General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWas George W. Bush president on September 11, 2001? It’s time to settle this once and for all.
This is Genius
On Friday, Donald Trump generated substantial controversy when he asserted that George W. Bush was president at the time of the 9/11 attacks.
Jeb Bush immediately pushed back, calling Trumps comments pathetic and insisting my brother kept us safe.
The media jumped on to the burgeoning controversy. According to The New York Times the idea that Bush was president on 9/11 and failed to stop the attack is a break from the GOP.
..................
Was George W. Bush president on September 11, 2001?
Its time to settle this once and for all.
Its true that, in the presidential election held on November 7, 2000, George W. Bush received fewer votes than Al Gore.
But according to the Associated Press, this is a photo of George W. Bush being sworn in as president on January 20, 2001.
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2015/10/17/3713554/guide-to-whether-george-w-bush-was-president-on-911/
http://www.balloon-juice.com/2015/10/17/this-is-genius-3/
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/10/17/trump-faces-backlash-blaming-ex-president-george-w-bush-911/74129434/
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)Rockyj
(538 posts)& we are tired of PUPPET politicians like President Obama & Prime Minister's Harper & Carmon & Hillary Clinton who will do their bidding to the 1%!
Dawson Leery
(19,348 posts)CaliforniaPeggy
(149,737 posts)He was.
We all know it.
Unfortunately.
BlueJazz
(25,348 posts)(Grand Wacky Baboon), I'm not sure.
Gothmog
(145,666 posts)The Sunday talk shows will be fun
ZX86
(1,428 posts)and every Republican needs to be grilled on it in every debate and tv appearance.
It's a simple proposition really. Is the President of the United States responsible for the security of nation from day one or not?
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)Because they can use it against Clinton too because president Clinton was president during world trade bombing one.
ZX86
(1,428 posts)My loyalty is to the truth. Not any particular politician or party.
hatrack
(59,594 posts)Using the legal system (no gratuitous invasion, no $4 trillion rathole, and taking off your shoes at the aiport was posponed a full decade).
ZX86
(1,428 posts)There is no indication that Clinton ignored warnings concerning the attack.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)Proud Liberal Dem
(24,446 posts)Last edited Sun Oct 18, 2015, 01:08 PM - Edit history (1)
I don't really recall anybody blaming/criticizing Clinton over the first WTC attacks or even the successful 2000 USS Cole attack- but again, I don't believe that there was any actionable intelligence in either cases that Clinton's team missed AFAIK. After the first WTC attacks and the OKC bombings, he did vastly step up his anti-terrorist game and his Administration thwarted attacks (i.e. "Millennium Plot" and was really aggressive against AQ in particular. There was a VAST amount of difference in terms of how many people died in the different attacks and Clinton/Democrats didn't AFAIK blame Bush 1 for the first WTC attacks either. even though they happened relatively shortly after Clinton was inaugurated. I recall Republicans pouncing all over Clinton right after 9/11 happened even though he hadn't been POTUS for almost 8 months at that time.
sub.theory
(652 posts)Oh we remember. Not only was he president, but he was warned. Specifically in the infamous security briefing he received August 6, 2001 titled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US". It doesn't get more clear than that. He's responsible.
The Republicans have spent the past 14 years blaming 9/11 on the failures of the Clinton administration despite the facts showing otherwise. The fact is, Clinton went after Al Qaeda, bombing them, and he was blamed for wagging the dog. All the Republicans were focused on was the Monica Lewinski impeachment charade. Clinton protected America while the Republicans staged political witch hunts.
SammyWinstonJack
(44,130 posts)ALBliberal
(2,349 posts)napkinz
(17,199 posts)Jack Rabbit
(45,984 posts)He lost the election of 2000.
No one was President on September 11, 2001 because the SCOTUS would not allow Al Gore to take office.
Duppers
(28,127 posts)The contortions the Rethugs do.
NanceGreggs
(27,820 posts)... that there is a history textbook somewhere in Texas that explains how Dubya was not the president at the time.
HubertHeaver
(2,522 posts)NanceGreggs
(27,820 posts)... in some states has approved as a history textbook - 'cause he is historical, what with being the president and all.
But not on 9/11 - so stop sayin' that.
Yallow
(1,926 posts)Re-writing history is what Republicans do.
All with the help of their vegetable supporters.
They complain about Carter, but if Jimmie took 2 trillion from
Social Security and poured it into the economy like Reagan
did, things would have been different.
Of course our national debt would be another 2 trillion higher now.....
There was never a president named George W Bush. Airstrip One is at war with Eurasia. Airstrip One has always been at war with Eurasia.
Uncle Joe
(58,458 posts)Thanks for the thread, kpete.
SunSeeker
(51,745 posts)SoapBox
(18,791 posts)The Bush & Company War Criminal Reign of Terror.
inanna
(3,547 posts)Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)As if it happened under Clinton.
These people really believe they can create a second completely legit reality of their very own with the power of their mouth.
malaise
(269,219 posts)an inversion of reality
Snobblevitch
(1,958 posts)Is this thread all about sarcasm?
I know the USSC decided in favor of Bush.
I must have missed the intent of this thread.
By the way, the way, the vote total is not the deciding factor in the election of the president. The Electoral college is what matters. If California and New York vote 70% for a candidate, it is not any better than 51%. That's the way it works.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Gore got more votes and won Florida but the counting was shut down.
still_one
(92,454 posts)2naSalit
(86,840 posts)I thought it was the Dick of Cheney, no, wait...
Wut?
thelordofhell
(4,569 posts)And Georgie boy made certain that he was safe and far away from New York and Washington D.C. on 9/11
malaise
(269,219 posts)George Bush was President on 9/11
yep.
it is that fucking simple.
GWB was president.
.
malaise
(269,219 posts)They present an inversion of reality on steroids
kpete
(72,028 posts)malaise
(269,219 posts)Dumbya or JebusEnoughFugingBushes??
Stuart G
(38,453 posts)napkinz
(17,199 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)Retrograde
(10,164 posts)You know how it is when you've had a nice relaxing month-long vacation - especially after seven hard months of presidenting: it takes a bit of time to get back into the swing of things, to catch up and get back to work. Besides, Shrub had only been on the job less than a year, which was barely enough time to find the White House washrooms or unpack his boxes, much less get down to the serious business of gubmint. So while he was in theory president, having been inaugurate and all that, he was still learning, so it's all Clinton's fault. Or Carter's. (Do I really need to add the ?)