In his interview with Chris Wallace:
In the interview Clinton said that during the 1990s conservatives criticized him for "obsessing" over bin Laden and "they ridiculed me for trying" to kill bin Laden.Jake Tapper of Political Punch disproves Clinton's remarks by quoting various conservatives who expressed their support of Clinton's actions:
After Clinton ordered the attacks in August 1998, ACCORDING TO THIS STORYin the Associated Press, "most lawmakers from both parties were quick to rally behind Clinton in a deluge of public statements and appearances yesterday, a marked contrast to the relatively sparse and chilly reception that greeted his Monday statement on the Lewinsky matter."Even the conservative press was supportive:
"I think the president did exactly the right thing," said House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) said. "By doing this we're sending the signal there are no sanctuaries for terrorists." Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) called the attacks "appropriate and just," and House Majority Leader Richard K. Armey (R-Tex.) said "the American people stand united in the face of terrorism."
The conservative National ReviewWROTE"Whatever one thinks of Bill Clinton, surely Sandy Berger and Bill Cohen would not take part in any wag-the-dog scenario. Republicans who suggest otherwise--including, to our astonishment and his embarrassment, the usually sober Sen. Dan Coats (R., Ind.)--should be ashamed of themselves. President Clinton should instead be commended for finally responding appropriately to a terrorist attack.It was the MSM who questioned it.
On "THE MCLAUGHLIN GROUP, Pat Buchanan said "there was every justification for it. It was a retaliatory strike, it's a pre-emptive strike, it was decided a week ahead of time, unanimously in the Ex Com of the National Security Council. There is not a scintilla of evidence that the president timed this for political reasons, and I think the Republicans who have stood behind the president in these strikes are exactly right."
I can't remember if Rush thought it was "wag the dog" or not. And I'm getting it confused with the time he bombed Iraq during the Lewinsky trial. Everyone was in agreement that was "wag the dog."
Clinton's problem is that he was a known liar, why would we believe anything that he said? Even the MSM didn't trust him. This is what happens to liars, he only has himself to blame (which he never would do, it's always someone else's fault).
Tags:
