Republished in full by Templestream from The Daily Sheeple
In the process of explaining her vote in favor of the war in Iraq,
Hillary Clinton made a startling admission — she sided with
then-President George W. Bush because he promised billions of dollars to
help New York after 9/11.
In an interview with MSNBC’s Chris Matthews,
Clinton described the situation the day after the attack as if she,
alone, could be the savior of New York City. Matthews queried the
presidential candidate, who now admits the U.S. invasion of Iraq was a
mistake, why Sen. Bernie Sanders foresaw the folly of that war when she
could not.
After a fly-over, seeing the “devastation” at ground zero, Clinton
stated $20 billion had been immediately slated by the Bush
administration to rebuild the Pentagon and fund Homeland Security, but
“not a penny for New York.”
Clinton attended a small meeting at the White House, where she
intimated she faced Republican opposition in garnering financial help to
rebuild NYC.
“I’m sitting there in the Oval Office, and Bush says to me, ‘What do
you need?’ And I said, ‘I need $20 billion to rebuild, you know, New
York.’ He said, ‘You got it.’ And he was good to his word,” Clinton
explained to Matthews. “So, my experience with [Bush] on something of
great import to this country was positive — because, literally that same
day, I get back to the Capitol, and the Republicans are trying to take
that money away. We kept calling the White House. Bush kept saying, ‘I
gave them my word, I’m going to stick with it.’ So, you know, I had a
different set of experiences [than Sanders].”
Besides apparently explaining her affirmative vote for the use of
force in Iraq as an exchange for earmarking funds for NYC, Clinton also
justified her vote with a long-disproven theory.
During the feverish build-up toward war in 2003, Bush and his cronies
often claimed Saddam Hussein had been stockpiling chemical, biological,
and potentially nuclear weapons — “weapons of mass destruction,” or
WMDs. Though the U.N. conducted inspections which proved largely
fruitless in that respect, when speaking with Matthews, Clinton
revisited and agreed with that contentious Bush administration claim.
She claimed that, at the time, there was a “strong sense” Saddam had
restarted his nuclear and biological weapons programs; and, thus, a
discussion about the need for “regime change” in Iraq. “That was the
prevailing opinion,” Clinton said.
As Matthews quickly noted, evidence, even available at the time,
didn’t back up that theory. In fact, former CIA director, Mike Morrell,
had specifically briefed Bush that there were no indications Saddam had
those capabilities or had begun to manufacture such weapons. Matthews,
who previously interviewed
Morrell on the subject, asked Clinton whose information she considered
in her vote to invade Iraq since the CIA had nixed the WMD theory.
Clinton referred to the ongoing U.N. inspections, which — though
Saddam had been less than cooperative — had not discovered evidence of
WMDs, either.
“Here’s what was misleading,” Clinton explained, “is that Saddam
Hussein could have ended it immediately. He could have said, come
anywhere, look anywhere, we have nothing. But he didn’t choose to do
that.”
As Matthews continuously grilled Clinton over the events from 2003,
it became clear she was as absent an explanation for her vote to invade
Iraq as Bush had been. Intelligence did not bear out any weapons
programs in the country. Rather, fervor for the invasion either blinded
the government or left the administration and its pro-war supporters
scrambling to come up with excuses to make it happen.
Though Hillary Clinton admits her vote to invade Iraq was “a
mistake,” her admission rings hollow in light of the evidence she uses
for justification. As usual, her excuse-filled interview seems wholly
disingenuous. Hundreds of thousands of innocent people died because she
wanted money.
Tags: Hillary Clinton on Iraq War, Election 2016, Clinton support of war crimes, Hillary Clinton admits on live TV invasion of Iraq was based on "a strong sense" and no evidence of nuclear weapons, Hillary Clinton corruption, example of Republican and Democrat corruption, status quo political corruption in US
No comments:
Post a Comment
You are welcome to post on-topic comments but, please, no uncivilized blog abuse or spamming. Thank you!