Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Sept. 11 Panel Addresses Lewinsky Scandal

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 10:05 AM
Original message
Sept. 11 Panel Addresses Lewinsky Scandal
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Sept-11-Lewinsky.html

<snip>
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Sept. 11 commission's final report says there's no evidence suggesting President Bill Clinton ordered airstrikes on Osama bin Laden targets to distract attention from his affair with Monica Lewinsky.

But the report says the affair, coupled with other issues, likely affected later discussions about using force against the terrorist leader.

<snip>
The commission's final report treads lightly on Clinton's affair with the one-time White House intern, which led to his impeachment and later acquittal by the Senate. Although only tiny sections of the report refer to the affair, the commissioners spent a lot of time discussing how and whether to discuss it in the report, deciding, in the end, that it was important to do so.

<snip>
While the commission said it found no reason to doubt the motivation of Clinton and his advisers, their report stated: ``The failure of the strikes, the 'wag the dog' slur, the intense partisanship of the period and the nature of the al Shifa evidence likely had a cumulative effect on future decisions about the use of force against bin Laden. Berger told us that he did not feel any sense of constraint.''



...more
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ayeshahaqqiqa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 10:07 AM
Response to Original message
1. Hatred of Clinton
by the Rethugs tied his hands and distracted him with the bogus impeachment. I really think bin Laden would have been captured if Bill had been allowed to govern.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 10:10 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. apparently
it wasn't in the repugs' best interst to allow clinton to do that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phillybri Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 10:12 AM
Response to Original message
3. I hope it was worth it to the Repubs...
Fucking idiots...:grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lovedems Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 10:16 AM
Response to Original message
4. If you have seen the documentary, "Black Hawk Down" you will
notice at the end during a commentary by Mark Bowden and others familiar with that moment in History that Clinton wouldn't have been able to fight the insurgents even if he wanted to BECAUSE THE REPUBLICAN CONTROLLED CONGRESS NEVER WOULD HAVE ALLOWED IT. Now, the republicans use that against him. He left Somalia in shame and it is all his fault. People seem to forget (and the republicans seem to forget) it was a republican controlled congress and their actions should be held accountable as well.

It is just amazing to me that Clinton takes the blame for things that were clearly the responsibility of the republican controlled congress. They screwed us then and they are screwing us now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 10:19 AM
Response to Original message
5. The GOP Monica hysterics was out and out TREASON.
They knew they were being an unnecessary distraction and creating a circuslike atmosphere but they LOVE money and their own power more than this country.

They are traitors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mr_Spock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. Yes, Repugs are TRAITORS and they should ALL be run out of town
on a rail. They hold a lot of the responsibilty for allowing us to be attacked on 9/11 and they know it. :mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 10:43 AM
Response to Reply #7
10. ESPECIALLY those Rethugs on the Intelligence Committee. They KNEW
the truth to what Clinton was doing and they chose to go along with the program to bring Clinton down instead of Bin Laden.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snippy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 10:59 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. Excellent point. And true for both houses. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #11
16. We need the Rethug list from the 1998 Intel Committee.
This should be a HUGE story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Old and In the Way Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #10
14. No investigation into anything Clinton was too small for the
Republicans to start......amazing how nothing motivates them today to investigate Bush.

Remember, lying about consensual sex is bad and is an impeachable offense, but lying about War that kills 10s of thousands of people is no reason to question the pResident.

Republicans have put their interests in front of this country's since 92, they have enabled this fraudulent administration to declare a Contract on America and they are too deeply complicit or too cowardly to stop it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 05:11 PM
Response to Reply #14
18. Could those investigations been purposeful to KEEP Bin Laden safe
for the BFEE who was no doubt orchestrating ALOT of the players involved.....Like Ted Olsen and his ilk, the congressional wingnuts and the rightwing journalists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ScreamingMeemie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 10:22 AM
Response to Original message
6. Oh please...I was wondering whe Clinton's penis was going to be
brought into it. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zomby Woof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 11:13 AM
Response to Reply #6
15. so to speak
:o

(YOu are very Freudian today... that was a nice slip!) :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zwielicht Donating Member (120 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 10:27 AM
Response to Original message
8. reading between the lines, this could...
Edited on Sat Jul-24-04 10:34 AM by zwielicht
no, wait, i think they are ignorant enough not to even think of what this would mean if they applied the same measures to *
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leesa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 10:40 AM
Response to Original message
9. Of course this is important...never mind the rampant treason occuring
in front of our eyes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lovedems Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 11:03 AM
Response to Original message
12. One quick question. I saw a news clip that Shelby (r-alabama) is being
Edited on Sat Jul-24-04 11:12 AM by lovedems
investigated. Apparently on September 10, 2001 2 congressional sources said, "The match begins tomorrow" and "tomorrow is zero day." Somebody knew this was going to happen! They had information that it was going to happen on 9-11!

That is just freaking creepy! What did they know? Talk about LIHOP! When I saw that, it sent chills down my spine. WTF is going on? Is this addressed in the 911 report?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Paradise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 11:10 AM
Response to Original message
13. Anyone out there have any civil suits they can bring against * ?
The "Supremes" said it was okay. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 11:28 AM
Response to Original message
17. I want to know why
the friggin' Democrats on the 911 Committee let the friggin' republicans get away with this BULLSHIT!!!!!!! The whole report is a whitewash of what happened. The WH is THRILLED to death about the report. And the damn Democrats on the committee went along with it? WHY? WHY? WHY? So they could appear to me bipartisan? FUCK bipartisanship!

There wouldn't have been any "Wag The Dog" accusations IN THE FIRST PLACE had the fucking republicans not investigated the Clinton Administration for 8 FUCKING years!!!! G-d I hate our corrupt government!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Minstrel Boy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 06:09 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. Because the Democrats were chosen by the White House.
With the exception of Max Cleland - and he's long gone - all the appointments have a compromised history, Democrat or Republican. Lee Hamilton has covered-up the Bush family high crimes for years (Iran Contra and October Surprise, for instance), and the (D) after his name means shit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ck4829 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 06:18 PM
Response to Original message
20. Blame the 'vast right conspiracy'
They persecuted Clinton and now they're profitting from 9/11. 2 wars, the Patriot Act, etc., etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 16th 2024, 12:23 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC