Home Store In Memoriam Deborah Newsletter Forum Topics Blogfeed Blogroll Facebook MySpace Contact Us About

Sean Hannity’s Clinton Obsessive Compulsive Disorder Tries To Make It 1996 All Over Again

Reported by Ellen - January 30, 2007 -

A few weeks ago, Sean Hannity waxed nostalgic about the Clinton-impeachment days. Now, with George Bush’s approval ratings nothing short of dismal and more and more Republicans joining Democrats in their opposition to his policies, Hannity & Colmes devoted the first half hour of last night’s show (1/29/07) to bashing the Clinton administration.

The show began with yet another rehashing of the deleted scene from Path to 9/11. Media Matters has an excellent write up about the falsehoods in this scene that Sean Hannity continues to assert is true. At the very least, it’s debatable. The screenwriter and producer has admitted that it was fabricated and the scene was cut, as Hannity announced on the show, because of pressure from the Clinton administration. So why did “fair and balanced” FOX News have Clinton-basher Dick Morris as their sole guest? It's not like Morris has any expertise in national security to explain it away.

“This isn’t about Clinton-bashing,” Hannity disingenuously told Morris. With phony-baloney Hanctimony, Hannity asserted, “This is about learning from mistakes in the past so we can keep everybody at home safe.” Funny how none of the mistakes that President Bush made, like not being able to imagine that anyone would fly planes in to the World Trade Center, like starting a war over false intelligence, like posting instructions on how to make a nuclear bomb, to name a few possible areas of concern.

Morris said disingenuously, “Berger says that that episode is not accurate.” He conveniently left out others who said so, too.

At that point, Hannity must have been so carried away with his fond memories of the Clinton era that he forgot he was only looking out for America’s security. “You can’t plead with the Saudis to take somebody you don’t have,” he said with bullyboy glee. This is a lie that has been debunked numerous times (also well-documented by Media Matters), yet Hannity repeated it without any acknowledgment that it is even a matter of dispute.

Hannity finally abandoned his high road and threw national security aside in order to delight in further attacks on his old favorites. “The story here is that Bill Clinton and Albright and Berger pressured a major network not to tell the story as is written, as is investigated, as is corroborated by many people.” Funny how he forgot to mention that the story is disputed by many people who are in a position to know.

The FOX News producers must also be suffering from Clinton obsessive compulsive disorder. They, too, overlooked the refutations and posted “THE REAL PATH TO 9/11” on the screen.

With melodramatic flair, Hannity called it “a cover-up of enormous proporitions here.”

You know that Hannity has gone hog wild when it’s Dick Morris who changes the subject away from the Clintons. “The fundamental point for the future, particularly for the next two years,” Morris said, was that Clinton was so weak politically “that we didn’t have a president of the United States for three years and because we didn’t have one, he couldn’t take that action. Now George Bush is going to face a very similar decision about Iran – to attack or not. And if his approval ratings stays at 30 %, he’s not going to be able to do it and Iran will get the bomb and that will be the next report.”

To my disappointment, Colmes also avoided mentioning the Bush administration’s failures. After pointing out the inaccuracies in the deleted scene, Colmes focused on what a bad idea impeachment is, thus confirming Morris’ point.

“Exactly,” Morris said. “Whose fault was it? Bill Clinton for the conduct? The Republicans for making such a big deal about it and tying up the country and impeaching or Bill Clinton’s for not recognizing that he couldn’t serve effectively as president and stepping aside.”

After a commercial break, it was time for a little Hillary-bashing.

Hannity once again displayed his touching concern for Barack Obama’s welfare at the hands of the Clintons. After it was noted that George Soros, Hollywood and some former Kerry supporters were backing Obama, Hannity asked, “Can I tie that to all the negative things that have come up in the last three weeks to Barack Obama? Is there a connection?”

Morris thought so. He claimed that the false Insight Magazine piece about Obama attending a madrassa “was indeed planted as Insight Magazine said, by somebody close to the Clinton war room.” It must have been those same evildoers who posted it on Hannity’s website and prevented him from taking it down, more than a week after the story was proved false and FOX News vice president John Moody disavowed it.

Nevertheless, Morris predicted, “You’re going to see a real effort to paint him as a monster and it’s all going to be from the Clinton damage-control people, from the private detectives Hillary hires.”

That wasn’t enough Clinton-bashing for civic-minded Hannity. The next segment was a discussion about whether or not former Clinton national security adviser Sandy Berger should take a lie detector test. Once again the unfair and unbalanced guest line up consisted of one Republican, one of the lawmakers demanding that Berger do so.

“You have to conclude something really important he was trying to hide,” Hannity said about Berger’s purloining of copies of national security documents.

Mica claimed that the Justice Department investigation conducted by the Bush administration had been insufficient, that though they “got” Berger on taking copies of documents, he “could have taken original documents.” That’s why Mica was calling for a lie detector test.

Colmes pointed out that there is no evidence so far that either the 9/11 commission or national security had been compromised in any way.

“Well, we don’t know,” Mica said. That’s why he wanted Berger to testify before Congress under oath.

“We’d be more vulnerable if he hid some of the mistakes of the Clinton era so we can’t analyze them objectively,” Good Samaritan Hannity said.

Comment: Maybe so but with all that concern for national security, why hasn’t “real journalism, fair and balanced” FOX News ever discussed the Gannon/Guckert scandal? Or is a gay prostitute getting White House passes not as significant as promoting a discredited TV scene, a discredited scandal and a further investigation into a now-closed misdemeanor from an administration that left office seven years ago?