The “Tough” Interviewer Turns Soft While Interviewing Bill Clinton

Spread the love

Loading

The same Brit who did a very hardhitting interview with John Bolton last May, John Humphyrs, now interviews Bill Clinton and wouldn’t you know it, it was quite the soft interview.  Funny how that works.

Britain and America has the scoop:

Asked why anti-Americanism is so strong at the moment, Bill Clinton said the Bush administration “squandered” the goodwill that America received after 9/11. He highlighted…

…the “failure” to allow the UN inspectors to finish their job in Iraq
…the withdrawal from Kyoto,
…the withdrawal from the anti-ballistic missile treaty,
…walking away from the non-proliferation movement,
…getting out of the International Criminal Court,
…stopping military aid to Latin America.

Quite funny stuff actually.  Bill would have us continue the inspection of Iraq another eight years, as his regime did, and allow Saddam to further enrich himself via Food for Oil, which coincidently, was created with the help and support of Bill Clintons administration.  I mean inspections didn’t work for 13 years, why not continue it even more right?

What a joke. 

Saddam was slowly eroding the sanctions against his country and it was only a matter of time until the only one who would demand the sanctions remained in place was the US.  Saddam had kicked out and let back in those same inspectors over and over and over again.  He played us like a fiddle and Bill wished we would of just allowed us to be played a bit more.  Saddams ties with terrorists, who cares.  His refusal to get rid of his WMD’s, who cares.  His refusal to abide by the cease fire signed 13 years prior, who care.

But way back when Al Gore was a "right wing nutjob" he even took issue with George H. W. Bush ignoring the ties between Saddam and terrorists, and those dang WMD’s:


But dangnammit, we should of just given those inspectors just a bit more time.

Then Bill Clinton pines for Kyoto.  The same treaty that the Senate voted 95-0 against ratifying.  The same treaty that Bill never sent to Congress to ratify since he knew it would never get passed.

So for four years Bill Clinton ignored Kyoto.  Bush continued this policy and now he is to blame for anti-Americanism.

Anti-ballistic missile treaty?  Come on, the cold war is over and was over when Bush pulled out of that.  It prevented us from getting the technology to safeguard our country against nuclear attack so he did away with it.  Our enemy isn’t Russia, it is fanatical Islam. 

The international court?  You mean that court that would have tried Americans for war crimes because they hate us so much?  A court that would allow other countries to decide which Americans are guilty of war crimes is an idiotic move and thankfully Bush understood this.  Professor Jeremy Rabkin, author of Why Sovereignty Matters, testified before Congress and explained why this court was a bad idea:

[A] practical objection to international tribunals is that they risk extending their jurisdiction in ways that threaten the United States. Let me emphasize here that the challenge is one of principle, as well. If we talk ourselves into thinking that these tribunals are quite appropriate for some states, then why not for us? We would be safer — and more honest — if we acknowledged that legal justice necessarily implies a sovereign authority. If a state is thought to be so disordered that it can’t administer its own justice, the remedy is not an outside court but a new government. And if no new government can be established, the remedy is colonial control. If we shrink from that, we should not fool ourselves that we have done something genuinely useful or effective by giving powers to international lawyers in the Hague.

Any agreement with a foreign body that turns control of criminal issues to a group made up of those who don’t share our interests or values is just wrong.  No other way you can spin that.

Did Mr. Humphrys tackle these issues with Bill Clinton during the interview?  Nope.  He let Bill rattle on and on.  Never calling him on his hypocrisy, never giving a follow up question to his answers.

Shocker.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
6 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Clinton: Liar then – Liar now.

Phew! I thought at first you meant Brit Hume…Fox News…and couldn’t believe that my favorite guy for interviews had blown it. Then realized you meant _a_ Brit, not _the_ Brit!

“…walking away from the non-proliferation movement,”

Seems Clinton and his “interviewer” have misplaced in their collective memory bank who rolled up the A.Q. Khan network and who oversaw Libya turn over it’s nuc program.

Not so funny how that works.

Yeah, they should have given Jeremy Paxman the job. He’s an equal opportunities interviewer – he can be rude to anyone, regardless of politics…

He highlighted…
…the “failure” to allow the UN inspectors to finish their job in Iraq
…the withdrawal from Kyoto,
…the withdrawal from the anti-ballistic missile treaty,
…walking away from the non-proliferation movement,
…getting out of the International Criminal Court,
…stopping military aid to Latin America.

One of these is not like the others…

Imagine the whining & wailing if Bush had given the UN delegates 72 hours to get out of the country and not look back…