"Nice Little Conservative Hit Job": Clinton Accuses Fox's Chris Wallace

[DeepModem Mom]

TV Newser: "Nice Little Conservative Hit Job:" Clinton Accuses Wallace Of Doing "Fox's Bidding"

Chris Wallace's heated interview with Bill Clinton is getting a lot of blogosphere buzz.

Thanks to Drudge and others, this YouTube clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UwJabtvSUQ) has been viewed over 450,000 times. Think Progress has published the entire transcript of the interview (http://thinkprogress.org/clinton-interview).

The conversation became confrontational when Wallace asked the former president why he didn't "do more" to "connect the dots" and put Osama bin Laden out of business.

After trying to answer the question, Clinton lashed out at the interviewer: "So you did Fox's bidding on this show. You did your nice little conservative hit job on me."

Clinton also accused Wallace of "coming here under false pretenses" when he expected the interview to be about his Global Initiative. "You said you'd spend half the time talking about what we did out there to raise $7 billion dollars plus over three days from 215 different commitments. And you don't care," Clinton said....

http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/fnc/nice_little_conservative_hit_job_clinton_accuses_wallace_of_doing_foxs_bidding_44365.asp

[NVMojo]

1. Smack em down, big dog!!!

[K8-EEE]

4. Wooof!! I Want My President Back...

Great to see this! Fox can spin it any way they want (and have of course) but the question remains, why don't they as GWB & the GOP why they suspended all anti-terrorism efforts in 2000?? And why didn't the GOP support Clinton's anti-terrorist efforts instead of all the "wag the dog" shit they were spewing. THEY were the ones obsessed with Monica at the expense of our security because they only thing they were interested in was taking Clinton down, from day one that's all they wanted.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Frances]

19. You must not have seen the same interview I saw

Clinton was totally honest. He failed to get Osama, but he had set up a good plan to get him. The present administration demoted the man in charge of that plan.

[MODemocrat]

21. Oh my, DCLer? Bill Clinton is his own man

He was obsessed with finding Bin Laden, and he was NOT the one who gave him 43 million dollars. That was
Bush. Try as you might, you can't make this a bad interview; and you can't take away the fact that George Bush has gotten us into a hell hole in Iraq, with no apparent plan for escape.
It made a liar out of Chris Wallace. Wallace wouldn't even be setting in that position if his Father wasn't named Mike Wallace.
Mr. Clinton, you made me so proud. :thumbsup:

[President Jesus]

33. I think you mean "DLC." Ironic that you use it as an insult...

...seeing as how President Clinton was a DLC founding member!

[MODemocrat]

45. So I'm not the world's greatest typist

I do know the difference, trust me, at my ripe old age I know a whole lot more than you'd ever give me
credit for.:shrug:

[Auntie Bush]

5. Next time I get a Chocolate Lab...I'm going to name him "Big Dog"

or "Clinton"...maybe Clint might be better.

[valerief]

2. I liked how the Big Dawg said he "tried to kill" bin Laden, He used

the word "kill" more than once, I recall. I think he did it for effect. You never hear U.S. movers and shakers (political, military) use the word "kill."

[stepnw1f]

3. The Right Wing is Being Exposed EVERYDAY!

They just don't get it....

[MannyGoldstein]

6. The Clintons Really Are Brilliant

Remember when King George I ambushed Dan Rather when Rather asked Bush about Iran-Contra*? I think Clinton ambushed Wallace the same way. Except Wallace deserved it, and had no defense. Rather, by contrast, had lots of ammo - but instead of using it, he did his best imitation of a Congressional Democrat.

Vintage Clinton, in more ways than one.

*Uh, maybe you don't remember - I happen to be really old - look it up if you don't.

[bling bling]

8. Clinton of all people shouldn't be suprised or shocked.

Clinton is one thing and one thing only to the conservatives: scape goat.

They have been ruthless, shameless, and frankly anti-American in their treatment of our former President and his wife during his entire term of office. I mean, some of the things they've done and said are beyond the game of politics and cross the border into malicious assault.

How Clinton can still think that he can trust any of them, ANY of them, including the right-wing GOP government run media is pitiful. It makes me sad for him. He doesn't deserve this.

[juajen]

9. What makes you think he trusts them?

He's much to smart to trust, period.

[lyonn]

13. Right, Clinton appeared to be ready for what happened

and Wallace looked unprepared. Look at the press this is getting, does it get any better. The blind will never see the difference but those that haven't completed closed their minds could learn something from Clinton's explainations. I enjoyed the hell out of it, come what may.

[kurth]

10. "You’ve got that little smirk on your face and you think you’re so clever"

Way to go, Bill!

I'm surprised that nobody has kicked that asshole in the mouth.

[bluedog]

17. just read that on yahoo

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060924/ap_on_re_us/clinton_fox_news;_ylt=AnrqcujD5inBSux6Jdfe0jas0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3OXIzMDMzBHNlYwM3MDM-

damn people over on that board are saying that Clinton should have had a heart attack after the interview........

they just hate it that hes coming out and defending himself and saying bush didn't do anything.

remember we all know that the Hart-Rudman report was put on a shelf.......and that bush was letting cheney take care of it....
plus the memos and warnings.......

Clintons right:........bush did nothing!

[Iris]

46. that was the best line of all!

Way to call 'em out!

[zonkers]

11. is there full interview link yet? ON EDIT -- found it and C&L.

[liberal N proud]

12. Clinton should be our poster boy for hitting back at these liars

We need someone big, like the Big Dawg to lead us into battle with the neocons.

[tuvor]

14. Too bad it seems to take a private citizen to hit back hard.

[Riddler]

15. Once again, the LAST legitimately elected, i.e., REAL, president

didn't let all of us who admire him down! Too bad he's got the only set of cojones in the entire Democratic party.

[ddeclue]

29. I thought that was Al Gore... ;-)

Doug D.
Orlando, FL

[Peace Patriot]

16. I do like Clinton's style, and smarts--though I have many policy

differences with him, including his signing of the telecommunications act that helped these fucking news monopolies consolidate their power. When Hillary mentioned the "rightwing conspiracy," she hit the nail on the head. Why then, have the Clintons facilitated the power grabbing of these and other mega-corporations? (--for instance, signing NAFTA without the promised labor and environmental protections, and sicking the Darth Vader police on the 50,000 people who protested the World Trade Organization in Seattle--the secret, undemocratic trade group that helped proliferate sweatshops and environmental devastation all over the world).

Hard to figure. I don't really understand it. And simple name-calling (they've "sold out," they're Corporate Democrats) doesn't really aid understanding.

I think Gore is much more advanced in his analysis of BushWorld. He wouldn't engage in this debate about who is the better killer. The whole debate is framed entirely wrong. The Bushites need to be attacked on this fundamental ground of framing: OBL and AQ are not a military problem. They are a police problem--and, in the case of the first World Trade Center attack, that's exactly how the problem was SOLVED, under Clinton--by good policing--something that the Bushites STOPPED DOING the moment they took office. We don't kill people on suspicion of a crime, even stateless people. We capture them and put them on trial, if we believe they've committed a crime. And we prove it. (Again, that's what the Clinton administration did.) We don't torture innocent people--or even people we suspect of something, or ANY prisoners. What abominable behavior this is! --and with enormous downsides, in bad intelligence, immorality, danger to our own military, degradation of our military, the temptation of political uses of torture, loss of our reputation in the world. We don't invade other countries, and slaughter tens of thousands of innocent people, and destroy their country, on SUSPICIONS--unfounded--that their leader MIGHT BE doing something we don't like that MIGHT threaten us sometime in the future. That is a gross violation of international law! It is a grave crime! These are the things Gore said, and Clinton has not said. So Clinton is not so smart--getting dragged into this killer-diller pissing contest.

I like his spirit, but he needs to do more solid thinking about his policies, and those of the Bushites and of the war profiteering corporate news monopolies. And how about starting with, say, justice for Middle Eastern peoples--the heart of the matter? Bushism is not about killing OBL. It never has been. It's about INJUSTICE in the Middle East. Clinton knows this. I don't mind him dismantling a Faux report, but he should use the opportunity to widen the frame, not just on rightwing Faux news, but on the accusation that he "didn't do enough"--attackable from so many directions (Ken Starr included) but mainly from the direction of the INJUSTICE and STUPIDITY of the Bush Cartel's war in the Middle East. (Sample: "They say I didn't do enough, and I say they can't do enough of the WRONG THING!")

[Blue_Roses]

18. OMG...

:wow:

"And you’ve got that little smirk on your face and you think you’re so clever..."
:rofl:

Go Clinton GO!!!!

Damn, is there going to be a repeat of this? I have got to see him smack down that smirking Chris Wallace. What a prick!

[BootinUp]

20. I think it repeats on cable fox news at 5 pm est. Also complete

interview is on Youtube.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2210581&mesg_id=2210581

[rodeodance]

22. Bill Clinton Defends bin Laden Handling (Chris Wallace 'surprized")

http://www.abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=2485316

Bill Clinton Defends bin Laden Handling
Former President Clinton Defends Handling of bin Laden in Combative 'Fox News' Interview


By KAREN MATTHEWS

NEW YORK Sep 24, 2006 (AP)— In a combative interview on "Fox News Sunday," former President Clinton defended his handling of the threat posed by Osama bin Laden, saying he tried to have bin Laden killed and was attacked for his efforts by the same people who now criticize him for not doing enough.

"That's the difference in me and some, including all of the right-wingers who are attacking me now," Clinton said in the interview. "They ridiculed me for trying. They had eight months to try, they did not try."

Clinton accused host Chris Wallace of a "conservative hit job" and asked: "I want to know how many people in the Bush administration you asked, 'Why didn't you do anything about the Cole?' I want to know how many people you asked, 'Why did you fire Dick Clarke?'"
.......

Wallace said Sunday he was surprised by Clinton's "conspiratorial view" of "a very non-confrontational question, 'Did you do enough to connect the dots and go after Al Qaida?'"

"All I did was ask him a question, and I think it was a legitimate news question. I was surprised that he would conjure up that this was a hit job," Wallace said in a telephone interview

[Kagemusha]

23. You mean surprised...

and this had already been reported on quite a bit, just maybe not by the AP. Just saying. Take care.

[tuvor]

24. This feigning-surprise stance is such bullshit.

Of course the question was "non-confrontational". Problem is, Wallace and fox never, ever ask the same questions of the bush administration.

If he was truly surprised it was only because he got called on it.

[calimary]

25. Fuck you, Wallace. It WAS a hit job. And you FAILED.

You thought you had a "gotcha" moment that would bring you up to the stature of your dad in his "60 Minutes" heyday, and you FAILED. YOU FAILED.

He was a putz. He's probably yearned, all his life, for the kind of towering fame his father had (hmmm... sound familiar???) when Mike Wallace was writing the book on confrontational journalism - yes, some of it pretty ham-handed. Little Junior Wallace was probably hoping he could surmount his father, probably got sick of being known as Mike Wallace's son. Him wanted to stand on him own widdle feetsies and be a BIG BOY to all the world.

Chris Wallace will NEVER be a Mike Wallace. He'll ALWAYS be second-best. Son of the big guy. Junior partner at best. Got into the business on his family name and his father's coattails. And thought this would be a big career moment for him.

Probably also, from working at Pox "news" and becoming all too accustomed to dealing with Democrats who are either tongue-tied and easily intimidated and behave like doormats in any on-air debates, or are like Donna Brazile and Susan Estrich (the FIRST ones to jump on the pro-CON bandwagon and dump on their fellow Dems and can't say enough about how wrong the Dems are and how important it is to disagree with them). He probably thought Clinton would take the high road and not come out swinging in his own defense. I mean, we haven't exactly seen a lot of our guys and gals doing that, have we?

Chris Wallace set up a great "gotcha" that backfired on him. HE wound up being the "gotcha" victim. He wasn't prepared for that. And to cover his shame and embarrassment, he's spinning it now, in much the same fashion as those who "apologize" because the other person got offended by some thoughtless, offensive, or stupid-ass thing the "apologizer" said.

It also shows ignorance on Chris Wallace's part, IMO. When you're a lawyer you should NEVER ask a witness a question that you don't already know the answer to. Chris Wallace should have done a little research, or had his researchers (surely, in that kind of position, he has a staff) look stuff up so he had the background information he needed. It sounds as though he didn't really do his homework, OR that he simply takes the Pox "news" and other wrong-wingers' party line about what happened. Perhaps he took "The Path to 9/11" as undebatable fact. The facts do not bear out what the movie alleged, and ANYBODY who'd google some of the real-life principals involved would know that. And Chris Wallace, priding himself as the most professional of professional journalists, up in the lofty heights he's reached, should have known the real backstory.

Plus, there are hundreds of ways to ask a question, to broach a touchy subject, especially such a loaded one as this, where lying and distortion is suspected, and accusations have been made over a long time. Journalists are supposed to be in the truth-telling business (even though I realize THAT isn't how it is anymore), and the truth-revealing business. Chris Wallace asked the question in such a way that it DID set Clinton off. He wanted to do that, and he meant to do that. Because he expected to elicit a "gotcha" moment from an off-guard interview subject unsure of his standing. Unfortunately for him, Bill Clinton was not that subject. And Wallace is, or should be, a big boy by now, and should have known what can of worms he was going to be opening up with Clinton if he did this. Should have known the answer before he asked the question. What does that say about him as a professional journalist/interviewer that he was "surprised" by the reaction?

Now Clinton wasn't born yesterday, and is a veteran and survivor of far greater uproars than this. I'm sure he knew that the 9/11 stuff would come up at some point in the interview, PARTICULARLY an interview conducted by a Pox "news" interviewer. The problem for Wallace was that Clinton was able to respond with such obscure, odd, unfamiliar things as - um - I think they're called facts. Wallace steeps himself week in and week out in an organization that specializes in fallacy and fantasy and just plain ol' flat-out LIES and distortions.

I hope now that Clinton has shown how you stand up to this kind of shit and shove it back, HARD, perhaps other Dems will take notice, learn, and apply these lessons - pardon the pun - liberally.

Oh yeah, and one more thing - this is the kind of interview face-off that most journalists live for, pray for, lust for - the interview that, itself, makes news, and gets you talked about in other news venues, and your soundbites replayed ad nauseam. Chris Wallace went into this hoping and praying he'd get a confrontation. Controversy sells, after all. But it's one of those "be careful what you wish for, because you might get it" affairs. He probably expected Clinton to hit the ball when he pitched a hard and fast one. He just hadn't expected Clinton to hit it so far out of the ballpark that it wound up in the next county.

[BootinUp]

31. Mike W. always knew the answer to the question.

good post.

[Skittles]

37. Wallace was as prepared as any FOX "journalist"

his primary function is BUSH WHORE

[Demit]

26. That is so disingenuous, that it was a non-confrontational question.

How transparent and whiney. "All I did was..." Sure. Especially when Clinton was told he was going to be interviewed about his global initiatives. Wallace should be so "non-confrontational" and ballsy and ask current admin officials questions like that.

[Botany]

27. It was a hit job Chris

just like the disney /ABC movie
just like the "Move America Forward," t.v. spot that blames Clinton
just like Rush does every day
just like Sean Hannity

Clinton not stopping bin Laden & al Qaeda is a right wing talking point ...
kinda like Al Gore said he invented the internet.

[Rowdyboy]

28. The best part of Chris rolled down his daddy's leg.....

[Triana]

30. You give 'em Hell Big Bill!!!

Dayum I love it when Big Dog bites back!

[Historic NY]

32. Wow its good to have a President again....................

Chris Wallace what a dewwb.

[Ethelk2044]

34. Chris Wallace

I sent an email to Fox thanking them for giving us a media
outlet to set the truth straight in the middle of election
season. Thanks to OUR President Clinton!

He should be the next DNC President after Dean.  We would
never lose an election!

[liberalpragmatist]

35. How on earth did Mike Wallace Spawn That Kid? - nt

[truthisfreedom]

36. anyone have the youtube of Mike Wallace (father) outing chris wallace(son)

on the air? i'd love to see that again.

[missingthebigdog]

38. Wow.

It is SO rare to see Clinton snap at someone, that when he does, it really blows you away.

[Buzz Clik]

39. Clinton delivers nut popping kick to Chris Wallace's groin:

Chris Wallace (second generation yellow journalist): …and all I can say is, I’m asking you in good faith because it’s on people’s minds, sir. And I wasn’t…

William Jefferson Clinton: There’s a reason it’s on people’s minds. That’s the point I’m trying to make. There’s a reason it’s on people’s minds because they’ve done a serious disinformation campaign to create that impression .... It always comes from one source.

===================

Don't ever get the impression that the Fox is any more or any less biased than the alphabet soup news sources. Don't ever forget how all the networks were so willing to repeat without filter the unadulterated bullshit about the Clinton administration after Bush was elected: the trashing of Air Force One (which never happened), the trashing of the VP office suite (which didn't happen and couldn't be documented because the entire suite was gutted and redecorated for Cheney's crew), the "stealing" of White House furniture, and on and on.

All of them -- every god damned one of them -- lie until the viewing public quits listening.

[samsingh]

40. the media is playing this up as if Clinton lost his temper

better headlines would be:

'Wallace tries to lie to a Former President'

'President Clinton sets the record straight for Fox'

'Fox's fair and balanced lie challenged by Former President Clinton'

[Love Bug]

41. That was bloody brilliant!

Wallace got his ass handed to him!

Next time you see the clip turn down the sound and watch Big Dog's body language. He leaned into Wallace's body space and when he tapped the papers in Wallace's lap -- well, that was a metaphoric castration. Heh.

[missTheBigDog]

42. Way to go, Big Dog

That was a thing of beauty.

[Marie26]

43. You can tell it was a planted question

Chris Wallace does this lame thing where he pretends he's just responding to viewer's emails (uh-huh), and then launches into this detailed, long question that covers Clinton's actions over 8 years in Somalia, the USS Cole, Nigeria etc. etc. By pretending it's from readers, Fox News can act like they're responding to viewer's perceptions instead of creating them. But they are creating perceptions, by asking a question that contains its own conclusion, and reinforces the twisted message of the "Path to 9/11" movie. It IS a coordinated disinformation campaign, and Clinton recognized that.

They invited him to talk about the "Global Inititative" & then slid this question in as if it were just a side issue & small tangent. But that "tangential" question was the WHOLE POINT of the interview - the rest was just fluff to get him to sit down w/Fox News. After the interview, Fox News intended to "debate" Clinton's failure to catch Bin Laden, his mistakes & how he's responsible for 9/11 - just as the 9/11 movie portrayed. They're trying to create a counter-impression to reality. They're trying to replace the official 9/11 report's findings (Bush blunders) w/their own (CLINTON's fault!). And they're trying to create an impression that Dems can't catch terrorists, just in time for the Nov. 2006 elections. It's so predictable & tiresome - and Clinton knew in an instant what they were doing. If Clinton denied the question, he'd look weak, and the "debaters" would spin it anyway. The only thing he could do was go on the offensive & point out the lies & propaganda. He tore down the "third wall" & showed the audience the machinations that motivated the questions. And the "debaters" had to acknowledge & rebut Clinton's accusations instead of accusing themselves. I think Fox News got outplayed on this one.

[nibbana]

44. Thanks to Drudge????? That's sacriligious

Don't source that idiot!!!

[SOS]

47. Will Chris Wallace

interview Bush Sr. and ask him why he didn't do more to "connect the dots" before the 1993 World Trade Center bombing?
Shouldn't Bush Sr. have been more vigilant, especially after the Gulf War?
Will he interview Bush Jr. and ask him why he didn't do more to "connect the dots" in the first eight months of his pResidency?

No.

It's their new strategy to blame Bush's failure in Iraq and Afghanistan on anyone other than Bush.
And it's disgusting.