Mr. Tapper better find cover before the Clinton goons come looking for him. Imagine the audacity of pointing out a Clinton inconsistency! I hope Mr. Tapper doesn't have any skeletons in his closet ... the Clintons will bring them to life in an instant!

The MSM has been letting Billy get away with blatant lies like this since the "I didn't inhale" days.

It's amazing. The MSM is suffering from battered wife syndrome when it comes to this charlatan.

Scott. Clinton did not simply support the war.. he made a strong plea on Larry King Live, July 22, 2003 to the country - that we all get together behind the effort, and to step the crap with the fictionalized drama. Had the media not squashed his view -  had the media not kept it from the view of the very interested public, might have resulted in the country coming together on a number of issues surrounding the Iraq war. Perhaps the terrorists and disenchanted in Iraq might have looked out and seen that the US was serious in it's effort to bring peace and some form of democracy and basic rights for all, and Iraq might not have sunk into the horrible mess that confronted them and us all. But the media had no interest in anything other than destroying the Bush administration - so they kept it out of the national view (my bold [my comments] - sorry about the length):

 CNN LARRY KING LIVE - Bob Dole Turns 80 - Aired July 22, 2003

....KING: President, maybe I can get an area where you may disagree. Do you join, President Clinton, your fellow Democrats, in complaining about the portion of the State of the Union address that dealt with nuclear weaponry in Africa?

CLINTON: Well, I have a little different take on it, I think, than either side. [you should have seen the look on King's face]

First of all, the White House said -- Mr. Fleischer said -- that on balance they probably shouldn't have put that comment in the speech. What happened, often happens. There was a disagreement between British intelligence and American intelligence. The president said it was British intelligence that said it. And then they said, well, maybe they shouldn't have put it in.

Let me tell you what I know. When I left office, there was a substantial amount of biological and chemical material unaccounted for. . .we knew what he had...

[..] 

I mean, we're all more sensitive to any possible stocks of chemical and biological weapons. So there's a difference between British -- British intelligence still maintains that they think the nuclear story was true. I don't know what was true, what was false. I thought the White House did the right thing in just saying, Well, we probably shouldn't have said that. And I think we ought to focus on where we are and what the right thing to do for Iraq is now. That's what I think. [anyone ever see Larry King bring up that point of his friend Bill Clinton, again?]

[..]

KING: What do you do, Mr. President, with what's put in front of you?

CLINTON: Well, here's what happens: every day the president gets a daily brief from the CIA. And then, if it's some important issue -- and believe me, you know, anything having to do with chemical, biological or nuclear weapons became much more important to everybody in the White House after September the 11 -- then they probably told the president, certainly Condoleezza Rice, that this is what the British intelligence thought. They maybe have a difference of opinion, but on balance, they decided they should leave that line in the speech.

I think the main thing I want to say to you is, people can quarrel with whether we should have more troops in Afghanistan or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks...

DOLE: That's right.

CLINTON: ... of biological and chemical weapons. We might have destroyed them in '98. We tried to, but we sure as heck didn't know it because we never got to go back in there. [and why did you not get in there, Mr. Pres.? Got tied up in an illicit affair, did ya?]

KING: Yes.

CLINTON: And what I think -- again, I would say the most important thing is we should focus on what's the best way to build Iraq as a democracy? How is the president going to do that and deal with continuing problems in Afghanistan and North Korea?

We should be pulling for America on this. We should be pulling for the people of Iraq. We can have honest disagreements about where we go from here, and we have space now to discuss that in what I hope will be a nonpartisan and open way. But this State of the Union deal they decided to use the British intelligence. The president said it was British intelligence. Then they said on balance they shouldn't have done it. You know, everybody makes mistakes when they are president. I mean, you can't make as many calls as you have to make without messing up once in awhile. The thing we ought to be focused on is what is the right thing to do now. That's what I think.

For a media that always likes Bill Clinton's advice -- how'd they do with censoring this view? One that might have actually brought the country together. I think we would have long ago pulled off the Iraq experience - successfully?

(;~/

And the hits just keep coming from Bill Clinton, the greatest President the world has ever known. Seems he also said recently that illegal immigration is happening because of the Bush "tax cuts to the rich", lol. According to him, since Bush borrowed the money for the tax cuts from Mexico, Mexico doesn't have the money to take care of its own people, and, as a result, the poor Mexicans must come here illegally.

What a maroon.

Well, I just saw Clinton's pic on Drudge, saw him kvetching on the television, and here's another photo of him here.

The one thing that they all show? Clinton, once again, using the pointing finger. Like I have observed before here on this fine website, long gone is the soft but tough clenched fist (but with the thumb on top), his trademark, a move emulated by every city councilman and state rep across thia fine land.

The pointing finger of defensiveness. Poor Bill.