They've issued several preliminary factual findings and released several reports, which you've quoted from and started threads about before. It's funny how you're all over Bob Kerrey now, when he was criticizing former Clinton officials a few weeks ago, you were telling us how great he was...now he destroyed the work of the commission via an appearance on the daily show.
Who is this stupid Paul Bremer guy, oh wait that guy we hired... http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/nation/2540529 Bremer rapped Bush on terrorism pre-9/11 Associated Press WASHINGTON -- L. Paul Bremer, the U.S. administrator in Iraq, said in a speech six months before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks that the Bush administration was "paying no attention" to terrorism. "What they will do is stagger along until there's a major incident and then suddenly say, `Oh my God, shouldn't we be organized to deal with this,' " Bremer said at a McCormick Tribune Foundation conference on terrorism on Feb. 26, 2001. Bremer spoke at the conference shortly after he chaired the National Commission on Terrorism, a bipartisan body formed by the Clinton administration to examine U.S. counterterrorism policies. The remarks drew attention on the same day Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney appeared before the Sept. 11 commission to explain the precautions they took to prevent a terrorist attack after taking office in January 2001. . . .
Write again when you actually see the segment. The National Review does a nice job of distorting and taking out of context, but that segment was funny and it was redily apparent to everyone watching that Stewart was making jokes and Kerrey was laughing at them. Kerrey said very little that even approached being a disparaging remark regarding the President. Stewart, however, was cracking joke after joke, which should not come as a surprise since his show is on Comedy Central. Nice try at a spin job, though.
Sorry, but he KILLED you in the semantics game, after which you dealt a low blow at him regarding contributions (that he made through someone else, BTW). Looks like you really do follow your leash holders lead. Do you heel, roll over, and play dead, too? Fetch me the paper, moron-boy. BUSH BOBBLE HEAD
You couldn't POSSIBLY believe that if you had seen the show in question. Admit it, you just saw the National Review article and decided to try to disparage Kerrey.
Here's a recap of facts and personal attacks. 1. Clinton did testify and allowed recording, and he testified under oath. 2. Bush and Cheny testified, but did not allow it to be recorded, nor would they testify under oath. 3. Bush had more folks there with him than Clinton did. TJ, seemingly unaware of the fact that Bush had more folks there with him than Clinton did criticized Clinton for having more people with him. Once it was shown that Clinton had FEWER people than Bush did, TJ tried to criticize MacBeth's spelling and lack of ability to access the edit function. Let's let the record be kept straight, about who resorted to what personal attacks when their ignornance on issue was exposed.
What a joke. You liberals have to include people on the periphery like two unnamed staffers for your numbers to work out... Sigh... And FranchiseBlade, you don't want to start counting up personal attacks. I rarely dole out *personal* attacks. Rarely. Those that may fall under the bucket of personal are typically cast in jest. The same can not be said of someone like andymoon. My attacks are collective in nature, not personal. On the other hand, I probably see 15-20 *personal* attacks against me every single day. Ever read andymoon? Chump? RocketmanTex? (yeah I don't read them much either, but you get the point) Yet you liberals seem to think it's me doing the personal attacking. Laughable.
I have a feeling that this board will seem much more intelligent now that I have placed t_j on my ignore list. I apologize to everyone (except t_j) for the insults I have been hurling lately, but he has really been getting under my skin, which is probably what he wants and is the main reason I will now ignore him.
I hope that your attacks on MacBeth were only in jest. Yes you do receive some personal attack, much to your enjoyment and delight I'm sure. However, these against MacBeth only happened after the facts that you started arguing were shown not to be true.
I'm confused. Every article I've seen mentions that Clinton testified privately. Every missive from the Commission suggests that is the case as well. Berger testified before the Commission (without Clinton) the same day as Richard Clarke. I don't think Lindsay has testified, but if I recall correctly, he did have some conversations with the Commission regarding the Clinton Administration documents withheld from the Commission by the Bush Administration. Perhaps the person Giddy was listening to confused the prep work done by Clinton before his testimony with the actual testimony. The following article documents his prep work near the end. At any rate, a source verifying Clinton had people in the room with him during his testimony before the 9-11 Commission would clear things up for me a great deal. ________________________ Bill Clinton 'forthcoming' to Sept. 11 panel By Todd S. Purdum and Raymond Hernandez NEW YORK TIMES WASHINGTON - Hours after it riveted Washington's attention with public testimony from Condoleezza Rice, the commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks met in secret and hung onto the words of a witness who once made much bigger headlines: President Bill Clinton. True to form, Clinton stayed an hour longer than planned and sometimes answered questions that had not been asked, commissioners reported. He took time off from finishing his memoirs and "battened down the hatches to prepare for this very methodically," reviewing relevant documents and discussing the issues with former aides, one longtime associate said. Clinton met "in closed private session" Thursday afternoon with all 10 members of the bipartisan commission at its request, the commission said in a terse statement issued after it was all over. The encounter, in an anonymous government office building off the Mall, lasted about four hours, and the commission said it "found the former president forthcoming and responsive to its questions." During his appearance, Clinton told commissioners that "he's going back in his mind over and over again about whether there's anything else he could have done and how he might have done it," said Tom Kean, a former Republican governor of New Jersey and the chairman of the commission. "But a lot of what we talked to him about was actually the inner workings of (the) presidency as well as many of the classified briefings we've been able to read," Kean said in an appearance on Thursday evening on PBS' "Newshour" with Jim Lehrer. "We asked him some pretty detailed questions on those. And he was just totally frank -- totally frank, totally honest, and forthcoming." It had been known that Clinton and former Vice President Al Gore both agreed to meet with the commission, but the timing of any appearance was secret until Thursday. "President Clinton was pleased to have the opportunity to meet today with the members of the 9/11 commission in Washington, D.C.," his spokesman, Jim Kennedy, said in a statement late Thursday afternoon. "President Clinton supports and has been cooperating with the commission, and hopes that its work will make America safer." If only because Clinton is retired from politics, and because the attacks did not occur on his watch, he may have less immediately at stake than President Bush in explaining how and why the government failed to anticipate or foil them. But recent testimony from current and former officials and reports by the commission's staff have suggested a string of missed opportunities and miscommunication stretching across both the Clinton and Bush administrations, and Clinton has long been described as especially conscious of his place in history. The Clinton associate, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the former president had taken a break from the manuscript of his memoir, due out this summer, to prepare for the session with the help of his former national security adviser, Sandy Berger, who testified earlier, and with his longtime legal adviser Bruce Lindsey. Clinton has past acquaintance with virtually all the commission members, and close familiarity with some of the Democrats, including former Sen. Bob Kerrey of Nebraska, who competed against him for the Democratic nomination in 1992; Jamie S. Gorelick, who was his deputy attorney general; and Richard Ben-Veniste, a former Watergate prosecutor who testified before the House Judiciary Committee against Clinton's impeachment over the Monica Lewinsky affair in 1998.
Well there's the fact that Bush and Cheney both refused to speak under oath nor on the record - which makes it impossible to impeach them for lying in this instance.
Still waiting for someone to provide a source that helps me out on the Clinton issue. In the meantime, I found this... "You would never see LBJ, Reagan, Bush Sr. or Clinton sitting there with the vice president in a hearing like this. They wouldn't have even thought of it. They were rugged and independent. Their personalities wouldn't have allowed it." James Thurber, director of the Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies at American University in Washington
