Found this article this morning via digg.com: http://www.cnn.com/US/9607/30/clinton.terrorism/

It's explosive!

Saddly the truth does not change partisan perception. If you are a Democrat you are angry with the Republican's for interfering with the safety of the country by impeaching the President Clinton over personal matters that had did not effect his official duties and if you are a Republican, you blame Clinton for his unethical and possible illigal behavior that created a situation in which he was distracted from keeping America safe by the justified critism of his actions. In the end, the truth rather then setting us free becomes just another set of chains to be cleverly used for partisan ends.

we have the inevitable swing toward how maligned Clinton was from Salon.

If you can accuse Bush of fearmongering and falsely bringing up terror attacks when it's politically convenient then you can still critcise Clinton for the timing of the various military attacks he made all around his impeachment days.

Clinton did the right things but he, of all the recent Presidents, knew when to deflect attention and was the most disingenuous about it.

Clinton knows how badly he f'd up with UBL and that's why it's such a sensitive spot for him.

your posting to Wolf "weak-kneed" Blitzer and ask him to read it on TV, you'll see why this information always goes unnoticed. Blitzer would lose his job if he took such a "partisian" attitude towards truth.

"Perceptions that the American president is less interested in the global consequences than in taking any action that will enable him to hold onto power [are] a further demonstration that he has dangerously compromised himself in conducting the nation's affairs, and should be impeached."

Very true...and George Bush should be impeached, convicted and run out of office on a rail at the earliest posible convenience.

Now they are going to use this little Clinton soundbite as a smokescreen to divert attention from their failed war and the lack of respect this administration generated from leader after leader during last week's UN opening. This administration and its supporters must go. Regime change in the Senate and Congress. That has to be the focus until November.

All we will hear until the next usable soundbite is every petty detail of Clinton's lack of whatever during his administration.

Rove must have had the big O over this interview, he can use it to divert attention from his Devil President.....

Meanwhile, have we forgotten what President Bush said about Bin Laden AFTER 9/11:

"And, again, I don't know where he is. I -- I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him," Bush, March 2002

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html

Not everything in politics is merely partisan. Some things are just objectively true (eg. After 9/11, Bush said he wasn't concerned about Bin Laden).

Which I think gets forgotten by both sides of the aisle.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts."-Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Glenn Greenwald, you've been hitting some Major League home runs in the past few posts. Big time, Babe Ruth shots.

You on the 'roids?

Before I ignore you again, I forgot your reasons why the boss didn't have a single meeting of the terrorism task force in his first 8 months in office. What were they again? I mean besides all the cedar he had to cut down at the "ranch"

...building on the previous response from "anonymous" to our beloved Joe, here's a War Room item from Tim Grieve that also hit a home run a little over 3 months ago.

- - - - - - -

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2006/06/20/911pdb/index.html

- - - - - - -

Ron Suskind, George W. Bush and the Aug. 6, 2001, PDB

Ron Suskind's "The One Percent Doctrine" is out this week, and the Washington Post's Barton Gellman says it's full of "jaw-dropping stories" about the Bush administration's war on terror.

Or lack thereof.

We've known for years now that George W. Bush received a presidential daily briefing on Aug. 6, 2001, in which he was warned: "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S." We've known for almost as long that Bush went fishing afterward.

What we didn't know is what happened in between the briefing and the fishing, and now Suskind is here to tell us. Bush listened to the briefing, Suskind says, then told the CIA briefer: "All right. You've covered your ass, now."

-- Tim Grieve

Same old, same old. I didn't say Bush was perfect. Never have.

But before 9/11 Bush was making moves to go after Al Queda. It just wasn't soon enough. And since Clinton had allowed him to become bigger and badder he has to take some, most, of the blame for this.

Ignore me all you want. Doesn't mean I'm wrong.

Same old, same old.

Getting a report saying UBL was determined to strike in the US was like getting a report that the sky was blue. It was a CYA memo.

And as we can see in current times when a terror plot is stopped before it can happen, Bush would have been critized about overreacting to the memo and trying to use fear to bolster his poll numbers.

Clinton had fantastic poll numbers, but wasn't willing to play with his "legacy" to protect the country.

Too bad he couldn't have done something more with his balls then getting them licked by an intern.

Ah, there's his legacy.

Please stop calling attention to this. When history is re-written, it must stay re-written. We have always been at war with Oceania.

exempted himself from the dialogue by being needlessly vulgar?

Sometime during the late 1990's, Osama bin Laden became convinced that the U.S. was weak, decadent and ripe for attack. What exactly gave him that idea? The Lewinsky scandal. It's easy to blame Clinton for that one, but in more patriotic times, both parties did their best to protect the President from personal embarrassment. During JFK's lifetime, his philandering was never front-page news--it wasn't in the news at all. And we were all better off for it. But in the 1990's, the Republicans went after the President over a purely personal matter and embarassed and humiliated him in front of the entire world. By destroying Clinton's reputation during his presidency, the Republicans did irreparable harm to the image and prestige of the U.S. as a whole. The entire world had a good laugh at our expense, but no one laughed harder than Osama and his allies. By dragging the President through the mud, the Republicans placed their own narrow partisan agenda ahead of the national interest. That's what emboldened Al Qaida, but they'll never admit it and they'll never learn.