television interview in the past week to be asking this, not the first. But I guess that's the conservative conspiracy...
CLINTON: OK, let's talk about it. Now, I will answer all those things on the merits, but first I want to talk about the context in which this arises.
I'm being asked this on the FOX network. ABC just had a right- wing conservative run in their little "Pathway to 9/11," falsely claiming it was based on the 9/11 Commission report, with three things asserted against me directly contradicted by the 9/11 Commission report.
And I think it's very interesting that all the conservative Republicans, who now say I didn't do enough, claimed that I was too obsessed with bin Laden. All of President Bush's neo-cons thought I was too obsessed with bin Laden. They had no meetings on bin Laden for nine months after I left office. All the right-wingers who now say I didn't do enough said I did too much — same people.
They were all trying to get me to withdraw from Somalia in 1993 the next day after we were involved in "Black Hawk down," and I refused to do it and stayed six months and had an orderly transfer to the United Nations.
OK, now let's look at all the criticisms: Black Hawk down, Somalia. There is not a living soul in the world who thought that Usama bin Laden had anything to do with Black Hawk down or was paying any attention to it or even knew Al Qaeda was a growing concern in October of '93.
This is Clinton's full response, and his first statement is a complaint that Fox News dares ask him the question? What??? Can you imagine the insane reaction Bush would get if he told a reporter they don't dare ask him certain questions? What a thin skin Clinton has, I guess he prefers adoring sycophantic reporters 100% of the time.
Then Clinton complains that "The Path to 9/11" is a "right-wing conservative" movie. He obviously didn't watch it. I did, and it spread blame around both administrations. The movie ended with a complaint that Bush and the Republican congress have not implemented "enough" of the 9/11 Commission's recommendations, and gave Bush a poor grade. That's right wing conservative? LOL
Clinton then complains that Bush had no meetings on Bin Laden for nine months. Umm, you want to compare your EIGHT YEARS to Bush's eight months? Months, years, not the same, Billy boy.
Then he pats himself on the back about an "orderly" transition in Somalia to the United Nations. This is a perfect example of a Clinton victory, where he and his team pat themselves on the back until they are BRUISED, over something that was a total disaster because of their poor micromanagement. It was the military commander on the ground who requested heavy armor for American soldiers. That request was denied by Clinton Secretary of Defense Les Aspin, who did not want America to be perceived as a "bully" beating up on some poor innocent third-world Somalis. The result? Our soldiers got dragged through the streets. Yet Clinton considers this a victory, because "I cared soooooo much! That matters more than results."
Clinton finally says that no one knew Bin Laden had anything to do with Somalia. But everyone knows Bin Laden gave John Miller a May 1998 interview where he explained:
The youth were surprised at the low morale of the American soldiers and realized more than before that the America soldiers are paper tigers. After a few blows, they ran in defeat and America forgot about all the hoopla and media propaganda after leaving the Gulf War and destroying infrastructure — and destroying baby formula factories, all civilian factories, bridges and dams that help planting food — about being the world leader, and the leader of the new world order. After a few blows, they forgot about this title and left, dragging their corpses and their shameful defeat and stopped using such titles. And they learned in America that this name is larger then them. When this took place, I was in Sudan, and this great defeat pleased me very much, the way it pleases all Muslims.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/833647/posts
CLINTON: No, no. I authorized the CIA to get groups together to try to kill him.
The CIA, which was run by George Tenet, that President Bush gave the Medal of Freedom to, he said, "He did a good job setting up all these counterterrorism things."
The country never had a comprehensive anti-terror operation until I came there.
Now, if you want to criticize me for one thing, you can criticize me for this: After the Cole, I had battle plans drawn to go into Afghanistan, overthrow the Taliban, and launch a full-scale attack search for bin Laden.
But we needed basing rights in Uzbekistan, which we got after 9/11.
The CIA and the FBI refused to certify that bin Laden was responsible while I was there. They refused to certify. So that meant I would've had to send a few hundred Special Forces in helicopters and refuel at night.
Even the 9/11 Commission didn't do that. Now, the 9/11 Commission was a political document, too. All I'm asking is, anybody who wants to say I didn't do enough, you read Richard Clarke's book.
So Bill Clinton's answer, like so much of his presidency, was "I would have loved to do X, but they wouldn't let me, I couldn't get approval, I couldn't do this, I couldn't do that, it's someone else's fault, read the book, don't blame me". That's not presidential.
CLINTON: But at least I tried. That's the difference in me and some, including all the right-wingers who are attacking me now. They ridiculed me for trying. They had eight months to try. They did not try. I tried.
So I tried and failed. When I failed, I left a comprehensive anti-terror strategy and the best guy in the country, Dick Clarke, who got demoted.
So you did Fox's bidding on this show. You did your nice little conservative hit job on me. What I want to know is ...
WALLACE: Well, wait a minute, sir.
LOL What on earth??! Just asking if Clinton could have done more to get Bin Laden, and it's a hit job? It's a question!
WALLACE: I want to ask a question. You don't think that's a legitimate question?
CLINTON: It was a perfectly legitimate question, but I want to know how many people in the Bush administration you asked this question of.
I want to know how many people in the Bush administration you asked, "Why didn't you do anything about the Cole?"
I want to know how many you asked, "Why did you fire Dick Clarke?"
I want to know how many people you asked ...
As we all know, Rumsfeld, Cheney and Bush have NEVER been asked if they could have done more to prevent 9/11! The whole Washington press corp, in Bush's back pocket! Not a peep from one of them, year after year, just meek acceptance! LOL
WALLACE: Do you ever watch "FOX News Sunday," sir?
CLINTON: I don't believe you asked them that.
WALLACE: We ask plenty of questions of ...
I've watched FoxNews Sunday for years, and I've never seen softballs directed at either party. In fact, they're extra-tough on GOP guests because of the constant whining from the Democrat blogs.
CLINTON: You didn't ask that, did you? Tell the truth, Chris.
WALLACE: About the USS Cole?
CLINTON: Tell the truth, Chris.
WALLACE: With Iraq and Afghanistan, there's plenty of stuff to ask.
CLINTON: Did you ever ask that?
What does Bush have to do with the bombing of the USS Cole? Is Clinton implying that
someone should have acted sooner than 9/11 against Al Queda and Bin Laden? But that's the precise question that sent Clinton into a tizzy over conservative conspiracies! LOL
You set this meeting up because you were going to get a lot of criticism from your viewers because Rupert Murdoch's supporting my work on climate change.
And you came here under false pretenses and said that you'd spend half the time talking about — you said you'd spend half the time talking about what we did out there to raise $7-billion-plus in three days from 215 different commitments. And you don't care.
Now it's a Rupert Murdoch conspiracy? BIll Clinton has turned down interviews with FoxNews for his entire presidency, and every year after that! I guess Murdoch made Clinton take the interview, too!
WALLACE: But, President Clinton, if you look at the questions here, you'll see half the questions are about that. I didn't think this was going to set you off on such a tear.
CLINTON: You launched it — it set me off on a tear because you didn't formulate it in an honest way and because you people ask me questions you don't ask the other side.
WALLACE: That's not true. Sir, that is not true.
Al Queda and Bin Laden existed before Bush took office. It's a fair question. Any question about what Bill Clinton did to stop them is fair. Did your presidency come with training wheels, so it's unfair to ask if you were up to the job? No, you're saving the world, bringing peace to Kosovo and the Middle East, and helping the kids, how dare anyone question that PERFECT RECORD. That's what Clinton is apparently so irate about. "I'm going to talk about how I cared so much I saveeeeeeeeeeeed the wooooooorld. Now you go and ruin it!"
WALLACE: Did they know in 2000 when he hit the Cole?
CLINTON: What did I do? What did I do? I worked hard to try to kill him. I authorized a finding for the CIA to kill him. We contracted with people to kill him. I got closer to killing him than anybody has gotten since. And if I were still president, we'd have more than 20,000 troops there trying to kill him.
Now, I've never criticized President Bush, and I don't think this is useful. But you know we do have a government that thinks Afghanistan is only one-seventh as important as Iraq.
That's a lie. Just go to Google and type "clinton criticizes bush". Bill Clinton and his Administration has repeatedly criticized President Bush's foreign policy. I imagine Clinton chuckles and says "Well I can't control what my people say about Bush, they're all adults, well some of them anyway."
And you've got that little smirk on your face and you think you're so clever. But I had responsibility for trying to protect this country. I tried and I failed to get bin Laden. I regret it. But I did try. And I did everything I thought I responsibly could.
I've never seen Chris Wallace treat anyone with disrespect. Is this how we're supposed to interpret Clinton's constant smirks through the years?
The entire military was against sending Special Forces in to Afghanistan and refueling by helicopter. And no one thought we could do it otherwise, because we could not get the CIA and the FBI to certify that Al Qaeda was responsible while I was president.
What a crybaby! Again with the "It's not my fault! They wouldn't let me do it!". I think the more accurate answer is that Clinton's
POLLSTERS told him not to go after Bin Laden. Not the FBI, not the CIA, but his sleazy political team told him it was better to leave Al Queda as a problem for the next president. And based on everything I have ever seen any Democrat/Liberal/Leftist say, this is obviously true. Every Democrat today would agree with that recommendation to Clinton because it's all they've been saying since Bush took office. Bush created it, Bush created terrorism! Nothing is Clinton's fault. How dare Wallace pierce this bubble of invulnerability!
WALLACE: Can I ask you about the Clinton Global Initiative?
CLINTON: You can.
WALLACE: I always intended to, sir.
CLINTON: No, you intended, though, to move your bones by doing this first, which is perfectly fine. But I don't mind people asking me — I actually talked to the 9/11 Commission for four hours, Chris, and I told them the mistakes I thought I made. And I urged them to make those mistakes public, because I thought none of us had been perfect.
But instead of anybody talking about those things, I always get these clever little political yields (ph), where they ask me one-sided questions. And the other guys notice that. And it always comes from one source. And so ...
So the White House is the "only source" that would like to know more about what Bill Clinton did to stop Al Queda? How 'bout every American? I wonder what Clinton's book says on the subject, probably "I was -this- close to catching Bin Laden and putting him on trial for tax evasion, but I ran out of time and Bush stole the election".
CLINTON: Well, there's a reason it's on people's minds. That's the point I'm trying to make. There's a reason it's on people's minds: Because there's been a serious disinformation campaign to create that impression.
Like the "vast right-wing conspiracy" Mrs. Clinton claimed made up the Lewinsky affair? It wasn't made up, it was Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Clinton who were the liars. So when they again tell us that this is a "serious disinformation campaign", your record is not that hot on that account.
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."
My Republican secretary of defense — and I think I'm the only president since World War II to have a secretary of defense of the opposite party — Richard Clarke and all the intelligence people said that I ordered a vigorous attempt to get bin Laden and came closer, apparently, than anybody has since.
Of course it was wag the dog! He fired cruise missiles at what he knew were empty training camps in Afghanistan, he fired cruise missiles at a Sudanese aspirin factory. "Feel good" gestures from the president who did nothing but run his foreign policy for polls and photo ops. And Bin Laden sensed
weakness.
WALLACE: I think we do. ... One of the main parts of the Global Initiative this year is religion and reconciliation. President Bush says that the fight against Islamic extremism is the central conflict of this century. And his answer is promoting democracy and reform.
Do you think he has that right?
CLINTON: Sure. To advance — to advocate democracy and reform in the Muslim world? Absolutely.
I think the question is, what's the best way to do it? I think also the question is, how do you educate people about democracy?
Democracy is about way more than majority rule. Democracy is about minority rights, individual rights, restraints on power. And there's more than one way to advance democracy.
But do I think, on balance, that in the end, after several bouts with instability — look how long it took us to build a mature democracy. Do I think, on balance, it would be better if we had more freedom and democracy? Sure I do. And do I think specifically the president has a right to do it? Sure I do.
But I don't think that's all we can do in the Muslim world. I think they have to see us as trying to get a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. I think they have to see us as willing to talk to people who see the world differently than we do.
This is all Clinton did for 8 years. Talk about how he wants democracy, didn't do
SHIT to get it for anyone. What a hero! What compassion! What love! What tolerance! He talked and talked and talked, while Al-Queda took the Middle East to hell. Now one president is cleaning up the mess, after 8 years of Clinton's aimless cruise missiles.
WALLACE: So what is the B.S.?
CLINTON: Well, every even-numbered year, right before an election, they come up with some security issue.
In 2002, our party supported them in undertaking weapons inspections in Iraq and was 100 percent for what happened in Afghanistan, and they didn't have any way to make us look like we didn't care about terror.
And so, they decided they would be for the homeland security bill that they had opposed. And they put a poison pill in it that we wouldn't pass, like taking the job rights away from 170,000 people, and then say that we were weak on terror if we weren't for it. They just ran that out.
Clinton is referrring to unionizing all the new jobs that the Department of Homeland Security would create. Which of course would be required to send all their contributions to the AFL-CIO, which then funnels it to the Democrats. Of course they struck it down, the poison pill was the sleazy Democrats trying to personally profit off of the new jobs that terror had created. Nice spin there, Slick Willy.
This year, I think they wanted to make the questions of prisoner treatment and intercepted communications the same sort of issues, until John Warner and John McCain and Lindsey Graham got in there. And, as it turned out, there were some Republicans that believed in the Constitution and the Geneva Conventions and had some of their own ideas about how best to fight terror.
Whoah! Bill Clinton just insisted a few paragraphs above that he "never criticized President Bush", yet he just says right here that Bush doesn't respect the Constitution or the Geneva Convention! Bill Clinton just can't stop lying, even from paragraph to paragraph.
But we want to implement the 9/11 Commission recommendations, which they haven't for four years.
That was the conclusion of "The Path to 9/11", the movie you just said was a right-wing conservative movie. Then you, Bill Clinton, must also be a right-wing conservative neocon Karl-Rovie hack!
We've got a huge military presence here in this campaign. And we just can't let them have some rhetorical device that puts us in a box we don't belong in.
You Democrats put yourselves in that box, on the side of Saddam Hussein, on the side of islamic terror, because that's how much you people hate Bush. You'll do anything to undermine him, even revealing national security secrets and printing them in Democrat newspapers, even if it means more Americans will die. Because the only thing that matters is getting Bush. That's a sick attitude, but that's the Democratic party of today.
WALLACE: Mr. President, thank you for one of the more unusual interviews.
CLINTON: Thanks.
The last time I saw a Democrat that combative on FoxNews Sunday was a Democrat councilwoman from the City of Chicago. Small fry. I don't think any Senator or Representative ever acted like such a defensive crybaby as Clinton did. Let alone a President.
This interview alone should merit a Nobel Peace Prize, like the politicized anti-Bush Peace Prize that Jimmy Carter was awarded.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,215397,00.html
