The latest CIA inspector general report shows that Bill Clinton lied in that infamous red-faced interview with Chris Wallace; he never ordered the CIA to kill Osama bin Laden:

  • The report also criticized intelligence problems when Bill Clinton was president, detailing political and legal “constraints” agency officials felt in the late 1990s. In September 2006, during a famous encounter with Fox News anchor Wallace, Clinton erupted in anger and waived his finger when asked about whether his administration had done enough to get bin Laden. “What did I do? What did I do?” Clinton said at one point. “I worked hard to try to kill him. I authorized a finding for the CIA to kill him. We contracted with people to kill him. I got closer to killing him than anybody has gotten since.”

    Clinton appeared to have been referring to a December 1999 Memorandum of Notification (MON) he signed that authorized the CIA to use lethal force to capture, not kill, bin Laden. But the inspector general’s report made it clear that the agency never viewed the order as a license to “kill” bin Laden—one reason it never mounted more effective operations against him. “The restrictions in the authorities given the CIA with respect to bin Laden, while arguably, although ambiguously, relaxed for a period of time in late 1998 and early 1999, limited the range of permissible operations,” the report stated. (Scheuer agreed with the inspector general’s findings on this issue, but said if anything the report was overly diplomatic. “There was never any ambiguity,” he said. “None of those authorities ever allowed us to kill anyone. At least that’s what the CIA lawyers told us.”


As noted before, I am not blaming Clinton for 9/11. The blame for that rests solely with Osama bin Laden and his Muslim followers.

But in about a year we are going to elect a new President and there is a very good chance that the Democrat nominee is going to the wife of the man who spared Bin Laden and a person who, by all accounts, agrees with how her husband did--or did not--prosecute the war on terror and plans on bringing back a fair number of her husband's advisors if she gets elected.

If, in fact, the Clintons and their advisors are lying about what they did to stop Bin Laden that needs to be considered when deciding who will protect us against him and his followers as the next president.

Also, this report only further fuels the speculation that reports or evidence on Clinton's failures to stop Bin Laden are exactly what Sandy Burger--the same Sandy who may be back in the White House if Hillary gets elected--was stealing from the National archive.