Bill Clinton with Chris Wallace: The meltdown

I was shocked to read this transcript.

It’s an interview of former President Clinton by Fox News reporter Chris Wallace. It will be broadcast tomorrow. OH MY GOD.

Wallace asks Clinton a few questions about a 9-11 Commission finding that the Clinton administration did too little to stop Osama bin Laden. Suddenly Clinton is transformed into the paranoid Captain Queeg in “The Caine Mutiny.” You can almost hear the steel balls.

Breathless. Wallace, son of CBS’ Mike Wallace, is one of the most level-headed and even-handed newsmen on television. Clinton’s performance seemed to take his breath away:

Wallace: May I ask a general question that you can answer. The 9-11 Commission … said about you … and I quote, “The U.S. government took the threat seriously, but not in the sense of mustering anything like the kind of effort that would be gathered to confront an enemy of the first, second or even third rank.”

Clinton: That’s not true with us and bin Laden…

Wallace: Do you think you did enough, sir?

Clinton: No, because I didn’t get him.

Wallace: Right…

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, and 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…

So you did Fox’s bidding on this show. You did your nice little conservative hit job on me. But what I want to know..

Wallace: Now wait a minute, sir… I asked 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…

Wallace: We asked...

Clinton: (inaudible)

Wallace: Do you ever watch Fox News Sunday, sir?

Clinton: I don’t believe you ask them that.

Wallace: We ask plenty of questions of…

Clinton: You didn’t ask that, did you? Tell the truth.

Wallace: About the USS Cole?

Clinton: Tell the truth.

Wallace: I…with Iraq and Afghanistan there’s plenty of stuff to ask.

Clinton: Did you ever ask that? You set this meeting up because you were going to get a lot of criticism from your viewers because Rupert Murdoch is going to get a lot of criticism from your viewers for supporting my work on Climate Change. And you came here under false pretenses and said that you’d spend half the time talking about…(...)

Wallace: [laughs]

Clinton: You said you’d spend half the time talking about what we did out there to raise $7 billion dollars plus over three days from 215 different commitments. And you don’t care.

Wallace: But President Clinton… We were going to ask half the question about it. I didn’t think this was going to set you off on such a tear.

Clinton: It set me off on such a tear because you didn’t formulate it in an honest way and you people ask me questions you don’t ask the other side.

Wallace: Sir, that is not true…

Clinton: …and Richard Clarke…

Wallace: That is not true…

Clinton: Richard Clarke made it clear in his testimony…

Wallace: Would you like to talk about the Clinton Global Initiative?

Clinton: No, I want to finish this.

Wallace: All right

Clinton: All I’m saying is you falsely accuse me of giving aid and comfort to bin Laden because of what happened in Somalia. No one knew al Qaida existed then…

Wallace: Did they know in 1996 when he declared war on the U.S.? Did no one know in 1998…

Clinton: Absolutely they did.

Wallace: When they bombed the two embassies? Or in 2000 when they hit the Cole?

Clinton: What did I do? I worked hard to try and 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 never criticized President Bush and I don’t think this is useful. But you know we do have a government that think Afghanistan is one-seventh as important as Iraq. And you ask me about terror and al Qaida with that sort of dismissive theme when all you have to do is read Richard Clarke’s book to look at what we did in a comprehensive systematic way to try to protect the country against terror. And you’ve got that little smirk on your face. It looks like you’re so clever…

Wallace: [Laughs]

Clinton: 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. The entire military was against sending special forces in to Afghanistan and refueling by helicopter and no one thought we could do it otherwise… We could not get the CIA and the FBI to certify that al Qaida was responsible while I was President. Until I left office. And yet I get asked about this all the time and they had three times as much time to get him as I did and no one ever asks them about this. I think that’s strange.

Wallace: Can I ask you about the Clinton Global Initiative?

Clinton: You can.

Wallace: I always intended to, sir.

Clinton: No, you intended to move your bones by doing this first. But I don’t mind people asking me. I actually talked o the 9-11 Commission for four hours 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…where they ask me one sided questions… It always comes from one source. And so…

Wallace: I just want to ask you about the Clinton Global Initiative but what’s the source? You seem upset?

Clinton: I am upset because..

Wallace: …and all I can say is I’m asking you in good faith because it’s on people’s minds, sir. And I wasn’t…

Clinton: 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 they’ve done a serious disinformation campaign to create that impression. This country only has one person who has worked… against terror… under Reagan… only one, Richard Clarke. And all I’d say anybody who wonders whether we did wrong or right. Anybody who wants to see what everybody else did, read his book.

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. And that was wag the dog when he tried to kill him. My Republican secretary of defense — and I think I’m the only person since World War II to have a Secretary of Defense from the opposite party — Richard Clarke, and all the intelligence people said that I ordered a vigorous attempt to get Osama bin Laden and came closer apparently than anybody has since.

Wallace: All right…

Clinton: And you guys try to create the opposite impression when all you have to do is read Richard Clarke’s findings and you know it’s not true. It’s just not true. And all this business about Somalia — the same people who criticized me about Somalia were demanding I leave the next day. Same exact crowd..

Wallace: One of the…

Clinton: …So if you’re going to do this, for God's sake follow the same standards for everybody.

Wallace: I think we do, sir.

Clinton: …be fair (...)

That’s a lovely video scene to add to the Clinton Presidential Library.

Chris Wallace didn’t go off on some long tangent. He asked Clinton what amounted to one question, with a few follow-ups. Imagine the reaction had Wallace asked whether the Paula Jones suit, the Monica Lewisky affair and the impeachment distracted Clinton from al-Qaida.

As it was, Clinton’s face nearly exploded.

Frank Warner

* * *

SEE ALSO: Big mystery: Which of Chris Wallace’s words set off Bill Clinton?

SEE ALSO: Clinton boil-over boils down to this: Fox News can’t talk to Democrats, and CNN can’t talk to Republicans.

Comments

[Neo]

Now with the reported death by Typhoid of Usama bin Laden, this all seems either ironic or silly.

Karl Rove sure does work fast.

[Frank Warner]

Yes, if that report is true, and if Wallace talked with Clinton a few days later, Clinton might have found a better way to change the subject.

[jj mollo]

Blame management is the most significant work done by politicians. I agree with Clinton, and I'm not going to blame him, but I'm not going to blame the Republicans either. The government, collectively has been doing a bad job. Let's start doing a good job. Where do we go from here? That's the right question.

The first thing we have to do is recognize that neither Clinton nor Bush are to blame. The terrorists are to blame.

I think that going after Osama might have helped before 911, but afterward it was beside the point. Vengence is not a sensible war policy. We are fighting reactionary Islamist radicalism, a dangerous religiously inspired memeset with qualities akin to fascism. We need to use strategies and tactics that work. We need to address Rumsfeld's challenge of how we can prevent the cultivation of new radicals who use terrorism as a tactic, how we can shut down the madrassas.

I can understand why Clinton is so sensitive. He feels guilty. Bush too, I imagine. Bush is at least in a position where he can make up for his early laxity. Clinton can only sit on his hands. What Bush is trying to do is wage war the best way he knows how. We need to support him, and so does Clinton. And for the most part, Clinton has been reasonably supportive, especially compared to most other Democrats, including Al Gore.

[Michael]

You people really need to read the full transcript, the bits and pieces here spun by the columnist in no way shape or form can show you an objective picture.

Please visit:
http://thinkprogress.org/clinton-interview

then formulate your own opinions not one spun by a biase columnist.

[Frank Warner]

By all means, read the full transcript. I already had linked to the thinkprogress site for everyone to see.

Ask yourself this: How was it that Clinton was never asked Chris Wallace's simple question before?

Ask yourself, was the basic question, "Do you think you did enough, sir?" a legitimate question?

And is Chris Wallace a right-wing hit man? Should he have asked Clinton nothing at all? What's the point of a news interview?

[Harrison]

Actually Wallace asked a few questions he claimed "people emailed him" which CONTRADICTED the 9/11 Commission finding.

And Clinton went off on Wallace because he would never think of asking Bush, Cheney and Rice why they did NOTHING for 9 months, right up to 9/11 on terrorism. While Clinton tried to kill bin Laden, they ignored him. And they KNEW he was behind the Cole bombing, during Clinton's time that wasn't known yet.

Actually, Clinton mops up the floor with Wallace. Exposes him as a FOX Right wing hack.

[KevinK]

"Do you think you did enough, sir?" a legitimate question?

Sure it's fair, and Clinton answered it. What piss off Clinton was why FOX never bothers to ask the Bush administration that very same question. That was his beef. As you can see if you watch the interview (which is far different than reading the transcript. You can't hear Wallace squirming in the text version).

http://www.crooksandliars.com/

[Molly]

Waching the video it's a clear win for Clinton.

Nobody will be questioning the job he did on terrorism again.

[Marko]

"What Bush is trying to do is wage war the best way he knows how. We need to support him"

No we don't. His incompetent fumblings have hurt America.

"Iraq War Has Spread Terror, Agencies Say"

WASHINGTON — The war in Iraq has made global terrorism worse by fanning Islamic radicalism and providing a training ground for lethal methods that are increasingly being exported to other countries, according to a sweeping assessment by U.S. intelligence agencies.

The classified document, which represents a consensus view of all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies, paints a considerably bleaker picture of the impact of the Iraq war than Bush administration or U.S. intelligence officials have acknowledged publicly, according to officials familiar with the assessment.

http://tinyurl.com/rz64x

[Frank Warner]

The Bush administration has been asked over and over whether it believes it did enough to stop terrorism, or if it believes it's doing enough now.

See:

http://patterico.com/2006/09/24/5187/chris-wallace-has-indeed-grilled-bush-officials-about-failing-to-get-osama-before-911/

The Clinton meltdown is proof that the Democratic news media refused to ask Clinton the same obvious and important question. Clinton is so accustomed to softball questions from his Democratic friends in the press that he was shocked and insulted that someone actually asked him about his record.

A notice Clinton's paranoia. Chris Wallace a hit man for the right wing? Clinton obviously doesn't know Chris Wallace.

Why didn't CNN ever ask Clinton whether he thought he did enough to stop al-Qaida? It's not as if CNN never had a chance to ask Clinton a question.

[Christopher Taylor]

I think it's a fair statement that angering and fighting terrorists has made them more upset and frustrated, so they lash out more. The question is... is it the right thing to do, and will it ultimately make matters better?

[Frank Warner]

Clinton said: "You set this meeting up because you were going to get a lot of criticism from your viewers because Rupert Murdoch is going to get a lot of criticism from your viewers for supporting my work on Climate Change."

If Clinton truly believes that, he is plainly delusional.

Watch the interview, look at the whole transcript. To those Democrats trying to pretend Clinton made sense: At which point in the interview did Chris Wallace go too far for your taste? At exactly which point did the interview become a "conservative hit job"?

[jj mollo]

You're right Marko. We don't need to support the President. Not unless we want to get some sort of handle on the growth of Islamist fanaticism. Many people in the US think that Bush is more of a threat than the terrorists. This is the kind of thinking that causes crazy people to kill their own family members more often than any other victims.

If I were to agree that he is inept, naive, arrogant, elitist and religiously inflexible, I would still have to point out that he is the only president we have now and we're not going to get another for a couple of years. If we don't support him now, then nothing will get done -- at least nothing on our side of the ball. Bush is the Executive. He is moving in the right direction, and nursing your grudges over the results of the last two presidential elections is not going to make him any more effective.

The thing that makes fanatical movements prosper is not a just cause or anger or resentment or poverty or mighty grievances. It is success and the appearance of success. Bin Laden posed and strutted and passed out money after his successes, and all the wannabes admired him, copied him and scrambled to do his bidding. His early successes were caused by our neglect. The ongoing successes of his movement are part of a gathering momentum. The only way that they can be tamed is by regular, consistent, hard work and by our adamant refusal to permit any more successes. Every war protest in this country feeds the hopes of madmen in the Middle East and fattens their wallets. I believe in the right to protest and the necessity of a lively public debate, but it would be nice if people could come to understand what's really going on. Partisan paranoia does not make for good national policy.

[wah]

To those Democrats trying to pretend Clinton made sense: At which point in the interview did Chris Wallace go too far for your taste? At exactly which point did the interview become a "conservative hit job"?

When he lied about Somalia?

When he lied about grilling the Bush admin?

Or when he asked, basically, when Clinton stopped being in love with Bin Laden?

Chris Wallace isn't a journalist,
he's a pundit. Example of question he asked Condi Rice..

"MR. WALLACE: The Democrats' number two man in the Senate, Dick Durbin, created quite a stir this week when he compared U.S. treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo to Nazi Germany, Stalinist Russia, and the killing fields of Cambodia. Does it make it harder for you to do your job as you travel through the Mideast and push U.S. policy on human rights and democracy when a top American official says we are part of the problem? "

How about..."Do Abu Graib, Haditha, and Quantanamo make your job harder?"

One of those question implictly calls Democrats traitors. The other deals with reality.

[Neo]

CBS's "Early Show," September 25, 2006

Michael F. Scheuer, a 22-year veteran with the CIA, created and served as the chief of the agency's Osama bin Laden unit at the Counterterrorist Center. Scheuer is now known to be the anonymous author of Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror.

Transcript of the relevant portion of the interview follows:

Harry Smith: "Elizabeth Palmer live in Pakistan this morning, thank you. I'm going to go back now to Michael Scheuer once again. Let's talk about what President Clinton had to say on Fox yesterday. He basically laid blame at the feet of the CIA and the FBI for not being able to certify or verify that Osama bin Laden was responsible for a number of different attacks. Does that ring true to you?"

Michael Scheuer: "No, sir, I don't think so. The president seems to be able, the former president seems to be able to deny facts with impugnity. Bin Laden is alive today because Mr. Clinton, Mr. Sandy Berger, and Mr. Richard Clarke refused to kill him. That's the bottom line. And every time he says what he said to Chris Wallace on Fox, he defames the CIA especially, and the men and women who risk their lives to give his administration repeated chances to kill bin Laden."

Harry Smith: "Alright, is the Bush administration any less responsible for not finishing the job in Tora Bora?"

Michael Scheuer: "Oh, I think there's plenty of blame to go around, sir, but the fact of the matter is that the Bush Administration had one chance that they botched, and the Clinton Administration had eight to ten chances that they refused to try. At least at Tora Bora our forces were on the ground. We didn't push the point. But it's just, it's an incredible kind of situation for the American people over the weekend to hear their former president mislead them."

Harry Smith: "And, and, and with this also further revelation that, in fact, the war in Iraq has only exacerbated the terrorist situation. Michael Scheurer, we thank you so much for your time this morning."