Bill Clinton(Spokesman) Breaks Silence On 9/11 Docudrama

[RamboLiberal]

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2006/sep/06/bill_clinton_breaks_silence_on_9_11_docudrama

President Bill Clinton has finally broken his silence and weighed in on the controversy over the forthcoming docudrama on the attacks on the Twin Towers, "The Path to 9/11." In response to our resquest for a comment on President Clinton's opinion of the docudrama, Clinton spokesman Jay Carson emailed us a statement questioning the film's depiction of Clinton's record and suggesting that it wasn't a "serious treatment" of the facts.

"The record shows that President Clinton was committed to and focused on stopping terrorism every day," Carson emailed us, "and that his administration had many significant successes on this front, and he expects that any serious treatment of history would reflect that."

Carson also confirmed for the record that the source who spoke to blogger Duncan Black earlier today was correct: Clinton's office, Carson told us, requested a copy of the tape, but it was denied. Carson also confirmed that Madeleine Albright and Sandy Berger sent letters requesting copies, but they were denied, too.

Given the extent to which the docudrama savages the Clinton administration and blames it for allegedly not giving the CIA the go-ahead to kill Osama Bin Laden -- not to mention the amount of relentless critical fire it's drawn for its alleged wholesale invention of the facts -- many will no doubt find Clinton's statement less than satisfactory. It's certainly less forceful than seems warranted. But President Clinton's office has now said something about the controversy, questioning its portrayal of the Clinton record, and we're sharing it with you. Have at it.

[dsc]

1. How can he possibly comment on the film if he hasn't seen it?

I think the outrage here is that they won't send tapes to people they savage who ask for them.

[whistle]

2. The 9/11 path to the outhouse is a four hour swift-boat type smear of

...Clinton and a complete white wash of BushCo and the republican/pentagon neglect which lead to 9/11 events and war.

[Totally Committed]

3. This is not the same fighter that won that first term election for POTUS.

Did they remove his balls when they tinkered with his heart? Sure does sound it.

If a major network were about to play fast and loose with what was left of my Presidential legacy, I'd be out there making mincemeat! As it is I feel I'm working harder to get this thing made right than he is. Shame on him!

TC

[Tellurian]

9. No, just an indication of how frightened they are, Hillary will WIN!

Consider this an early innoculation.

Better to come out sooner than later.

Besides, she can use the lies as part of her campaign to totally gut the Republicons.
If Bush can lie to the World about going to War with Iraq...Hillary can identify
with the "good guys". The people who were duped into a war..All this coming from
the same people who have tried every trick in the book to destroy her husband's presidency.

The film is aimed at destroying confidence in the general voting public.

Take it and run with it, Hillary. Keep the answers short and to the point.

[Tellurian]

23. I don't think there is any reason why Prez Clinton can't SUE

Them for malicious liable and slander.

Clinton is a private person, he is not running for any elections.
Hollywood sues the tabloids all the time.
This is no more than a self admitted Tabloid Media drama.

So, Bill has filed his objection with the producers.

Also he can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt they are propagating bold faced lies.
This is a High Stakes Poker Game...

Whether they pull the piece or go forward. He Wins!

GodSpeed...you finally have the SOB's right where you want them!

[Double T]

4. This means an all out war with the rethugs and neocons........

this is another 'swift boat attack' and this time WE ARE GOING TO KICK RETHUG BUTT AND TAKE NAMES!!!!!

[blogslut]

5. The Big Question is Why

Why won't ABC send advance copies to the people actually portrayed in this film. Why keep advanced copies away from left-leaning bloggers? Why keep it away from CNN news,like I just heard Jackie Schechner tell me?

[RamboLiberal]

6. What was said on CNN News?

Cube rat would like to know. Thanks.

[blogslut]

12. Their blog peporter Jackie Schechner

...covered the "controversy" over the ABC movie. She said that ABC calls it a docudrama but folks on the left say scenes the movie are "innacurate". She then told how some bloggers and others were refused an advance copy of the movie. She then said CNN was unable to obtain an advance copy.

[Dinger]

7. Maybe It's Some Kind Of Pre-Lawsuit Protection?

I don't know - I'm not a lawyer, but maybe.

[Pirate Smile]

8. "ABC Insider Assures RW Bloggers" This crap is truly unbelievable!

ABC Insider Assures Right-Wing Bloggers: ‘The Message of the Clinton Admin Failures Remains Fully Intact’

ABC won’t give President Clinton, Madeleine Albright or Sandy Berger a copy of its 9/11 docudrama, “The Path to 9/11.” But there is virtually nothing about the film ABC won’t share with the right-wing blogosphere.

For example, an ABC insider sent this missive to right-wing blogger Hugh Hewitt about potential edits to the film:

The Disney execs met all through the weekend - unheard of in this business - debating what changes would be made and what concessions should be given. Here is what looks to be the conclusion:

- There will be a handful of tweaks made to a few scenes.
- They are minor, and nuance in most cases - a line lift here, a tweak to the edit there.
- There are 900 screeners out there. When this airs this weekend, there will be a number of people who will spend their free evenings looking for these changes and will be hard pressed to identify them. They are that minor.
- The average viewer would not be able to tell the difference between the two versions.
- The message of the Clinton Admin failures remains fully intact.

Read the full email to Hewitt here.

Right now, former Gov. Tom Kean (R-NJ) — a paid senior advisor to this film — is digging in and defending ABC. If the network is making edits to the film to correct errors, they should tell everyone, not just right-wing bloggers.

The fact that ABC continues to cater to Rush Limbaugh and conservative bloggers, while refusing to show even the most basic courtesy to a former President of the United States, says a lot about what this “docudrama” is really about.

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/09/06/abc-assures-bloggers/

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/09/06/abc-assures-bloggers/

[Synnical]

10. From the E-mail

The changes are done only to appease the Clinton team - to be able to say they made changes. But the blame on the Clinton team is in the DNA of the project and could not be eradicated without pulling the entire show. A $40 million investment on the part of ABC is enough to stem even Bill Clinton's influence.

Jeesuz, the man has been out of office for five years and they're still blaming him for everything!

[helderheid]

11. he should fucking sue!

[mmonk]

14. That may be why they are denying requests for copies.

[malaise]

17. He should stop being seen in public with

those fugging Bush folks.

[stepnw1f]

18. How about a Class Action Lawsuit? (nt)

[Cha]

13. Damn Straight! The neoCONS can't

hide the monkey's actions anymore so they have to resort to making up fucking history!!

[fooj]

15. I'm afraid rewriting history has always been part of the plan...

[Cha]

16. Oh Yeeah! I made it sound

like they just started or something..no way. They've been at it since time immemorial.

[stepnw1f]

19. seriously.... That's It?

what the fuck was that?!

[seabeyond]

20. it is a first step. all this didnt come out until yesterday. lets see

where this goes. i am thrilled he said anything.

[stepnw1f]

22. I Take It Back

I know more now why that was all that was said. Legally, they did the right thing here. Thanks for reeling me back in seabeyond.

[Straight Shooter]

21. $40 million investment = coming soon on DVD to a video store near you!

:puke: