Former FBI Director Louis Freeh is leveling a serious charge against former boss Bill Clinton in his memoir, “My FBI,” and in interviews such as the one Sunday on CBS’ “60 Minutes” — that rather than use a meeting with Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah to pressure him into being cooperative in investigating the 1996 bombing of Khobar Towers, Clinton used it to pressure the monarch into giving money to the Clinton presidential library. The problem is that Freeh’s troubled tenure at the FBI (Waco investigation, Oklahoma City, Wen Ho Lee, spy Robert Hanssen, computer foul-ups, pre-Sept. 11 period) makes him a less-than-credible critic. In truth, it’s getting difficult to believe what anybody from any presidential administration says about anything anymore.
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Jed on Let immigrants run
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
26 Comments
The liberals had their “ax-to-grind” administration people with Bush, but now it is such a bad thing when it is turn on Clinton?
Louis Freeh is most likely telling the truth, and boy does it hurt.
Can he be believed?
Answer: no.
Here’s why–”Freeh ran the bureau from the rise of al-Qaeda in the early 1990s until just two months before Bin Laden landed his roundhouse blow on the United States. Under his leadership, the FBI made many mistakes and missed many opportunities that paved the way for 9/11. He presided over a bureau that fell almost laughably behind in information technology. On his watch, the counterterrorism division languished as a career-killing backwater. As David Plotz noted in Slate more than a year ago, Freeh’s chief accomplishment as FBI director was to oversee an almost endless litany of fiascos while successfully ducking responsibility for all of them.”
He wasn’t even called to testify before the 9-11 Commission because
“Freeh became a key player in the long-standing war between the Clinton White House and the Republican Congress. And he, unlike the country, profited from it immensely. He carved out a pocket of freedom for his agency and himself in which he was accountable to pretty much no one. Both parties bear responsibility for that. Now they are both conspiring to sweep the truth under the rug.”
From Josh Marshallhttp://www.bigmagic.com/pages/blackj/column75o8.html
BTW, there was nothing to investigate in the bombing of the Khobar Towers.
George HW Bush put troops into Saudi Arabia after Iraq invaded Kuwait. Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda were furious. They fought in Afghanistan to rout the Russians and here was the US in their holy land.
Bill Clinton kept them there. After several Al Qaeda attacks. So did Bush Jr.
Stupidity is bi-partisan.
“Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.”Douglas Adams (Hitch-Hikers Guide To The Galaxy)
Some of us will just never get over our obsession with Clinton. As republicans are wont to say, “Get Over It”.
LOL! I love the spin of the left.
It’s like the spin of the right only it goes the opposite direction.
I guess this Louis Freeh story on 60 minutes kinda throws water on the “THE MEDIA IS ALL LIBERAL!!!!!!!!” raving complaint of those on the right!
We have the most corrupt failed administration in history and yet the “liberal” 60 minutes does a story about a book by well……another failure! (Louis Freeh) And how coincidental that this attack comes at just the very climax (I hope) of the bush administration failure.
Ahh but it’s all part of the same old “Look what he did not what we do”.
I was no great fan of Clinton. He was probably the best republican president of his era. But I’ll put his record against bush in any way anytime.
You guys didn’t even know who Louis Freeh was until all of this got out.
It’s kind of funny that people have so much to say about somebody, when they only get what is being said about them on the current event news sources or talk radio.
Joe, sorry to disappoint you, but most of us are probably familiar with Louis Freeh. Is GW? At least I know that Africa is a continent, not a country, and I’m not running for the highest office in the country, yet don’t know most of the names of the leaders in the rest of the world. I’m also smart enough to know why the French don’t have a word for entrepeneur.
Ok! Without googling, who is the current director of the FBI? Off the top of your head please!
It will be hard for me to believe on this blog. I might have stumped you if we were talking over the phone.
I dont’ believe he’s credible, but what is the point anyway?
9/11 happened on Bush’s watch. Months after he read? a pdf titled:BIN LADEN DETERMINED TO STRIKE IN US.
Even if you want to put the blame on Clinton, Bush still had a responsiblity.
umm pdf=pdb
I don’t give a damn if Clinton was rolling a doob while Monica was under his desk, he was still a far better President than this clown we’ve got in there now.Back on point, how ironic that this guys last name is pronounced FREE. Sure the book’s going to be packed full of juicy stuff, he’s SELLING BOOKS. Soon enough, someone will write a similar book about this guy. The whole bunch of Washington insiders can write nasty books about each other and laugh all the way to the bank, because nothing’s going to change except the size of their bank accounts.And don’t argue with Joe, he’s always right.
This blog has degenerated into a mishmash of words. Has anyone here ever DONE anything about the situations that are railed against so strongly?
For example, have you ever contacted (in person) your local, state or federal elected representatives? Have you ever attended a city council meeting, a state legislature session or the US Congress? Have you ever organized volunteers to work on a cause? Have you ever contributed to a PAC? Have you ever raised funds for a campaign? (and I don’t mean standing around sipping champagne and writing out checks). Have you campaigned and ever door to door? Made phone calls? Hung signs? Stuffed envelopes?
Have you ever testified at a state or federal level committee? Have you ever organized or attended a political group meeting? (not including hate groups like the Klan, Ed). Have you gotten thousands of signatures on legal petitions?
If you haven’t done these (or all of them, like I have done), then the words written here are pretty empty, aren’t they?
Talk is cheap…strongly worded opinions on a blog in central Kansas aren’t going to change a thing.
Joe Williams,
That’s horseshit. I remember very well, during the initial press conference where Clinton touted Freeh (’superbly qualified’ was the Big Dog’s language, if I recall correctly), thinking that the last thing the FBI needed was another insider as its head. Turns out I was right.
Oh, and it’s Robert Mueller III: they call him ‘three sticks’ in the agency. I DID look up the FBI webpage to make sure I spelled his name right.
Ray Thomas,
I do a lot of those things, too. But so what? This is America. Nobody has to do any of that to have a voice.
Everbody loves a self-appointed hero.
“You guys didn’t even know who Louis Freeh was until all of this got out.” LOL, Joe.
How ironic that Clinton hired a guy who ended up spending a lot of time trying to bust him for his many scandals.
No comments on Freeh’s accusation that Clinton “dropped the ball” after the Cobart Towers bombing?
Mr. Thomas:I have done all of the above…and run for office three times, as well. Fortunately, I never won.Louis Freeh is just one example of how elected officials have completely lost control of government. Wichita City Hall is an even better example. City staff goes on their merry way, to hell with what the City Council wants. If someone with money is involved, the people of this city are, in the words of a former Eagle publisher “of no consequence”.And the despicable whorehouse that is the FCC…well, that’s another story you’ll never read about in the MSM.
NoJo–
“How ironic that Clinton hired a guy who ended up spending a lot of time trying to bust him for his many scandals.”
Heh, no kidding. And how long do you think Mueller would last if he did the same thing to Bushboy?
It’s the difference between a president who welcomes the truth and openness in gov’t and one who doesn’t.
As far as dropping the ball on the Khobar Towers attack, of course he dropped the ball. He kept troops in Arabia which is the precipitating factor for all the Al Qaeda attacks.
Because no one, including the news media, was willing to take an honest look at what the terrorists hoped to accomplish, we doomed ourselves to more attacks.
9-11 finally tore the mask of ignorance off, while the media and the vast majority of Americans remain clueless.
BTW, our troops are now out of Arabia, so in a very real sense, the terrorists won. They achieved their primary objective.
Who’s the head of the CIA, JoeW?
No googling . . .
I think he’s googling under the desk.
Ray,I’ve been an activist for various causes since 1963.
Ray,I’ve protested against an unjust war. Does that count?I fought in a war. I got shot at (a lot). Don’t know if that’s activist enough to count, But it’s doing my part. (ever been shot at, Ray? Not that it matters, but I’m curious).I testified in front of a Senate sub-committee one time. Is that as good as “testifying at a state or federal level committee”? My part was small, but it was pretty scary.I organized for a union for a couple of years. I think that qualifies as politically active.I’ve been involved in several political campaigns. None of the glamor stuff; just running cameras, handing out fliers, making campaign buttons etc.
Point is, Ray, most of the bloggers on these pages are politically active at some level and I’d bet in most cases, more so than average.”Talk is cheap…strongly worded opinions on a blog in central Kansas aren’t going to change a thing.”
Oh, I hope you’re wrong, Ray. It may be roudy, but it’s an exchange of ideas. Ideas bring change.—–
” but it’s an exchange of ideas.” Ideas would be the enemy. If people have ideas then it means they have been thinking and that is dangerous to the current administration.
As for Freeh, I don’t trust him. He has an agenda beyond wanting to tell the ‘truth’. I think he is manuvering for a push into either politics (ie. congress) or talk radio/TV. And with this book he is aligning himself with the right by picking on their favorite target.
Good instincts, K.
John Podesta refutes Freeh’s claims in the WaPo–
Perhaps no part of Freeh’s auto-whitewash is more self-aggrandizing and inaccurate than his rewrite of the history of the investigation into Khobar Towers. Freeh claims the White House did not support his attempts to probe the Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia…In fact, on numerous occasions senior Clinton administration officials reiterated requests for full cooperation on Khobar Towers, including access to key witnesses, with interlocutors at the highest levels of the Saudi government. This culminated in a face-to-face demand by President Bill Clinton to Crown Prince Abdullah in Washington in the fall of 1998. Freeh, who was not in that meeting and cites only unnamed sources, claims that Clinton never pushed seriously for cooperation, instead asking Abdullah for a contribution to his planned presidential library.
This account does not pass the straight-face test. Those who were in the room, including several still in government service who cannot speak publicly, all concur that Clinton pushed Abdullah hard for cooperation, telling him that the future of the American-Saudi relationship depended on the kingdom’s cooperation. In short order, that cooperation was forthcoming and produced the information that led to the eventual indictments. Freeh alleges that the real reason for the Saudi turnaround was the intervention, at his request, of former president George H.W. Bush. That Bush added his voice to the chorus of administration demands reflects well on our former president, but the argument that the Saudis would deliver on the basis of an appeal from someone who was out of office as opposed to someone whose actions would determine the course of U.S.-Saudi relations is completely implausible….