Stinger

In an interview with Brian Williams on NBS Wednesday night former president Bill Clinton claimed "

"The charges that the House sent to the Senate were false,"

Of course in his plea bargain to avoid a felony prosecution he stated

""But I now recognize that I did not fully accomplish that goal and that certain of my responses to questions about Ms. Lewinsky were false."

And he was held in contempt of court for his lying under oath (aka perjury), and obstructing of justice committed when he told those lies.

He went on to impugn the men appointed by the justice department to investigate his crimes and the news media by saying

"People in your business [liked the Lewinsky investigation] very much," Clinton told Brian Williams. "And they like what Ken Starr did because they thought it made good ink.

"[But] they didn't do a very good job of reporting for years all the innocent people he persecuted and indicted because they wouldn't lie and the assault on the American Constitution that he waged or that I was acquitted."

He wasn't acquitted he copped a plea and was held in contempt.

Going on to say

"And that the charges that the House sent to the Senate were false. So I did a bad thing. I made a bad personal mistake. I paid a big price for it. But I was acquitted because the charges were false."

Nope, the statements of the voting Senators totally bely that statement when senator after senator made it clear that although he committed the acts he was charged with they did not want to remove him from office.

So Clinton continues to try and rewrite history. The quotes are supplied by NewsMax as I unfortunately did not hear the interview but I would bet Williams did not challenge him on any of these bogus assertions he made.

shuamort

I was at the gym last night and that interview was on. Apparently, he's added more pages to his autobiography and whatever he says is probably going to spur more sales of that book. As the axiom goes, any publicity is good publicity.

Rev.

I'm speechless.

__________________
Rev.

God doesn't send anyone to hell. We go to hell over His dead body.

Arthur Fonzarelli

Clinton may have been a better actor than Reagan but certainly not a better president.

Stinger

Did Williams even challenge him on his totally bogus assertions? I need to find a full transcript.

Edit (went and found it)

I asked the president a blunt question about his legacy and any regrets he may have that impeachment will always play a prominent role in how his presidency is remembered.

Clinton: It probably would, because — but to be fair, you said you're being blunt with me. People in your business like that very much. And they like what Ken Starr did because they thought it made good ink. And they didn't do a very good job of reporting for years all the innocent people he persecuted and indicted because they wouldn't lie...

Williams: And yet...

Clinton: ...and the assault on the American Constitution that he waged...

Williams: This was...

Clinton: ...or that I was acquitted. And that the charges that the House sent to the Senate were false. So I did a bad thing. I made a bad personal mistake. I paid a big price for it. But I was acquitted because the charges were false.

Williams: Guantanamo Bay, Amnesty International says................

What a wimp Williams is, he just let Clinton say those out right lies and get away with it.

Squawker

What would you suggest? Call him a liar right to his face? When you interview a pathological liar like Clinton, you have to expect you will get lied to. Williams did the right thing-- let Clinton hang himself.

__________________
http://users.igl.net/jdsquawker/squawkereagle.gifhttp://users.igl.net/jdsquawker/squawkername.gif

Political Word W/RSS Feed

sebastiansdreams

Well gosh, it seems to me he's just modeling after our current president. Bush has hung himself in his lies more than he has approved executions in Texas.

__________________
http://img52.echo.cx/img52/3092/sebas7nq.jpg

Squawker

All I have seen as proof is partisan rhetoric and slogans. Bush lied, men died type of propaganda. The reality of the situation is if Bush is such a liar, and as evil as the left tries to make him, he would have been charged with a crime by now. No smoking gun, just left wing character assignations they are so good at.

sebastiansdreams

Well didn't it seem that he was telling us there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? And yet we find none. I mean, all partisan aside, does that mean that he simply made a big freaking mistake or was he lying?

Arthur Fonzarelli

***David Kay said the trace residue of mustard gas found in an artillery shell earlier this month was likely a relic overlooked when Saddam said he had destroyed such weapons in the mid-90s.

***Hans Blix said his team found 16 warheads that were tagged as 'used for containing Sarin,' but were empty.

*** Saddam's government had disclosed binary Sarin testing & production after the 1995 defection of Iraqi weapons chief Lt. Gen. Hussein Kamel al-Majid, Saddam's son-in-law. But Saddam's government never declared that any Sarin or Sarin-filled shells still remained.

***A dozen chemical shells were also found by UN inspectors before the war; they had been tagged for destruction in the 90s but somehow were not destroyed.

***Iraq acknowledged making 3,859 tons of Sarin, Tabun, mustard and other chemical weapons. Iraq began producing Sarin in 1984 and admitted to possessing 790 tons of it in 1995.

***The mustard gas shell may be one of 550 projectiles Saddam failed to account for when he made his weapons declaration shortly before Operation Iraqi Freedom began last year. Iraq also failed to account for 450 aerial bombs with mustard gas.

***Kimmitt said the shell belonged to a class of ordnance that Saddam's government said was destroyed before the 1991 Gulf War.

Now can you seriously say they didn't find anything?

NOTE: these are excerpts from many articles I read when doing research for a letter to the editor of my local newspaper. All I did at the time was use a simple Yahoo search. This was obviously a while ago so I don't even recall how I searched this info. Probably WMDs or mustard gas, or artillery shell or some combination. Plus the articles would have also been from a variety of sources. Most likely NY Times, Washington Post, maybe even AP, Reuters, etc.