Today on Blogcritics
Home » Louis Freeh says Clinton sold US out to Sauds

Louis Freeh says Clinton sold US out to Sauds

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Ann Coulter’s way too free in tossing around the word “treason” to describe political opponents such as Bill Clinton. Still, the guy was selling us out for a song all along. Most obviously egregious, he signed executive waivers to let top campaign contributors sell sensitive technology to China.

Thus I find it easy enough to believe when I see stuff like this, from Drudge’s preview of former FBI director Louis Freeh’s new book My FBI : Bringing Down the Mafia, Investigating Bill Clinton, and Fighting the War on Terror:

Freeh says the former president let down the American people and the families of victims of the Khobar Towers terror attack in Saudi Arabia. After promising to bring to justice those responsible for the bombing that killed 19 and injured hundreds, Freeh says Clinton refused to personally ask Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah to allow the FBI to question bombing suspects the kingdom had in custody – the only way the bureau could secure the interviews, according to Freeh. Freeh writes in the book, “Bill Clinton raised the subject only to tell the crown prince that he understood the Saudis’ reluctance to cooperate and then he hit Abdullah up for a contribution to the Clinton Presidential Library.” Says Freeh, “That’s a fact that I am reporting.”

Of course, it’s not like the Bush presidents haven’t had their noses just as deep up the Saud family’s behinds. What’s up with all that?

Powered by

About Gadfly

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    I have a real bad taste in my mouth on this one, Al. I don’t believe any Director of a Federal Agency empowered with National Security should be able to divulge what went on behind the scenes until 50 years after they are out of office. Granted there’s the FOIA, but there has to come a point where national security serves the best interest of the people. For history’s sake, there should be a record, but no one says it has to be made public within months of one’s departure.

  • RogerMDillion

    Sounds like the same kind of stuff that the right cries emboldens the terroists.

  • http://www.diablog.us Dave Nalle

    Frankly, when it comes to gross malfeasance I’d like to know while the perpetrator can still be held accountable.

    Dave

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    Silas, I appreciate your concern for security issues, but I will 99% take openess over secrecy on general principles. Is there some way in which this particular revelation could reasonably be seen to compromise national security?

    Looks to me like it’s likely only to further make Clinton look bad, and people do need to see the truth of what they’re dealing with.

  • http://journals.aol.com/vicl04/THESAVAGEQUIETSEPTEMBERSUN/ Victor Lana

    Al,

    I don’t know if this story is true or not, but it brings up a most salient point: we are too involved with Saudi Arabia (now and for the last forty years).

    We need to find alternative fuel sources NOW; we need to completely divorce ourselves from the Saudis (that means not taking a drop of their filthy oil); we need to stop getting oil from any source other than the USA.

    In this there will be enormous difficulty at first, but eventually freedom from dependence that has now made us bow to the Saudis and the rest of the price gaugers in OPEC.

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    The problem isn’t that we buy oil, but that we get deeply involved in their politics.

    Also, we can’t very effectively just legislate our way out of dependence on oil. The good thing about high oil prices is that they naturally start motivating people to save energy, and look for alternative fuels.

    And who’s up for more nuclear energy?

  • http://www.djradiohead.com DJRadiohead

    Everybody is in bed with everybody. It is so hard not to throw your hands up and say, “The hell with it.”

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    Good point, Victor. Yesterday I invoked some passages from Jimmy Carter’s Malaise Speech. I’m compelled to do the same here:

    In little more than two decades we’ve gone from a position of energy independence to one in which almost half the oil we use comes from foreign countries, at prices that are going through the roof. Our excessive dependence on OPEC has already taken a tremendous toll on our economy and our people. This is the direct cause of the long lines which have made millions of you spend aggravating hours waiting for gasoline. It’s a cause of the increased inflation and unemployment that we now face. This intolerable dependence on foreign oil threatens our economic independence and the very security of our nation. The energy crisis is real. It is worldwide. It is a clear and present danger to our nation. These are facts and we simply must face them.

    What’s changed since 1979? Here we are almost 30 years later and he goals set forth by President Carter were never even closely reached. That’s American complacency. That’s the American penchant to wait until the last possible moment to react. We seem to think that paying $4 a gallon for gasoline is a sufficient sacrifice.

    …the solution of our energy crisis can also help us to conquer the crisis of the spirit in our country. It can rekindle our sense of unity, our confidence in the future, and give our nation and all of us individually a new sense of purpose…

    Therein lies our biggest problem. We’ve lost that sense of purpose. We’re so bogged down by the insignificant. Those issues that we really need to face have become so gargantuan that we’ve just let them fester as a cancer in our collective subconscious. Louis Freeh can blame Clinton, the Democrats, and the Pope. He was in a position to do something as the Director of he FBI. He had access to information that we can’t even fathom. Instead of writing a book clearing his own name, perhaps he should don a pair of overalls and get dirty with the rest of us. He was part of the problem, let him be a part of the solution.

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    And who’s up for more nuclear energy?

    Soylent Green, Al. That’s the ticket. And instead of using it for food, use it for energy.

  • http://journals.aol.com/vicl04/THESAVAGEQUIETSEPTEMBERSUN/ Victor Lana

    Silas et al,

    I advocate that all vehicles run on manure by 2010. Washington DC will be an infinite resource for the nation (and probably could fuel the rest of the world too).

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    Another alternative is to plug a hose in their butts and run on natural gas. Too bad we can’t convert hot air into cheap energy. Washington could power the globe.

  • george mark

    if Judge Freeh , felt that President Clinton , “sold” out ,then he should have “blown the whistle” so to speak , at the time and resigned as Director. Like Secretary of State Cyrus Vance did over the hostages in Iran when he disagreed with President Carter. As to “how” to handle the situation.
    For Judge Freeh , to now come out now with that , is a cheap shot , to say the least. Judge Freeh , does not have
    “clean hands” for him to take , shots
    at President Clinton. Meaning that the
    Judge also made errors “Big Ones”
    on his watch ! Not surprised that he
    took the shot that he did , given that they both disliked one another very much!!! to say the least !

  • Megan

    He was appointed by President Clinton why would he lie.

  • george mark

    reply to Megan : -if- the question made
    referred to my comment , then , never
    said or implied that Judge Freeh “lied”.
    He himself said that it was a “fact”
    of what President Clinton “did” as to
    selling out. Given that , the statement
    stands , he should have resigned.

  • Steve

    In 1995 I was in the 71st Fighter Squadron out of Langly AFB, VA. In the fall of that year we rotated to Saudi for a 5-month mission.

    I was in the very tower that was targeted. The fence line was only a two-lane road away from the building. Our only protection was two Saudis in a Red Jeep pick up with a 50 Cal. mounted on top.

    I worked the mid shift and after getting off shift we’d sit outside and watch the goings on outside the fence line. And we noticed a lot of unusual things going on.

    Like obvious stuff such as people pacing off distances. Cars driving towards the fence line real fast then braking to a stop before driving away real quick.

    We are just aircraft mechanics to be honest but we saw the writing on the wall and you did not have to be a cop, FBI or CIA to figure this one out.

    Myself and others made our observations had a meeting to ensure we were not just going to yell the sky is falling when in fact it was not. After talking and each of us having our say in what we noted we took our concerns to our chain of command.

    We/I don’t know for a fact that this did get inputted to the chain to the highest level but they did put USAF SPs on top of the buildings after that. And they most likely save a lot of lives but still 19 died and over 300 where injured when the chain of command knew something was up.

    Steve Hackett, MSgt, (USAF Ret.)

  • likes clinton

    freeh was not even at the meeting he describes. how he know’s it a “fact” i don’t know.

  • exo

    I just saw 60 Minutes. There is something strange about Louis Freeh. Very dark character, wonder what skeletons are in his closet. He has is so repressed and seems to have envied Clinton’s Alpha male extra curricular activities. He has giant inferiority complex too. Who on earth titles a book “My FBI?” He should have called it “My Clinton Sex Obsession: How I Lost the War on Terror and Bankrupted the FBI, While Self-Flagelating Myself in the Dungeons of Opus Dei”

  • http://www.templestark.com Temple Stark

    Waging War on Terror it says on the book – not the title Amazon gives it.

    And “MY FBI” (plus the rest) is a very bad “I’m trying to make up for something” title.

    At least “My Life” – as a title – made sense.

    So, does Freeh put himself in the “I coulda done better” corner? I seem to remember a lot of Republicans and the Clinton haters also hating Freeh just as much.

  • Sandra DiLonardo

    Mr. Freeh needs to delve back in the past to see who, in fact, sold us to the Saudis – that might be George Bush, the elder! Enough of this infidel who is probably being paid by Bush the junior to come forth NOW and say these lies about Clinton. A pox on Louis Freeh!

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    Some more acts of treason by Clinton:

    1) We were attacked three different times by Al-Queda and Clinto never did anything to prevent a next one which led to 9/11.

    2) The pardon of Marc Rich

    3) The Waco incident

    4) The return of Elion Gonzales back to Communist Cuba.

    5) The veto of two partial-birth abortion bills.

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    Well, there’s 4 reasons to ammend the Constitution to allow another Clinton Presidency.

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    O.K. then…

    I wonder which one you don’t agree with. Was it the sucking of babies brains??? or was it the tank fire on a building full of little kids???

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    And I would like to add another act of treason to comment 20:

    6) The Bush/Clinton duo raised a hundred million to the Katrina victims while Clinton was able to raise 200 million for his a library.

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    Anthony, you’re being both rude and ridiculous. One, you are being, as Hannibal Lecter would say, unspeakably rude all over Blogcritics. I try to be nice, but not every discussion is all about abortion, and you don’t have any right to presume to hijack every discussion with this foolishness. It’s not impressing anyone, or changing anyone’s minds. It’s just reflecting badly on all of us to the right of center. Cut out this foolishness.

    Second, you are being simply ridiculous with the use of the word “treason” here, to the point where it has no meaning except “doing something Anthony Grande doesn’t agree with.” Waco was pretty bad, and he and Janet Reno should still be prosecuted.

    But vetoing a couple of abortion bills does not constitute treason. It only constitutes disagreeing with you, and you need to get it into your arrogant teenage brain that there’s a difference.

    Finally, simply raising money for his library does not constitute an act of treason, but merely name calling on your part.

    You need to give the foolishness a rest.

  • MCH

    Hey Al…

    …Dittos!

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    >But vetoing a couple of abortion bills does not constitute treason.< These are not normal abortion bills. They are partial abortion bills. If you want to see the difference click on my name.

    That is killing Americans at the moment of birth. That is treason to me.

    >simply raising money for his library does not constitute an act of treason,<

    Raising money for his library is one thing. But by raising 200 mil for his personal gain and raising only 100 mil for Americans in need is TREASON. It shows that if he wanted to he could have raised more.

    Oh, and how about sending a six year old whose mother died by bringing him here back to communist Cuba to be with a father he hadn’t met since he was born???

    See, these aren’t just moral and politcal issues that I disagree with, these are atrocities.

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    I too thought it was a bad policy to send Elian Gonzalez back to Cuba, but that does not even begin to make it an act of “treason.”

    I too would tend to favor laws restricting late term abortion, but that’s a policy issue again, which is a long ways from “treason.”

    You say, “That is treason to me.” No, see, you’re just making up your own arbitrary definition to include things that don’t belong.

    [You taking notes here? There’s going to be a quiz.]

    Not everything bad that a politician does is “treason.” Selling out the country to a hostile foreign government, that would be treason. Supporting different abortion or tax policies than you is NOT treason.

    Not only is it not treason, but when you go around insisting that it is, you only make yourself look foolish before all sensible and mature individuals. Thus, the things that you say which might have merit are discredited by your ideologically blindered foolishness all around it.

    In short, you’re not helping either your reputation or your cause with the rude and presumptuous foolishness.

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    Senator, I wish you’d lecture the members of Congress.

    I too thought it was a bad policy to send Elian Gonzalez back to Cuba…

    That’s a Catch-22. I think Elian’s father’s rights superceded everything else. The manner in which he was taken from the house wasn’t the best possible way. But, again, it’s about parental rights and that is sovereign in my eyes.

    I too would tend to favor laws restricting late term abortion…

    That’s reasonable. If the fetus is not viable, then the mother should have the right to choose regardless of dogma imposed by belief systems.

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    Silas, you thought the operant principle for Elian would be “parental rights” where I would have thought the big point would be what was best for the child. Of course, then we get into who gets to decide that.

    I’m sympathetic to the basic pro-life position that abortion kills a baby, and it’s bad. I don’t believe in the government enough to grant them the authority over what’s going on inside a woman, but I can understand how some people might.

    It’s reasonable for people with those beliefs to vote pro-life. It’s just NOT reasonable to start accusing everyone who disagrees with you of “treason.”

  • http://www.elitistpig.com Dave Nalle

    >>I wonder which one you don’t agree with. Was it the sucking of babies brains??? or was it the tank fire on a building full of little kids???<<

    Technically the kids weren’t in the building, but in the underground shelter beneath it, so the tank didn’t attack them directly. They died because of smoke inhalation when the building burnt down, from fires which may have been started by the defenders.

    Dave

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    Al Barber, sending a child back to communist Cuba, our enemy, is selling out our country. That is final.

    Who do you think you are??? “Oh, Your going to be quizzed”

    Look at you. You are disgracing yourself. Saying that I am hurting our cause then you go around and say “Abortion is wrong, but the Government can’t tell us it is wrong so we should do it anyway”

    You got blood on your hands my libertarian freind. You want to keep Roe v. Wade, you got blood on your hands.

    Dave, the kids died. Clinton sold out their lives.

  • http://biggesttent.blogspot.com/ Silas Kain

    I think that there’s too much government intrusion on the rights of parents. From the day the kid is popped out, it’s like he/she is given the 800 Number to the local child services agency. Look, I’m not condoning parental abuse. At the same rate, I don’t condone government abuse of parents.

    Abortion. There are those that believe when an abortion is performed it is equivalent to murder because “life” begins at conception. Consider, for a moment, that it was true that upon conception, a spirit enters the zygote. A woman terminates her pregnancy. Under “pro-life” doctrine, that poor, suffering, murdered human being would take the A-train to Heaven. There, the little one, in all likelihood, become sa cherub or something to that effect. Now, believers in Christ and His salvational powers — don’t you see that little baby’s fast track causes it to join the Father and live in eternity in His Light and Love? How can you bemoan the baby’s loss, when he/she is clearly in such a better, beautiful place? Being on this Earth or spending Eternity in the Light of the Father? Oh come now, you KNOW the choice is clear!

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    Anthony, I’ve really been trying to be polite, but you’re an idiot. That’s okay, you’re young. But you’re being willfully ignorant now, and that’s not okay.

    For starters, I am opposed to the Roe decision, and I look forward to it being overturned. It was a horrible excuse for constitutional law, the very symbol of the court just making up laws from the bench.

    I’ve said as much repeatedly. As much time as you have spent on this site carrying on and on and ON about abortion, you should have known this. But you have made it clear that you don’t care about anything that anyone else says, because you’re 17 and you know everything.

    Generally, I think abortion is a terrible sin. Nonetheless, I do not presume to dictate every intimate personal decision in the world. It’s not MY decision to make, and it sure as hell isn’t yours.

    I can even understand a point of reasonable disagreement there. I can understand why someone might think that abortion should be illegal, but I would expect people who so opine to recognize that someone of good will and honest intent might take a different opinion.

    Whereas pretty much NO ONE is going to be impressed with some teenager who thinks that anyone who disagrees with them is evil and has blood on their hands. Your pure frickin’ arrogance wears on my patience.

    “Who do you think you are???” Answer: I’m an educated and experienced adult who has been around enough real world situations to see the practical complexities of the debate. I’m also smart enough and thoughtful enough to have some measure of humility, and to know that NO one is wise enough to make these decisions for everyone else.

    I’m talking down to you with the “quiz” stuff because you are badly needing a rebuke. You just absolutely will not take friendly admonitions to civility in public discourse. So, I’m calling you out.

    I’m tired of your foolishness. You’re coming up here in MY yard yacking a lot of presumptuous nonsense, as if your teenage ass was the pure fount of wisdom and knowledge. It’s not, and you do not need to be thinking that it is, and you definitely do not need to be coming into MY yard acting like you’re smarter or more moral than everyone else. You’re not.

  • http://alienboysworld.blogspot.com/ Alienboy

    What Al said.

    Impressively put too, Al.

  • JR

    Anthony Grande: Al Barber, sending a child back to communist Cuba, our enemy, is selling out our country. That is final.

    A teenager taking a stand on a political issue and declaring, “That is final”.

    Isn’t he adorable.

  • http://alienboysworld.blogspot.com/ Alienboy

    Er, no he isn’t.

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    Barger, you say that I should know that you want to overturn Roe??? Well all I got out of your comments were:

    >I don’t believe in the government enough to grant them the authority over what’s going on inside a woman,< That is your own words by the way. And here is what you said next:

    >I am opposed to the Roe decision, and I look forward to it being overturned.< You contradicted yourself man. So much for:

    >I’m an educated and experienced adult< And your calling ME out???
    -----

    >NO ONE is going to be impressed with some teenager who thinks that anyone who disagrees with them is evil and has blood on their hands<

    No you are twisting my words aroud. I said anyone who “supports abortion” has blood on their hands, and you said anyone anyone who “disagrees” with me has blood on their hands.

    Someone who does not want Roe v. Wade overturned has blood on their hands, but someone who disagrees with me and says Gay Marriage should be legal I wouldn’t say that they have “blood on their hands” because death is not involved, I would simply say “I disagree”.

    Big difference.

  • MCH

    Is Anthony Grande a little brother of Bobby (RJ) Elliott?

  • Bennett

    Very little.

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    MCH, you’re being rather unfair to good ol’ RJ. Granted, he can be a bit of a pitbull- which I appreciate- but he’s never on his harshest day been so stubbornly and unprovokedly hostile as Master Anthony.

    Plus, RJ is quite a bit smarter. Besides being rude, Master Anthony does not appear to be the sharpest tool in the shed. RJ I’m sure readily gets the point of being pro-choice but anti-Roe.

    Read slowly, try to comprehend. See this is what I meant when I said that there was going to be a quiz- and you flunk. I have write about abortion related topics here now and again, and you have commented repeatedly and at length. I give the capsule version of this pretty much every time. Do you not even read the posts here before you start commenting?

    I’m pro-choice because I don’t think that the government should presume to have that kind of intimate authority, but I’m anti-Roe because that’s not the way to go about it. By rights, laws about abortion should mostly be a subject for democratically elected state legislatures to address, not appointed federal judges who utterly lack proper authority to make such decisions.

    Are you taking notes here, Anthony? This WILL be on the test.

    To put it another way, I’d rather accept that perhaps a couple of states might effectively outlaw abortion than throw our entire system of separation of powers out of whack as we have done by having the federal courts making up laws like this.

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    Yeah, but if we put Abortion on the ballot for the people to decide it would be outlawed in every state, but who would want to do that???

    How dare you call me stupid??? You hate abortion but you want abortion. I don’t care what your explanation you give, that is stupidity.

    What would have been your solution to slavery???

    See, I am Pro-Choice also. The woman should have the CHOICE to get pregnant or not.

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    Anthony, I have not used the word “stupid” to describe you, but you seem to be having an awfully hard time understanding a simple point. I hate abortion, and I do not want abortion- but I do not presume the authority to outlaw everything I don’t like.

    Also, slavery is a totally different type of issue than abortion.

    Basically, all the information that you seem to be capable of processing is ABORTION BAD. After that, it seems to be pretty much absolutely anything that acts to restrict abortion is good, otherwise you have blood on your hands and you’re BAD, BAD. Life and these issues are just a whole lot more complicated than that.

    You sound like the village idiot with your simple minded ideologically blindered ranting. You end up sounding just as ridiculous and lacking in credibility as the idiots on the other end who can’t think a half inch beyond some slogan like “A woman’s body, a woman’s choice.” The difference is that they probably have a stronger simplistic argument.

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    You have been to other threads obviously. The reasons why I haven’t gotten into detailed arguments here is because you agree with me. Know what good would it do if I started on why Abortion is bad???

    My argument against you is:

    O.K. we both think abortion is bad, BUT WHY DON’T WE TOTALLY BAN IT!?!?!?!?!?!!?!?!!?!?!??!?

    Roe v. Wade just says that the States don’t have the right to outlaw Abortion. Now if Roe were to be oveturned, then the States will decide for themeselves if Abortion is bad, then we go from there. States like Arkansas, Alabama, Oklahoma, West Virginia will quickly ban it. Then we can work on the other states.

    What is wrong with that???

    Now tell me, do you think Roe v. Wade should be overturned and the States get to decide Abortion for themeselves???

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    I don’t think I’ve been unclear, but I’ll try again. Roe should absolutely be overturned right away on constitutional grounds. It was a very poor legal decision.

    That kicks it down to the state level for decisions. At that level, legislatures should NOT be trying to criminalize abortion, though I might be open to some amount of regulation and caveats.

    Again, I think abortion is generally a really bad thing- but it is not MY decision to make on behalf of every woman out there.

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    Al, would we be up to bringing it up on the ballot for the PEOPLE to decide???

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    Anthony, you’d probably be very disappointed with the results of a ballot initiative on abortion. But it’s still not the place of everyone else to make the decision for a woman and her family.

    But yes, the big point of saying that Roe should be overturned is that I’m saying that the issue should be addressed in a democratic manner by accountable elected officials. I’m skeptical of trying to run things by ballot initiative, but local state legislators are right there close where you can work on them, or vote them out of office.

  • http://www.nrlc.org/ Anthony Grande

    >But it’s still not the place of everyone else to make the decision for a woman and her family.< You disagree with abortion, but you want women to have the right to choose, so you are Pro-Choice.

    >Anthony, you’d probably be very disappointed with the results of a ballot initiative on abortion.< I got to disagree there Al. Even Norma McCorvey (Jane Roe) because of new technology now opposes abortion, here: http://www.webedelic.com/church/roevwadef.htm

  • Dino

    As you said Al “it isn’t like the Bushies haven’t had their noses up the Saudi Royal Familie’s behinds.” It was G.W. Bush and his administration after all who evacuated the Bin Laden Family immediately after 9/11, flying them out of the U.S. when all U.S. flights were grounded. Freeh’s allegations may have some truth to it, but the Bush Family connections to the oil rich Saudis dwarfs any thing that Clinton did.

  • Sandee Dee Fan

    I agree with anything Sandee Dee says!