lie in his interview with Fox?
http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=topNews&storyid=2006-09-26T095436Z_01_N26315500_RTRUKOC_0_US-SECURITY-CLINTON-RICE.xml&src=rss
2006-09-26 00:56:17 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Carbonia, you have got to be joking. What the heck did that news reporter do to bully Clinton besides ask him questions? Clinton lied a lot in that entire interview. He said that he gave them the word to kill Osama, yeah right, if he had, why didn't they? He is the head of the US, CIA and the FBI will listen to him. Plus, killing Osama at the time would have been a bad thing and not on their plans, they just wanted to capture him. I just wanted the truth, and provided more lies
2006-09-26 01:06:29 · update #1
so, carbonia, you are saying that all Fox reporters are conservative right wingers who want to attack people who dont believe what they do. Please, tell me what Wallace did wrong that he attacked Clinton? Again, another person believes more in what they want then facts, fine, i don't care
2006-09-26 01:21:35 · update #2
I don't like the slime bag, however, hindsight is everything. We need to be very careful not to judge a leader for mistakes he may or may not have made. In honesty, this whole finger pointing game got started with the liberal members of congress pointing fingers at Bush for 9/11. This is also a complete lie. Then the Reps started pointing fingers at Bill. And although I agree with the fact that he did little to nothing to stop these guys, I disagree with pointing fingers at him for it. He did what he thought best given the data in front of him, the same thing Bush is doing right now. As Rice said on 60 mins, new information can change what we do tomorrow, but not what we did yesterday.
2006-09-26 01:00:56 · answer #1 · answered by AT 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Why do you think? He just got made to lok bad after the whole "Path to 9/11" movie aired on ABC.
The 9/11 Commission Report made it look like he wasn't serious about terrorism, and had a tepid response to it at best.
He was doing damage control, pure and simple. Do you think it was an accident that Clinton had a big deal with Laura Bush a couple of days ago (right around the time the 9/11 movie was airing on ABC?).
As somebody else pointed out - he showed the same sort of bluster that he did when he denied having a relationship with Monica Lewinsky.
He's doing damage control pure and simple. He knew, when he went into the interview, that there was a real possibility that he would get asked a question like that - and so he got ready, acted like he had all sorts of "righteous indignation" and lashed out at Chris Wallace.
He did it for spin control, and to give some "red meat" to liberals.
2006-09-26 08:09:07 · answer #2 · answered by Flint 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Billy-Bob got his panties in a wad because his normal boosters at ABC News dissed him on their run-up to 9-1-1 made for TV docudrama movie and Hillary hasn't been all snuggly since he started giving Monica flute lessons and let the whole world find out about it (Did that blue dress ever show up on EBAY?). He kept quoting Richard Clarke, who has changed his story of what he did more times than John Kerry (if that's even possible).
2006-09-26 08:37:03 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The bigger question is why this cheap attack at this time when an investigative report is about to be released that shows Bush for the fraud that he is?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15004160/
Postnote: apparently you didn't pay much attention to the actual interview. He explained why they didn't attack Bin Ladin. I think the guy has more guts for standing up during that cheap attack by Wallace and just goes to show the kind of character he has, unlike Bush. You watch...I'm betting that this interview goes on to really spur people to get the Bush machine out of office. People who have a lick of common sense see a man defending himself against a propagandist. Conservatives...well I'll let the rest of you judge for yourself. Just take a look at this question.
PNote 2: C'mon...how can you seriously watch that interview and say that Wallace wasn't taking a cheap shot. He even admitted that it was a strongly biased question on his part. Like I said before...did you really watch this interview or are you just the typical brainwashed conservative that only sees what they want to see?
Wheeee...check this out. Unbiased my....
http://break.com/index/fair_and_balanced.html
2006-09-26 08:02:53 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Seeing as there was a Federal Warrant out on UBL since 1998 , Clinton had only to say , "GET HIM "!
That was before UBL ran to Afganistan to hide after 911.
Clinton could of had him and based on the warrant , thrown his @SS in jail for 30 years .
Clinton Defenders , read some history !
2006-09-26 08:35:48 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
One thing that wasnt mentioned.
Obviously he lied abotu binladen because it was CLINTON himself who gutted CIA & other budgets which is why CIA & others couldnt get binladen.
By doing that he is to blame a lot more than Bush.
Bush immediately increased CIA & other budgets as soon as he got in, but it wasnt till 9/11 that the budget was even in.
2006-09-26 08:24:19 · answer #6 · answered by pcreamer2000 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Good question. Makes one wonder. I think another good question is, why did he agree to the interview in the first place.
With all the liberals eager to blame Bush for everything, seems like Clinton could've just kept quiet. Puzzling.
2006-09-26 08:08:19 · answer #7 · answered by ? 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Faux News. Nice. I believe the Liberals gave Coulter the same treatment and made her run like a baby. At least Clinton stayed and fought.
2006-09-26 08:32:07 · answer #8 · answered by Huey Freeman 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Pathological liers believe their own lies, and so, this is the reason why if you administer a lie dectector test to such a person, it will always show that he is telling the truth.
2006-09-26 07:59:47 · answer #9 · answered by WC 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Funny. Bush regime went into Afghanistan and Iraq without asking anyone's permission, and she's dissin' Clinton's plan. Good one.
2006-09-26 08:00:21 · answer #10 · answered by just browsin 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋