Clinton vs Clinton on Iraq
…not Bill vs. Hillary, but Bill vs. Bill. President Clinton told an Iowa audience today that he’d “opposed Iraq from the beginning.” But Clinton opponents were quick to point out instances where he seemed to say the opposite.
The RNC notes a June, 2004 article in Time Magazine, in which the former President was quoted as saying “So, you’re sitting there as President, you’re reeling in the aftermath of [September 11], so, yeah, you want to go get bin Laden and do Afghanistan and all that. But you also have to say, Well, my first responsibility now is to try everything possible to make sure that this terrorist network and other terrorist networks cannot reach chemical and biological weapons or small amounts of fissile material. I’ve got to do that. That’s why I supported the Iraq thing.”
And a rival campaign accuses President Clinton of either rewriting history, or failing to convince his wife to share his view and oppose the war. A campaign aide cites a May, 2003 AP article quoting President Clinton as saying “I supported the president when he asked for authority to stand up against weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.”
Hillary spokesman and former aide to President Clinton Jay Carson says the ex-prez was merely giving a shorthand version of his usual answer — which is that while President Bush was right to stand up against weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, weapons inspectors should have been given the time to do their jobs. Carson says Clinton has often said that he felt how, when, and why the invasion was carried out were wrong — citing a quote in that same June ‘04 Time piece in which Clinton said “I would not have done it until after Hans Blix finished the job,” as well as a December 2005 interview on CNN, when Clinton said “I didn’t agree with what was done when it was done. But we are where we are.”
Regardless of whether Clinton’s been technically consistent on the issue, expect Hillary’s Democratic and Republican rivals to jump all over this comment on Wednesday.
Tags: Bill Clinton, hillary clinton, Iraq
Share
“Regardless of whether Clinton’s been technically consistent on the issue, expect Hillary’s Democratic and Republican rivals to jump all over this comment on Wednesday.”
Could not have said it better myself.
Clinton HAS been consistent on this issue — technically or otherwise — and Hillary’s Democratic and Republican rivals WILL jump all over this.
Unfortunately for Hillary’s rivals, the facts are clear:
~ Bush said he wanted to send the inspectors in to find wmd’s.
~ The inspectors hadn’t found wmd’s.
~ Bush pulled the inspectors out prematurely and invaded Iraq anyway.
~ There were no wmd’s in Iraq.
I don’t expect this post to show up on a Fox site.
If it does, check out the FACTS at The Fact Hub on http://www.hillaryclinton.com
The Clintons have been consistent.
President Bush is the one who went back on his word, and the vast majority of the American voters now realize that.
If it smells like a dirty diaper, it probably is a dirty diaper. Bill’s needs changing.
“…check out the FACTS at The Fact Hub on http://www.hillaryclinton.com”
*******************
LOL…you got to be kidding! Come on, to many of us, Clinton has always been untrustworthy, and well, yes, a LIAR…his denials and futile attempts to revise history are both frustrating and laughable. In front of an anti-war crowd he and his wife say one thing, but their stance will surely change if the conditions warrant. ENOUGH OF THESE TWO ALREADY!
O.K. Now my question has been answererd. This is what we are going to get from the Clintons. Lies and more lies. Nothing is innocent, everything is planned. The Senator from NY just simply does not have the experience to be president.
I feel that a lot of times the media tries to exploit, for the sake of sensationalizing the comment,
the answer to a question. I feel that most Americans know the real answer behind the question.
First and foremost, up front, Bill is not running for the nomination, Hillary is….If Fox is trying to dissuade the public from the real candidate because of her husbands comments, it is not registering with us…Besides, that is in the past and many on both sides of the floor have taken new stands on what went on then. Whether it was for or against back then, has no bearing on what is happening now…Listen to the one who has a plan on what to do about it in the future.
The he said she said dirtiness of politics has to end. From both sides.
As long as the news media plays on words or comments, and makes them more than what they are, it is not providing a service to us…This country loves gossip and enuendo and sensationalism, and there is enough in the news away from politics. Why don’t you do us a service and leave it there, away from politics….
We want to know what the candidates are going to do to propell our country forward in this young century.
I watch Fox and Cnn and MSNBC…I always turn the channel when the host goes off on a tantrum about something a candidate did or said that has nothing to do with politics.
Give us the real political views and opinions expressed that have to do with the governing of our country…Leave the tabloids in the garbage where it belongs…
Jan, did you not see the film of the convoys heading out in the night from Iraq during the time
Saddam was stalling on his so called commitment to destroy DMVs. He had sufficient time to
move or hide all of them. You don’t believe Saddam used this type of distruction, killing thousands in Iraq, proving he had them? Back to the Clintons, how can the American people
overlook all the scandalous life they have lived? Why would you refer to http://www. hilliaryclinton.com for the truth? If Clinton is put in the White House, heaven help us.
If it was not for Mr Clinton failed policies and if he would have listen to his generals on what a threat Ben Laden was we would not be in this mess. Do you really want another Clinton in the whitehouse? I feel the same with Jeb Bush. No more Clintons or Bushs in the Whitehouse.
As far a WMDs go remember the Iran / Iraq war. Iraq used chemical weapons that where supplied by us the USA to fight Iran and if you think for one minute he used them all you have got to be kidding yourself. We knew he had them because Mr Ronald gave them WMD’s. And if for one minute any of you think this is something that should go away because it cost to much. Ask yourself this. What will happen to the dollar if a WMD hits the USA. Your MONEY WILL BE WORTH NOTHING and your kids will need to pick up this fight. We need to look at history to see through the future. Remember the war of 1812. The group of people in the north that wanted to surrender (You know the way the liberals speak today lets surrender) well those people where hung! Maybe those days need to come back. If you hate the USA so much then move to
The Clinton’s are both liars, oportunist’s and just all around creeps. Both of them will say whatever seems politically popular at the moment. They make my skin crawl!
Time for both the Clintons to take a hard look. This war is succeeding. Are they sure they want to stick to the “I opposed this war.” speech during the 2008 race for the most important job in the nation? We are winning. Do they really want the USA to lose? History will show this was the right thing to do. And I fear for our country if the senator wins the White House and does not allow the military to finish the job.
Are the comments made by Bill Clinton really news. Bill Clinton is a politican. Politicans say alot and most of what they say is not the truth but just words coming out of their mouth.
You seriously expect to findtruthful “facts” on Hillary’s website?!!
I can’t stop laughing!!
There isn’t anything honest about either one of them!
Here are some real facts for you:
CLINTON RECORDS SET
- The only president ever impeached on grounds of personal malfeasance
- Most number of convictions and guilty pleas by friends and associates*
- Most number of cabinet officials to come under criminal investigation
- Most number of witnesses to flee country or refuse to testify
- Most number of witnesses to die suddenly
- First president sued for sexual harassment.
- First president accused of rape.
- First first lady to come under criminal investigation
- Largest criminal plea agreement in an illegal campaign contribution case
- First president to establish a legal defense fund.
- First president to be held in contempt of court
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions from abroad
- First president disbarred from the US Supreme Court and a state court
It never ceases to amaze me the memory loss attributable to Dems, do they not remember that Bush took an extra 8 months to invade Iraq. Forget the fact that even prior to that Saddam consistently thumbed his nose at international mandates to evoke cooperation. Speaking of international help including the corrupt United Nations, thanks but no thanks to France, China and Russia for delaying any kind of significant sanctions because….they were getting bribed by Saddam with billions of $$$ worth of oil thru the disingenuous U.N. “oil for food program”. (Bush pulled the inspectors out prematurely and invaded Iraq anyway) how blind can Dems be, remember how the inspectors were threatened, France would tip-off Sadam to their next inspection site and the inspectors wouldn’t be allowed total access and faced time limits.
Now back to Bush’s rush to war. How many times did Dems demand and Bush obliged another vote to go to war? At the last minute even Turkey our ally threw a monkey wrench into the imminent invasion and delayed the US even more. So please enough with this exaggerated claim of no WMDs. Plenty of time in delays allowed for concealment and removal (Russian help) of WMDs. Just because the media doesn’t make much about chemical/biologicals found by the our military does not alter their discovery. Too bad for you Dems that millions of computers in the hands of ordinary Americans with very little effort can find statements and videos of Dems including President Clinton saying Saddam is a threat and he must be forced from power.
[...] claim that he opposed the Iraq war from the beginning is not inconsistent with his previous statements (his claim that he supported “the Iraq thing” because it was important to keep weapons [...]