Thank you, finally some one with correct information on here. Clinton's have always covered -up things that make them look bad and try to point the finger at some one else.
2007-01-28 13:31:37
·
answer #1
·
answered by m c 5
·
4⤊
4⤋
Clinton become extra focussed on the "little terrorist" in his pants than the terrorist that were planning 9-11. Remix version is a Clinton apologist. all of us with 1/2 a mind is conscious the direction to 9-11 all started contained in the Clinton Oval workplace. you in user-friendly words ought to adhere to the stains he left contained in the carpet and on dresses for 8 lengthy years ignoring the terrorist probability at the same time as he pursued overweight fawning interns and continuously lied to federal grand jurys.
2016-12-03 04:19:33
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Oh do you remember from 1997 when he attempted to eliminate Bin Laden, the venerable repugnican led congress balked at every turn. When Clinton wanted to go after him in Afghanistan and bomb him out of existence- Arlen Specter R-PA was among those who shouted " Wag the Dog", "No bombs for Monica"? Do you remember when the Repunican party kept on complaining about Clinton's obesession with Al Qaeda and protested that there was no way they the Congress would allow Mr Clinton to waste tax payers
2007-01-28 13:54:53
·
answer #3
·
answered by thequeenreigns 7
·
2⤊
2⤋
Ok first of all Fox news is not creditable so don't use same with that ABC "documentary," which was called a movie not doc. Next no one in America knew how evil Bin laden was. Most of America never even heard of him till September 11th, 2001. Now in response to you I leave you with a question. Why did this President allow a private jet filled with a relative of Bin Laden along with numerous other Saudi's leave the country when all other planes were grounded on 9/11?
2007-01-28 13:35:38
·
answer #4
·
answered by slickny8111 3
·
2⤊
5⤋
Yep I have heard the tape too.
I don't fault Clinton for letting bin laden go.
He was showing his love and figure if he did that he would attack the U.S.
Of course we seen how Bill pitch his hissy fit when confronted on Fox.
Oh well liberals will keep on believing he is the best thing that ever happen to them.
2007-01-28 13:33:59
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
4⤋
Do the republicans know they sent 10k people to find Osama and 100k people to find Saddam even though Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11?
Your question is just spin. Fact is, Osama had done nothing major until near the end of Clinton's presidency, so risking losing international support was not worth getting Osama at the time.
2007-01-28 13:30:35
·
answer #6
·
answered by Justin H 2
·
3⤊
6⤋
Dems choose to ignore this fact; similar to Clinton ignoring the first 4 prior attacks on the US.
2007-01-28 13:28:27
·
answer #7
·
answered by ValleyR 7
·
5⤊
4⤋
Fox News What a joke! Saturday Cartoons are more reliable then Fox.
2007-01-28 13:48:09
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
4⤋
will republicans realize clinton is not president anymore. that abc series was proven to be wrong and so many levels. Besides I though abc was part of that liberal media republicans dont listen too.
2007-01-28 13:30:21
·
answer #9
·
answered by sydb1967 6
·
2⤊
5⤋
Clintoon let Osama go. America knows the truth thanks to the brilliant documentary "The Path to 9/11".
History will NEVER forgive Clintoon.
2007-01-28 13:27:29
·
answer #10
·
answered by x 4
·
5⤊
5⤋