Sept. 26, 2006

Bill Clinton Strikes Back

The Nation: Former President Shoots Back At The 'Drive-By' Media

  • In this handout photo provided by Fox News Sunday, former President Bill Clinton responds to Chris Wallace. Photo

    In this handout photo provided by Fox News Sunday, former President Bill Clinton responds to Chris Wallace.  (AP Photo/Fox News Sunday, M.Simon)

  • Interactive William Jefferson Clinton

    Follow the ups and downs of President Clinton's years in office, see photos and learn about his life before and after the presidency.

  • Interactive Bin Laden & Al Qaeda

    Where al Qaeda operates, who's been caught, how they're financed and a timeline of attacks on Americans.

  • Interactive Hunting Bin Laden

    See the Bin Laden tapes and follow the manhunt.

(The Nation)  This column was written by John Nichols.
Regular readers of this column will know that it maintains no great affection for former President Bill Clinton. A Democratic Leadership Council stalwart, Clinton got elected president by promising health care and education for all and then proceeded to give the country fiscal conservatism and a corporate-sponsored free trade agenda. His missteps handed control of Congress to Newt Gingrich and the radical right, rendering the Democratic party largely dysfunctional at the legislative level to this day.

But there has never been any doubt that Clinton was more serious about combating terrorism than his successor, George W. Bush. Clinton actually worried about threats to the United States, while Bush dismissed warnings at precisely the moment when the threats were most serious. And, as the intelligence community now confirms, Bush's failure of focus and practice have made the Americans more vulnerable.

The fact that Bush's supremely political presidency treats "homeland security" as a slogan rather than a necessity is the fundamental flaw in the current commander-in-chief's deeply flawed tenure. And his handlers are well aware of the problem. That's why they have worked so hard, along with their amen corner in the media, to create the false impression that Clinton and the Democrats were somehow more responsible for the 9-11 terror attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon than Bush and the gang that couldn't shoot straight.

Unfortunately, the so-called "leaders" of the opposition party have done a lousy job of challenging the spin job ... until now.

Clinton used an appearance with "Fox News Sunday's" Chris Wallace to challenge the lies of the Bush administration and its media acolytes. The interview, which was broadcast over the weekend, got to the heart of what's wrong not with the Bush presidency but with a media that covers that presidency from the on-bended-knee position.

Clinton recognized that Wallace, one of the more competent members of the Fox team, was under pressure to mouth the Republican talking points that the network uses as its reference points. And the former president pounced on that vulnerability.

When Wallace started in on the "Why didn't you do more to put bin Laden and al Qaeda out of business when you were President?" line of questioning, Clinton leapt.

"Okay, let's talk about it," the former president began. "I will answer all of those things on the merits, but I want to talk about the context (in) which this (discussion) arises. I'm being asked this on the Fox network … ABC just had a right-wing conservative (program) on "The Path to 9/11" falsely claim that it was … based on the 9/11 Commission Report with three things asserted against me that are directly contradicted by the 9/11 Commission Report. I think it's very interesting that all the conservative Republicans who now say that I didn't do enough claimed (in the 1990s) that I was obsessed with Bin Laden. All of President Bush's neocons claimed that I was too obsessed with finding Bin Laden when they didn't have a single meeting about Bin Laden for the nine months after I left office. All the right-wingers who now say that I didn't do enough said (then) that I did too much. Same people."

By now, Wallace was sputtering: "I understand...," "with respect, if I may, instead of...," "But Mr. President..."

But Clinton was on a roll.

Despite Wallace's stumbling attempts to interrupt him, Clinton went year-by-year, incident-by-incident, initiative-by-initiative through his anti-terror efforts.

Continued



By John Nichols
Reprinted with permission from National Review Online.



If you like this article, check out www.thenation.com for more investigative reports, timely editorials and incisive columns

Video and Galleries from Opinion

Add a Comment See all 27 Comments
by avenger1956 September 26, 2006 4:37 PM PDT
I commend former Prsident Bill Clinton on stating the REAL facts in his interview with Chris Wallace regarding his efforts to fight terrorism and trying to do something about it way before 9/11
Reply to this comment
by solomonrex September 26, 2006 4:47 PM PDT
I think Clinton has exactly zero credibility. He's a known liar, he never succeeded in defense matters, and he never succeeded in his domestic agenda. His own staff pulled a practical joke on his last day (pulled W's off of keyboards). He made a lot of questionable pardons on his last day.

He's a known liar and a crook. Bush was misled about WMD, but so was Kerry and Mrs. Clinton.

Bill has no conviction. If he was fighting the terrorists, how did 9/11 happen?

Why didn't Bill win in Somalia, invade Afghanistan or defeat Saddam? Because he's ignorant of radical Islam. 9/11 educated both Republicans and Democrats rather quickly, but he was hardly ahead of the curve.

I'm tired of his lies and wishful thinking. If he saw the threat, why didn't he increase security? Why didn't he take the fight overseas? Why did he let Black Hawk Down happen?

His policies didn't make muslims love us and Bush didn't make them hate us.
Reply to this comment
by mwilson30058 September 26, 2006 4:52 PM PDT
As a black unemployed MISM negroe for 9 years I am appauled at the misinformation and lies being propaged by the news media and the government. One of the main points that we teach children in
a Christian Society is to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth no mater how hard and difficult it is to do so
Constantly reminding Bill Clinton and torturing Bill Clinton about the Supposed Monica Lewinsky affair is both childish and unChristian.
What Bill Clinton did in the White House was his business when he was in office and he will have to answer for his actions to his maker and not to the people of the United States for you have put aside the right to his privacy and his personal space by discussing what does not concern us.
To set up an ambush on a decent person and distorting his record to suit political purposes is both childish and immature. We will all have to answer for our actions later, and right now a lot of people smell like roasting beef
Reply to this comment
by one_american September 26, 2006 4:58 PM PDT
Clinton's own advisor says he is a liar:

http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/455911p-383523c.html
Reply to this comment
by tnannie September 26, 2006 5:10 PM PDT
"But there has never been any doubt that Clinton was more serious about combating terrorism than his successor, George W. Bush. "

Thanks for the comic relief, Mr. Nichols! As far as one-liners go, that's one of the best I've heard.

~Annie
Reply to this comment
by torti151 September 26, 2006 5:13 PM PDT
I was so pleased that President Clinton finally spoke up on this, with great dissapointment I have watched the media shrug it's duty over the past years.

Perhaps now some of the media will think about factual reporting of events.

Tom Lemke

Chesterfield, Missouri.
Reply to this comment
by graywebster September 26, 2006 5:23 PM PDT
Early in the interview, Chris Wallace asked Clinton what the difference was between being President and being a former president. This interview told me something he didn't mention: now he doesn't have to worry anywhere nearly as much about polls or elections or congressional votes any more. He can speak the truth, do the right thing, and not let snotty media personalities bully him. This was an amazing and inspiring thing to watch.
Reply to this comment
by tejasdemo September 26, 2006 5:29 PM PDT
Bill Clinton is the man ! He is the main man. Republicans are just a bunch of crooks and liars. They have nothing at all to say except to constantly try to pin the crime on somebody else. It is time the news media in this country got their balls back.
Reply to this comment
by tejasdemo September 26, 2006 5:31 PM PDT
I was completely inspired too ! It was beautiful to watch.
Reply to this comment
by drgoodwin12 September 26, 2006 6:32 PM PDT
If you had read Against All Enemies then you would know Clinton considered Bin Laden and Al Queda the major priority of the U.S. in fighting the next war. He tried to take him out and got siderailed by the Republican Party for obsessing with Bin Laden and For the Lewisky affair. Now do 2 things,get out and vote and For everyone that is against Bush because he deliberately mislead us into war in Iraq,go online and contribute $10,25 or any amount of money you can afford to the Democratic Party and do so before the elections.There are good republican senators like Specter and Warner however in order for this country to change course we have to change it's leadership first.It's crunch time for the elections and in order to restore this country we need new leadership in the house and senate.
Reply to this comment
by observertrue September 26, 2006 7:00 PM PDT
Bill's List:

1. Confabulate with Monica
2. Confound Congress
3. Cuckold Hillary
4. Conspire Cover-up
5. Contrive Plausibilty
6. Contraindicate Culpability
7. Collect Contributions
8. Cancel Capitolism
9. Concoct Contrition
10. Capture Bin Laden
Reply to this comment
by rsm512 September 26, 2006 7:43 PM PDT
I am so sick and tired of watching the GOP wipe the ground with the democrats and get away with it. George W Bush did not win the presidency in 2000. He Stole it. Does any body remember that his brother Jeb is the Gov of Fla. They threw out the votes of thousands. In 2004 the GOP used scare tactics to stay in office. What did Bill Clinton do while in office? He flipped the national debt into a surplus. Where is it now? Education standards were on the rise. Where are they now? How many High School Students don't graduate? The envirnoment was on the forefront and not just talk. They have been taught to lie and deceive. They are following the footsteps of 'W'. So what if he couldn't keep it in his pants. That was all the GOP had on him. The reports on the USS Cole,the US Embassey in Lebonon, and 1st Twin Towers hit all verifying Al-Quida and Bin Ladin were after Clinton left office. If it were before I believe that 9/11 would not have happened. But besides - if Clinton was president when 9/11 happened would he have waited 7 minutes to respond. If Clinton was president when Katrina happened, would it have taken 4 days for federal supplies. This nation is being ruled by self indulgent quacks that couldn't even run a major league baseball franchise! Get out and vote. Change is a must if we are to survive as a nation!
Reply to this comment
by alanrobisch September 26, 2006 8:14 PM PDT
Gee Bill clinton the honest. get real. also note he was out to defend himself and I have heard people say that nothing he said was true and I have heard that everything he said was true. Knowing bill clinton he probably shaded the truth to spin it his way very simply. this is often called lying and sometimes get advertisers in trouble but this doesn't seem to bother this disbarred president.
Reply to this comment
by nynative1340 September 26, 2006 9:19 PM PDT
George's list:

1. Start fight with father over hitting trash can while drunk;
2. Get drunk;
3. Stay drunk for 20 years;
4. Join Texas National Guard to avoid Vietnam duty;
5. Leave Texas National Guard early to avoid completion of obligation;
6. Get drunk;
7. Start failing businesses using Daddy's friend's money;
8. Sell stocks early (Harkin business failing) and get slap on wrist from SEC for insider trading (sound familiar);
9. Get drunk;
10. Successfully run for gov of Texas so he can screw up Texas;
11. Unsuccessfully run for US President so he can screw up the US;
12. Get bailed out by brother Neal's state and right-wing supreme court and be appointed as president;
13. Plan a war with Iraq to avenge father's failings;
14. Act like a moron who can't read or speak proper English;
15. Ignore warnings that allow al Qaeda to attack US;
16. yada yada yada...


Reply to this comment
by frenchie777 September 26, 2006 9:52 PM PDT
John Nichols has shown his irrelevance as a journalist and CBS (Couric's Big Show) should take his salary and invest in a fact checker and get a journalist who isn't so biased. Statements like "The amen corner" and "Clinton actually worried about threats to the United States, while Bush dismissed warnings" expose Nichols as silly & uninformed. No one but John Nichols and the rest of the progressive/liberal koolaid drinkers actually believes that Clinton cared more about killing Bin Ladin especially when he never responded militarily. The Democrats (Doves) would have had heart failure and Clinton was a pacifist apeaser. If Clinton would have responded the way a real leader should have, he would have not been re-elected. As far as "Bush and the gang that couldn't shoot straight", the only people Clinton ever shot back at was Monica Lewinski & Chris Wallace
Reply to this comment
by yankeegal2 September 26, 2006 10:21 PM PDT
I bet that Chris Wallace was grateful that Slick Willy was just wagging his finger at him. Oh yeah-Chris is not a 20 year old intern, or hooker, or old lady-is there anyone Bill wouldn't nail besides Hillary? I can't even look at him without thinking of him walking around the White House with his pants around his ankles looking for his next victim. Sure he was trying to fight the war on terror-wink, wink... Although, Bin Laden does wear a dress..
Reply to this comment
by mauidave September 26, 2006 10:26 PM PDT
Mr. Clinton had disappointed many "boomers" with the Lewinski mess that tarnished his tenure. The past week has, once again, shown that he is a brilliant, persuasive man with a solid grasp of what is happening in the world.
And we still have two more years of Moe Howard in the Oval Office. God, help us!
Reply to this comment
by walt1944 September 26, 2006 10:31 PM PDT
Recently, me and the wife were eating at a resturant when this elder ditz came in and sat down, striking up a conversation with the people in the booth next to her. She claimed that George Bush was able to walk on water (what else would you expect from someone who talks to God in the White House Rose Garden and gets answers!) and his mother was the sweetest thing that walked the planet. Howard Dean, on the other hand, has totally screwed things up along with all the Democrats, Liberals, and Progressives who ever walked this planet. I suppose you could throw Jesus Christ, Buddha, and Ghandi into that crowd too! I came very close to walking up to this total airhead and asking her after 5 years, why don't we have Osama Bin Laden? Why are we in Iraq? Why is the entire world ticked off at us? Now that king George has us in a big mess, can't he and Rice do something more constructive than point fingers?
Reply to this comment
by jtkeefe September 26, 2006 11:54 PM PDT
Hooray Bill! We need a lot more of the same. We cannot let the opposition say anything they want and go unchallenged.
Reply to this comment
by mrcodpiece September 27, 2006 7:12 AM PDT
Six years after leaving office - Conservatives continue to obsess more over Clinton's *** than they do over finding Bin Ladin.
There's something mighty Freudian about that...
Reply to this comment
by beacheshuman September 27, 2006 9:26 AM PDT
How naive to think that any administration could do anything to halt the spread of insanity in this current world. Powers greater than any man or nation controls will prove that we are all just observers as the universal stage plays out. Relax, get through it, its going to get better and there's not a thing anyone can do about it.
Reply to this comment
by gina32203 September 27, 2006 10:56 AM PDT
Wow! Congratulations President Clinton! I so happy that you didn't allow that little WEASEL to unload on you!!
Reply to this comment
by mjv2944 September 27, 2006 11:56 AM PDT
Dubya is a definite zero and Clinton did not get the name "slick willie" for nothing. Clinton could talk a penguin into buying a refrigerator. But remember he is the ultimate politician, he know what to say, when to say it, and when to shut up. I think he ended up not being the liberals champion because of his fiscal conservatism, but at least he left a surplus which the so called conservatives pi--ed away in a hurry.
Reply to this comment
by energyecon September 27, 2006 1:15 PM PDT
BEN-VENISTE: Isn't it a fact, Dr. Rice, that the August 6 PDB warned against possible attacks in this country? And I ask you whether you recall the title of that PDB?

RICE: I believe the title was, "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States."

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/08/rice.transcript/
Reply to this comment
by energyecon September 27, 2006 1:16 PM PDT
What the Clinton administration left for Bushco, which they spurned...

snip

The January 25, 2001, memo, recently released to the National Security Archive by the National Security Council, bears a declassification stamp of April 7, 2004, one day prior to Rice's testimony before the 9/11 Commission on April 8, 2004. Responding to claims that she ignored the al-Qaeda threat before September 11, Rice stated in a March 22, 2004 Washington Post op-ed, "No al Qaeda plan was turned over to the new administration."

Two days after Rice's March 22 op-ed, Clarke told the 9/11 Commission, "there's a lot of debate about whether it's a plan or a strategy or a series of options -- but all of the things we recommended back in January were those things on the table in September. They were done. They were done after September 11th. They were all done. I didn't really understand why they couldn't have been done in February."

snip

Clarke asked on several occasions for early principals meetings on these issues, and was frustrated that no early meeting was scheduled. No principals committee meetings on Al Qaida were held until September 4th, 2001.

snip

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB147/index.htm
Reply to this comment
by jakovo-2009 September 27, 2006 2:09 PM PDT
I don't think it was a calculated reaction to Wallace. I think he (Clinton) knew he was going into hostile territory. I just think about the role of news, thier objectivity, how the 'Nation' can even be a part of the 'News opinion' team of CBS. How Fox is all about an 'agenda orientated ' spin of news. Not news. Why is there an 'opinion forum' in a straight news org? Where do we go not to hear 'spin'? Where is the news? Just the facts?
Reply to this comment
by ausmatt-2009 September 28, 2006 6:28 AM PDT
Yes he stood up for himself, but what he said were complete lies. Clinton did not have a comprehensive strategy for Al-Qaeda and Rice is completely justified in saying "We were not left a comprehensive strategy to fight al Qaeda,". Refer to this interview with Richard Clarke in 2002, the person that Clinton on numerous occassions refers to throughout the interview. It completely contradicts every Clinton says http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,115085,00.html
Reply to this comment
See all 27 Comments
  • MOST POPULAR
  • Viewed
  • Commented
Latest News
Featured Blogs