Bill Clinton interview with Chris Wallace

#26
#26
He could have answered the question clamly without all the "Fox inspired by right wingers" comments. He looked goofy. He tried to give off the impression that no one has done as much as he has done to get Bin Laden.

He looked downright idiotic.
 
#27
#27
I seriously doubt he was appealing to the typical FNC viewer. Seeing how he reacted after the "Path to 9/11" issue, this could be expected.

I guarantee you Bush would do the same thing if pushed. It's funny to see Bush clinch his teeth and interrupt Wolf Blitzer when challenged on bigger threats from other nations. Bush wasn't exactly 'friendly' either.

I imagine this will give the talk radio crowd something to harp on for another week. There seems to be an obsession with Clinton that somehow he's still responsible for all of the negative in the country. Any time someone on the Right has been criticised the popular response always is "Well look what Clinton did" or "Clinton was worse", etc. If it weren't for Bill and Hillary, the news would be dead and talk radio would be out of business.
 
#28
#28
CSpindizzy said:
I seriously doubt he was appealing to the typical FNC viewer. Seeing how he reacted after the "Path to 9/11" issue, this could be expected.

I guarantee you Bush would do the same thing if pushed. It's funny to see Bush clinch his teeth and interrupt Wolf Blitzer when challenged on bigger threats from other nations. Bush wasn't exactly 'friendly' either.

I imagine this will give the talk radio crowd something to harp on for another week. There seems to be an obsession with Clinton that somehow he's still responsible for all of the negative in the country. Any time someone on the Right has been criticised the popular response always is "Well look what Clinton did" or "Clinton was worse", etc. If it weren't for Bill and Hillary, the news would be dead and talk radio would be out of business.
Click to expand...

As I said, he reaction reminded of the one where he points his finger and says "I did not have sexual relations...". Similar reactions and we see how truthful he was in that one. Looks as though he is trying the same thing here.
 
#29
#29
TheGimp said:
I'm not the biggest Clinton fan, but that interview made me respect him more. Fox News is propoganda garabage, and I'm glad he stuck it to them in that interview.
Click to expand...
So, this was a propoganda thing? Here are the questions asked of Clinton and earlier, in 2004, asked to Rumsfeld:
Here’s what Wallace asked Clinton today:
[H]indsight is 20 20 . . . but the question is why didn’t you do more, connect the dots and put them out of business?
​
And here is what Wallace asked Donald Rumsfeld on the March 28, 2004 episode of Fox News Sunday:
I understand this is 20/20 hindsight, it’s more than an individual manhunt. I mean — what you ended up doing in the end was going after al Qaeda where it lived. . . . pre-9/11 should you have been thinking more about that?
. . . .
What do you make of his [Richard Clarke’s] basic charge that pre-9/11 that this government, the Bush administration largely ignored the threat from al Qaeda?
. . . .
Mr. Secretary, it sure sounds like fighting terrorism was not a top priority.
​
Click to expand...


​
 
#30
#30
The former President, who was accused of rape, should not go around touching anyone. You do not touch the interviewer!

Matt Drudge
Click to expand...

Everyone seems to be dismissing the fact that Clinton made physical contact with Wallace several times during the interview.
 
#33
#33
Interesting that OWB always has an opinion on everything, except for when one of "his people" do something wrong or stupid, and then all he can do is say there was "an agenda".

LOL


Typical Liberal though.
 
#36
#36
Yeah good job in calling me out, you owned me about as much as Wallace owned Clinton in that interview.
 
#37
#37
While we're at it, why don't all of you list the things that Bush did to try and get Bin Laden from January 2001 to September 2001. I mean, since it was so obvious that Bin Laden was a huge threat and Clinton didn't do enough to kill or capture him.
 
#38
#38
TheGimp said:
They probably just expected him to weasel around the questions like the current administration. They asked tough questions, and they got tough answers. Now, they act as though he went crazy.
Click to expand...

He was very unprofessional. I have never seen president Bush act that way, or any of his appointees, for that matter.
 
#39
#39
I think there's plenty of blame to go around between both administrations.

The question though is why did Clinton decide to give such an over the top performance? I don't for one second believe that he did not go into the interview with the intention of going ballistic at the first mention of the terror issue. And as much as he ripped Fox News, Fox News is the one place he can go ballistic and get a free pass.
 
#40
#40
OWB said:
While we're at it, why don't all of you list the things that Bush did to try and get Bin Laden from January 2001 to September 2001. I mean, since it was so obvious that Bin Laden was a huge threat and Clinton didn't do enough to kill or capture him.
Click to expand...


Let me tell you bud...there are things that happen almost every day that you, me or most Americans dont know about when it comes to covert operations. My guess is there have been quite a few attempts on bin ladens life. :salute:
 
#41
#41
herksrus said:
Let me tell you bud...there are things that happen almost every day that you, me or most Americans dont know about when it comes to covert operations. My guess is there have been quite a few attempts on bin ladens life. :salute:
Click to expand...

And this same statement can be applied to Clinton as well. Funny how positives are only applied to one side and negatives to the other.
 
#48
#48
Yeh OWB, don't worry too much, I think OS hates Ainge more than he does you.................................so there is a bright side.....
 
#49
#49
The White House if fighting back...it only took 5 years for them to realize they can't just sit idly by and be the whipping boy for jaded Americans.
September 25, 2006 -- Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice yesterday accused Bill Clinton of making "flatly false" claims that the Bush administration didn't lift a finger to stop terrorism before the 9/11 attacks. Rice hammered Clinton, who leveled his charges in a contentious weekend interview with Chris Wallace of Fox News Channel, for his claims that the Bush administration "did not try" to kill Osama bin Laden in the eight months they controlled the White House before the Sept. 11 attacks.
"The notion somehow for eight months the Bush administration sat there and didn't do that is just flatly false - and I think the 9/11 commission understood that," Rice said during a wide-ranging meeting with Post editors and reporters.
"What we did in the eight months was at least as aggressive as what the Clinton administration did in the preceding years," Rice added.
The secretary of state also sharply disputed Clinton's claim that he "left a comprehensive anti-terror strategy" for the incoming Bush team during the presidential transition in 2001.
"We were not left a comprehensive strategy to fight al Qaeda," Rice responded during the hourlong session.





RICE BOILS OVER AT BUBBA By IAN BISHOP Post Correspondent - New York Post Online Edition: Seven
Click to expand...
 
#50
#50
Part of me thinks Clinton went over the top on purpose. He knew it would get plenty of airplay close to election time. It could almost be seen as an ad for the Democratic party. He looked all mean and talked about how tough he was on Bin Laden.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top