Wallace falsehood: said in Clinton interview that he asked Bush admin officials "plenty of questions" about failure to catch bin Laden

Summary: During his interview with former President Bill Clinton on Fox News Sunday, Chris Wallace asked Clinton why he failed to "do more" during his presidency to put Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden "out of business," a question, Clinton said, Fox News "do[esn't] ask the other side." Wallace denied the charge, responding, "That is not true."

In a taped interview with former President Bill Clinton that aired on the September 24 edition of Fox News Broadcasting Co.'s Fox News Sunday, host Chris Wallace asked Clinton why he failed to "do more" during his presidency to put Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden "out of business." Clinton responded with a vigorous defense of his administration's anti-terrorism policies, noting that he instituted a "comprehensive anti-terror strategy" during his tenure in the White House and that many conservatives had accused him at the time of being "too obsessed with finding bin Laden." He then told Wallace: "I want to know how many people in the Bush administration you've asked this question of. ... Tell the truth." Wallace replied, "Have you ever watched Fox News Sunday, sir? ... We ask plenty of questions." Clinton later stated, "[Y]ou people ask me questions you don't ask the other side," to which Wallace responded, "That is not true." In fact, in dozens of interviews over the past five years with senior Bush aides, Wallace and former host Tony Snow have repeatedly failed to ask pressing questions regarding the Bush administration's efforts to pursue Al Qaeda in the eight months prior to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks -- and in the years since.

Here is a list of senior Bush administration officials interviewed on Fox News Sunday since September 11, 2001. (White House press secretary Tony Snow previously hosted the program. Wallace succeeded him in December 2003.):

• Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice; 9/10/06
• National Security adviser Stephen Hadley; 8/6/06
• Rice; 7/16/06
• Rice; 6/4/06
• Rice; 5/21/06
• Rice; 3/26/06
• Rice; 12/18/05
• Hadley; 12/4/05
• Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld; 11/20/05
• Rice; 10/16/05
• Rumsfeld; 6/26/05
• Rice; 6/19/05
• Hadley; 5/15/05
• Then-White House chief of staff Andrew Card; 5/1/05
• Rumsfeld; 3/20/05
• Hadley; 3/13/05
• Vice President Dick Cheney; 2/6/05
• Rice; 1/30/05
• Rice (then-National Security adviser); 10/10/04
• Rice; 6/27/04
• Rice; 6/6/04
• Rice; 4/18/04
• Rumsfeld; 3/28/04
• Card; 12/7/03
• Rumsfeld; 11/2/03
• Rice; 9/28/03
• Rice; 9/7/03
• Rice; 7/13/03
• Rumsfeld; 5/4/03
• Rumsfeld; 3/30/03
• Rice; 2/16/03
• Card; 1/26/03
• Rumsfeld; 1/19/03
• Rice; 11/10/02
• Rice; 9/15/02
• Card; 6/9/02
• Rice; 5/26/02
• Cheney; 5/19/02
• Rice; 5/5/02
• Card; 4/14/02
• Rice; 2/3/02
• Cheney; 1/27/02
• Rumsfeld; 11/11/01

In the March 28, 2004, interview with Rumsfeld, Wallace did press him on whether the Department of Defense should have "been thinking more about" terrorism prior to 9-11 and asked him to respond to the "basic charge that, pre-9-11 ... this government, the Bush administration, largely ignored the threat from Al Qaeda." Referring to Rumsfeld's testimony before the 9-11 Commission regarding the Defense Department's anti-terrorism efforts, Wallace remarked, "[I]t sure sounds like fighting terrorism was not a top priority."

But beyond this exchange, the Fox News Sunday interviews listed above have almost entirely ignored several key questions regarding the Bush administration's efforts to pursue bin Laden and Al Qaeda.

Why did the White House not respond more forcefully to the August 6 CIA memo warning of an impending bin Laden strike against the United States?

On August 6, 2001, the CIA delivered a now-famous "Presidential Daily Brief" (PDB) to Bush entitled "Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in U.S." The memo stated that, although the FBI had "not been able to corroborate" a 1998 report that bin Laden was seeking to "hijack a U.S. aircraft," "FBI information since that time indicate[d] patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York."

The administration appears to have done little in response to the August 6 PDB. The 9-11 Commission stated in its report that it "found no indication of any further discussion before September 11 among the President and his top advisers of the possibility of a threat of an al Qaeda attack in the United States" -- this despite the fact that "[m]ost of the intelligence community recognized in the summer of 2001 that the number and severity of threat reports were unprecedented."

News of the August 6 memo first broke on May 18, 2002. During Cheney's appearance on Fox News Sunday the following day, Snow brought up the memo and asked him, "Why didn't we connect the dots?" But in their subsequent interviews with Bush administration officials, Wallace and Snow repeatedly failed to ask them if they regretted not reacting more forcefully to it. Wallace even avoided questioning Rice about it days after she discussed the memo during her testimony before the 9-11 Commission, as the weblog Think Progress noted.

Why did the Bush administration demote Richard Clarke?

Former counterterrorism official Richard Clarke left the White House in January 2003, shortly after being demoted by the Bush administration. He subsequently criticized the administration's response to the alarming intelligence delivered prior to 9-11. During the September 24 interview, Clinton said that Clarke was "loyal" to former presidents Reagan, George H. W. Bush, Clinton, and George W. Bush. Clinton then noted that despite Clarke's loyalty, the Bush administration "downgraded him and the terrorist operation," which prompted Clinton to ask Wallace, "I want to know how many people you asked, 'Why did you fire Dick Clarke?' " Clinton later said: "This country only has one person who's worked against terror, from the terrorist incidents under Reagan to the terrorist incidents on 9-11. Only one: Richard Clarke."

In his numerous interviews with Bush administration officials, Wallace mentioned Clarke only once, as Think Progress noted, in the March 28, 2004, interview with Rumsfeld. But in that interview, Wallace failed to question Rumsfeld on Clarke's demotion.

Why didn't the Bush administration do anything in response to the bombing of the USS Cole?

During the interview, Wallace asked Clinton about the "attack on the Cole" and why, "after the attack," the Clinton administration "didn't do more." Wallace was referring to the USS Cole bombing on October 12, 2000, roughly three months before Clinton left the White House. Clinton noted that he didn't have much time to respond to the bombing and asked Wallace: "I want to know how many people in the Bush administration you asked, 'Why didn't you do anything about the Cole?' "

As Think Progress noted, no Bush administration official has ever been asked about the administration's lack of response to the Cole bombing by a host of Fox News Sunday -- this despite the fact that the FBI and CIA did not certify that bin Laden was responsible for the attack until early 2001.

Why did Bush not heed the CIA's call for more troops to help catch bin Laden at Tora Bora?

In an April 17, 2002, article on bin Laden's escape from the Tora Bora region of Afghanistan in late 2001, The Washington Post reported that the Bush administration's "failure to commit U.S. ground troops to hunt him was its gravest error in the war against al Qaeda, according to civilian and military officials with first-hand knowledge." The article noted that several "[a]fter-action reviews, conducted privately inside and outside the military chain of command, describe the episode as a significant defeat for the United States." Further, the Post quoted a senior counterterrorism official saying, "We [messed] up by not getting into Tora Bora sooner and letting the Afghans do all the work. ... We didn't put U.S. forces on the ground, despite all the brave talk, and that is what we have had to change since then."

But in their subsequent appearances on Fox News Sunday, senior Bush aides did not face any questions regarding the Bush administration's decision-making at Tora Bora.

In 2006, investigative reporter Ron Suskind shed even more light on the incident in his new book, The One Percent Doctrine: Deep Inside America's Pursuit of Its Enemies Since 9/11 (Simon & Schuster, June 2006). Suskind disclosed that CIA officer Henry "Hank" Crumpton, the head of the agency's Afghanistan campaign at the time, had told Bush in late November 2001 that Pakistani and Afghan fighters were "definitely not" equipped to handle the mission and that "we're going to lose our prey if we're not careful." According to Suskind, Crumpton "strongly recommended the marines, or other troops in the region, get to Tora Bora immediately." But despite delivering this recommendation to Bush directly, the administration never committed more troops to the area, and bin Laden ultimately escaped.

Since Suskind's book release in June, Wallace has interviewed both Rice and Hadley, but he did not ask either of them about this revelation...http://tinyurl.com/py87e
*
Chris Wallace & FOX really stepped in the Big Dawg poop yesterday. The one bottom-line thing you want from a 'news' station is truth. That's what FOX lacks. They have everything else but not that.
One of the great things about Media Matters for America is that it's helmed by David Brock, a reformed right wing hit man. He knows how these sleaze balls operate, he was one.
It's truly a site worth visiting often.
*