Media critic. Invader of
SJW safe spaces.
But then again, what else have we come to expect from the serial liar? Via Reuters (emphasis added):
“The president says he’s just trying to get the rules clear about how far the CIA can go when they’re when they whacking these people around in these secret prisons,” Clinton said in NPR’s “Morning Edition” interview, recorded on Wednesday.
“If you go around passing laws that legitimize a violation of the Geneva Convention and institutionalize what happened at Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo, we’re going to be in real trouble,” he said.
I’d like President Clinton, or any of the other nimrods who are whining about the President’s attempt at making clear what interrogation tactics are ok to use on suspected terrorists to tell me exactly where in his proposal(s) is he trying to “legitimize” a “violation” of the Geneva Convention or “institutionalize” what happened at Abu Ghraib or Gitmo (and BTW, what DID happen at Gitmo? Not torture. Just aggressive interrogation tactics).
This kind of blatant dishonesty coming from so-called ‘patriots’ of this country only confuses the issue even more. What’s happening here is that Bill Clinton is doing what his party loves him to do, and that’s put a ‘concerned’ face in front of the American people to tell the DNC’s dirty, cheap lies about the President’s intent with regards to what the CIA, the military, etc should legally be allowed to do/say with suspected terrorists while in US custody.
It’s five years after 9-11 – the anniversary of which was just a little over a week ago – and Democrats (with the help of ‘moderate’ Republicans) are STILL trying to thwart every little thing the President has attempted to do in his role as President and Commander in Chief in trying to stop another 9-11 from happening.
Seeing nearly three thousand innocent people murdered (innocent people like Peter Edward Mardikian) on one otherwise beautiful Tuesday morning on our own soil had to have impacted and affected the President in ways we can only imagine. I’ll be the first to acknowledge that the administration has not been perfect in their execution of the war on terror -especially on the immigration front. But on the necessary tools to fight the war on terror -including the Patriot Act, warrantless wiretapping of suspected terrorists – he has done everything he can, in an effort to prevent a future attack from happening on our soil. Do Democrats think he wants another terrorist attack on his conscience? Whether or not they think that, they seem destined to repeat the mistakes of the past that would lead to another one by displaying a permanent, dangerous 9-10 mindset and they’ve done so by fighting him every step of the way, even accusing him six months after 9-11 of “knowing” that 9-11 was going to happen, but “doing nothing” to stop it. Why? Because they’re so desperate to regain the power they lost when Republicans gained control of Congress in 1994 and a Republican was elected in 2000 and again in 2004 as President and CIC of this country. In other words, they’ve played politics, instead of offering viable alternatives to what they have said (in much harsher words): that the President’s war on terror policies ‘aren’t working and are putting us in more danger.’
Here it is, September 2006: What is the President and his adminstration trying to do? Give the CIA, the military, and others who would be in a position to question terrorist suspects the tools they need to get the information we need to thwart another terrorist attack. What are Democrats like Bill Clinton doing? Trying to get the information they need – to thwart the President.
The contrast couldn’t be more striking.