Clinton rages against Dimbleby in Panorama confrontation over Lewinsky

[hightime]

Bill Clinton loses his temper with David Dimbleby during a BBC television interview to be broadcast this week when he is repeatedly quizzed about his affair with Monica Lewinsky.

The former American president, famed for his amiable disposition, becomes visibly angry and rattled, particularly when Dimbleby asks him whether his publicly declared contrition over the affair is genuine.

His outrage at the line of questioning during the 50-minute interview, to be broadcast on Panorama on Tuesday night, lasts several minutes. It is the first time that the former President has been seen to lose his temper publicly over the issue of his sexual liaisons with Ms Lewinsky.

The President initially responds to Dimbleby's questions by launching a general attack on media intrusion. When the broadcaster persists with the question of whether the politician was truly penitent, Clinton directs his anger towards Dimbleby.




newlink thank to DrBB

[bahrbearian]

1. My god , with the way this world is heading and we're still talking

about a private affair.

[lancdem]

2. Good for him. That is a dumb question

BTW, how much do you want to bet that this article exaggerates his "anger."

BTW, the Telegraph is owned by Conrad Black, a right winger like Rupert Murdoch.

[hightime]

5. This may give you an idea about their "slant"

Visibly angry: Bill Clinton

[Skip Intro]

3. Clinton going after the media, and in a personal way, is not a bad thing

as far as I'm concerned.

I hope I get a chance to see it.

[candy331]

51. Maybe now he sees how it feels when the piranha news media

bites and feed w/o let up. Perhaps he will join Dean now in calling for the news media to be held accountable for it's failure to report news but act as a tabloid and deliberately gives false information.

[mountainvue]

63. Now he sees it?

Where were you from 1992-2000? Just asking.

[PaDUer]

64. Maybe now?

He's KNOWN a LONG time..Faux hounded him constantly...they're jealous of this entire family because they can't shine their shoes!

[number6]

4. yea, so what ...

...not interesting :boring:

I wanna see * (smirkface) asked some real questions ....

[Lars39]

6. You can shorten it at

www.tinyurl.com

Here it is shortened: (You still have to register, though.)
www.tinyurl.com/3hkxv

[hightime]

7. You don't have to register if you cut and paste the link

[Lars39]

15. It still sent me to the registration page after I clicked on the article.

Both copy and paste and tinyurl.:shrug:

[hightime]

20. I fixed the original link with the help of DrBB

[Lars39]

23. Thanks!

And welcome to DU! :toast:

[harper]

8. Now lets see....we're in a snake pit in Iraq

We've had an American kidnapped and beheaded in Saudi Arabia, we've lost almost a thousand soldiers in the Mideast with untold thousands wounded and maimed. Our economy is still shaky despite the talking head's happy talk(have any of them been to the grocery store lately). Jobs are being outsourced and formerly well paid professionals are out of luck.

And the BIG story this week is Bill Clinton's affair with Monica. These assholes aren't journalist, they're crotch sniffers and they should be ashamed. Last weeks Reagan orgy was bad but this is pretty much the last straw. My TV is OFF.

[kanrok]

11. Geez...can you imagine if all this shit occurred with Big Dog at the helm?

Shudder.

[harper]

13. I think of that often

Every time the press shrug off another massive fuck up by the current administration as a matter of fact.

[chaumont58]

52. My guess at what would have happened

If Clinton had invaded and conquered Iraq on the trumphed charges the bushies has used, he would have been impeached by the Republican House, removed by Republican Senate(which way do you think Lieberman or Zell Miller would have voted), arrested and hanged in a White House Rose Garden ceremony.
Yet, chimpie put on Flight Suit One with a sock in it, lands on a carrier, and is hailed by a swooning Tweety Bird.
Life is fair and so consistent.

[jdj]

22. Last night on PBS this Gohel guy said Saudi Arabia's

situation was MORE dangerous than the one in Iraq. (He's a middle east expert of some sort). That freaked me out. Bill Clinton needs to get angry, to tell these idiots where to get off, he needs to say that if the Bush administration was half as interested in the location of bin Laden as they are in the location of his penis, that bin Laden would be in custody, he needs to say that if the press wrote half as many stories about Muslim extremists as it did about Monica Lewinsky maybe 9/11 would have never happened, and we certainly know the Iraq war would not have happened. He needs to tear them a new @sshole, like Mike Moore's response to Matt Lauer. Now is the time for him to rage, to talk about the death of Paul Johnson and how they dare make Monica an issue at this time in history.

[Longhorn79]

33. I saw an interview where he did get pissed off

about losing bin Laden. He got real upset about the interviewer's implication that he didn't get him when he had the chance, saying it was bullshit. What he said directly contradicts what is in 'Dereliction of Duty' so somebody is lying.

[Zookeeper]

34. Yes, yes, yes!!!!

I would love to hear Clinton actually ask the media WHY they are still so fixated on his sex life circa 1999/2000 instead of the incessant lies and horrors perpetrated by BushCo during the last three years. SOMEONE with access to the media should ask "Why are you still obsessing over Bill's PENIS?"

Very good point, BTW, as to whether the resources that were spent on the Bill & Monica affair could have been used to give us some information on what Islamic Fundamentalist terrorists were planning. Perhaps it was the Repubs nasty partisanship that wasted money, time and resources and left us vulnerable to the 9/11 terrorists.

Edited for typo.

[PaDUer]

65. Email or fax the puke

and ask him that, and tell him where the bird shits in the buckwheat!

[Crachet2004]

45. Yeah, right after the 'Reagasm' comes comes a big rehash of Monica...

How the hell does that help us? I'm not talking about right or wrong, or whether the press is covering what it should be covering, I'm talking about the TIMING of all this Clinton coverage, and the effect it will have on the campaign.

I don't think Bill Clinton is trying to help us at all. He knows controversy sells books, but that is just a bonus for him...what is really going on, is a plan to drive all the negative press on Bush to the side-just like the Reagasm did. And no, I do not believe everything is just coincidental. Clinton is easily smart enough to have known beforehand the effect his reemergence into the spotlight will have, at this time. It is a Godsend for Bush.

I saw an award ceremony the other day with Bush slobbering all over Bill Clinton, and that video spoke volumes, things being what they are. Things being what they are, Clinton should not even be in the same room with that son-of-a-bitch.

Call me cynical, but if Kerry gets beat, the door is open for Hillary in 2008...and the stage will be set for Jeb to beat her. Because there is no way Hillary will ever be elected...all her candidacy can do, is guarantee a victory for a man, who probably could'nt be elected himself, otherwise-JEB.

The economy was great under Clinton, largely due to cheap Saudi oil, at that time. Other than that, I can't think of a damn thing he actually accomplished (if you can really call that an accomplishment)for any of the various constituencies of the Democratic Party. As a matter of fact, with Nafta, Gatt, welfare 'reform', telecommunications deregulation, etc..., he hurt the hell out of many of us.

I do not like Bill Clinton, and I do not trust Bill Clinton. He is a betrayer at heart, I think...even unto his relations with women.

I think he is trying to stab the more progressive among us in the back, one last time!

[ldf]

49. stab the more progressive among us in the back

yes, and luckily what you think is irrelevant.

[Crachet2004]

54. Not at all, as I am not the only one with eyes to see...

I think it will not be too hard to poke further holes in Bill Clinton's already threadbare credentials as a liberal, or progressive...essentially because he is neither.

But the truth about Clinton seems to have struck a nerve with YOU, and I can only speculate privately on a public bulletin board, as to why THAT might be.

[Bridget Burke]

58. You can't speculate privately on a public bulletin board....

What's the thought-crime you can only allude to?

Clinton makes your Bush Jr look like the moral, mental & physical dwarf that he is.

Of course, the evil Klintoons are only out for themselves. Where have I heard this before?

[sendero]

55. I take exception.....

.... to your "crotch sniffer" comment. They are ass-sniffers.

I'd be happy to see ONE "journalist" take on Bush* for any number of the horrific gargantuan mistakes he has made they way they go after Clinton over a cold blow job.

[arwalden]

9. It Looks Like It's A "Membership" Site...Or A Damned "Register First" Site

If this story is worth anything, it will appear on other FREE web sites with unrestricted access.

I'll wait.

-- Allen

[WyLoochka]

17. You don't have to wait

Use:

http://bugmenot.com/

to obtain a pre-registered password.

[hightime]

25. Queenclinton and hillaryisaliar??

That was an interesting political backhand in their faq under "tutorial two". That was the username and password used in the sample login.

BTW, I fixed the original post and link.

[buycitgo]

76. great SITE!!!!!!

been wanting one like that for a long time

very useful

thanks!

[DEMVET-USMC]

10. As to hyperlink, kudos for event trying.I have never seen such a long link

...Oscar

[DrBB]

12. How to do a hyperlink on DU--please read

You can avoid these problems by simply using the DU hyperlink syntax. Just click on the "HTML lookup table" when you're posting and it shows you how. You end up with a link that looks like this. It avoids many annoyances, not least the one where someone puts a long URL in that forces the whole thread to be 8 screens wide.

[hightime]

18. Thank you much

[LittleApple81]

14. IT IS ABOUT TIME HE GETS FURIOUS. These "journalists" are just

dumb as rocks and scandal mongers.

[PinkTiger]

37. Don't put newsmagazines and journalism in the same category.

I'm a print journalist and I find most TV news to be bogus, anyway.

[PaDUer]

66. That's right...

tell them to go after the * crime family and maladminisitration...lot of true stories there..

[NYC]

16. Link to Independent article:

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/media/story.jsp?story=533383

[LittleApple81]

19. WTF??? Their conclusion, bolded, is REALLY OFFENSIVE!

Who are these "press people" to be judges of character and contrition? His book is 900 pages, I doubt that Monica is covered very extensively. CLINTON WAS PRESIDENT FOR 8 years and all this ASSHOLE can think of asking is about Monica????
From the article:

The President initially responds to Dimbleby's questions by launching a general attack on media intrusion. When the broadcaster persists with the question of whether the politician was truly penitent, Clinton directs his anger towards Dimbleby.

The atmosphere, which was initially warm, then turns decidedly chilly. One BBC executive who has seen the interview, which took place in a New York hotel last Wednesday, said: "He is visibly angry with Dimbleby's line of questioning and some of that anger gets directed at Dimbleby himself. As outbursts go, it is not just some flash that is over in an instant. It is something substantial and sustained. (my comment:No shit Sherlock: he probably wanted to sock the twerp!!!)

"It is memorable television which will give the public a different insight into the President's character. It will leave them wondering whether he is as contrite as he says he is about past events. Dimbleby manages to remain calm and order is eventually restored."

[Mad As Hell]

21. I don't believe it.

I think Clinton is too smart and I think it is a publicity stunt to get people to watch.

[aquart]

27. Dimbleby? Now there's a name Dickens would have cherished.

[TahitiNut]

31. Yup... Nickleby and Dimbleby, Attorneys at Law.

:silly:

[PaDUer]

67. Yup...

like pimples on his ass.

[chaumont58]

69. Dimbulb

If the shoe were on the other foot, if l-dotters were blasting the right honorable English gentleman, he would be called "Dimbulb."

[Zookeeper]

36. Yeah, I question the idea...

that because his reaction is "substantial and sustained," it means he isn't truly contrite. So, if he just let the badgering slide off his back it would indicate sincerity? This reporter must think very highly of himself in the first place to even ask such personal questions.

[riverwalker]

24. "rages" yeah sure

The "rage" probably amounts to a tense jaw and a few snippy comments.
So instead of FOX showing a clip of the so called "rage", they will just spread around that Clinton "rages" in the interview, and not show any actual clips. That's their style.
Now a real "rage" would be Clinton throwing a chair at the moron and shouting "the world in the brink of destruction and you depraved gossip whores are STILL obsessing about a freakin' B.J.??!!!"

[Judi Lynn]

26. Can you imagine anyone idle, empty, ill-mannered enough

to snuffle around in a person's sexual encounters years after the fact, when he has the chance for a real interview? Shows you he doesn't have the mental ability to discuss anything in depth. He's a dolt. He says far more about himself than he does about Bill Clinton.

Republicans sacrificed our entire 8 years of his Presidency to their own deranged, ruthless, hoglike rush to regain the top job, using any and every means possible.

I'll go even further. I believe it was the same nasty right-wingers within the oil industry who pulled strings and arranged the oil "shortage" which made life a living hell for Jimmy Carter and put him in a bad light with our less intelligent citizens, who are easily manipulated. You do remember how they love to shriek that he was inept, weak,inadequate, unsuccessful, etc. whenever his name comes up.

Anyone who has read about his accomplishments knows this is wrong. He did some real good, undoing some vicious stuff they had put in place during Nixon's time, which was reversed when Reagan slid in to place ASAP.

Republicans are going to try to destroy any Democrat, apparently, from now on who somehow manages to get past the Republican controlled e-voting machines and their other chicanery and make it back to the Oval Office. You can be sure of it.

You DO remember Nixon's Donald Segretti DECADES AGO already had the plan to recruit & introduce skanks into the circles around Democrats who would find them irresistable and have affairs, and KA-BOOM, get nailed for their efforts, right? Some people no doubt snickered at that. Who's snikering now?

Pathetic @$$####$.

[aquart]

28. Which is why energy should never be in private hands.

These people are willing to destroy us for their own very short term advantage.

[Zookeeper]

38. Good points, JudiLyn...

What I was most upset about re: the Monica affair was that the Repubs were camped on Clinton's doorstep *just waiting* for him to commit some sexual indiscretion, so they could destroy his presidency. And...he just handed it to them. The Repubs are ruthless and nasty and really have no true concern for the long-term health of our country. And they will try to destroy the next Democrat who sits in the Oval Office.

[Isere]

29. Clinton's fatal mistake

was that he didn't tell the press at the beginning of his run for president to go take a hike! He should have told that young questioner who asked him "Is it boxers or briefs?" that it was none of her business! Then he should have told the Inquisitioners of the Right that his personal life was none of their f-ing business. When they plagued him with personal questions he needed to say "Up yours!"
Eventually, they would have gotten the point.

It's well past time for Bill to tell the tabloid Draculas to bugger off!!!!

[Merlin]

30. Mon Dieu! The man IS human after all!

I cannot conceive of the innate self control it has taken for him to remain so unruffled after all that's happened over all these years. I welcome his anger as justified, righteous and evidence that he is not a god but human after all.

I still love the guy. Warts and all.

[glitch]

32. Authors need to start boycotting these 'shows' - plenty of shows to sell

books - why give these creeps the interview?

[Miss Authoritiva]

35. Good ratings jack up trick.

I just love the "and order is eventually restored." Makes it seem like a Jerry Springer-type fight broke out with upended chairs and security personnel swooping into the camera frame.

So who will be first to yap about this (minus any video, of course): O'Reilly or Hannity? We know Limbaugh will manage to drag out this one short "story" for 45 minutes worth of material.

You know, you'd almost think that air time and newspaper space were really cheap commodities.

[Catherine Vincent]

39. I don't blame him, he's probably tired of people asking him about that.

His wife and family has forgiven him. This thing was years ago so no one really cares about it. Well, except maybe the Clinton-hating crowd.

[Gyre]

41. Angry Bubba

I'm no apologist for Clinton, but "IT" is an assinine thing to focus on in the context of a president who lies to the UN, the Congress and the American people to get support to invade a country that poses no threat to America. I'm not saying that's why Bubba got mad but that's why I would get pissed under those circumstances.

Gyre

[ConsAreLiars]

40. Don't believe everything you read in neocon rags

The media funded by Scaife, Murdoch, Black and such have long been waging a disinformation and smear campaign against Clinton. Is there any reason to believe that the Telegraph is being honest in this report? Any clips around for corroboration?

[Merlin]

42. Damn good point!

I hadn't noticed it was the Telegraph.

[muriel_volestrangler]

43. I doubt there's any clip yet

it won't be broadcast until Tuesday evening. For corroboration, see NYC's link to the Independent here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x633588#633618

For background for Americans, David Dimbleby is one of the top 2 or 3 political interviewers in the UK, and has been for about 30 years. He is not the most vicious, and is not partisan.

[opihimoimoi]

44. Its the only way Dimbleby's name could be known, get the Big Dog

to go ballistic.

[Vladimir]

46. Contrary to what all of you may think

Dimbleby is not some RW loon, or even out for publicity. He hardly needs it, seeing as he is about the most respected interviewer in Britain (along with maybe Paxman and Frost). And he has dealt with Blair and co. very harshly indeed in the past, in fact I have never seen him pull a punch. The thing is, all the British papers have been portraying Clinton's biography as being primarily about Monica and the ensuing witchhunt for the last week, almost all the quotes carried in them have been about this. The story, as far as Britain is concerned, has been Clinton's contrition. Dimbleby is going after the story that is current in Britain, because that is his job. Blame the press all you want for this, and rightly so, but leave Dimbo alone... I rather enjoy the fact that there are no 'sacred cow' politicians for him.

[glitch]

47. going after Clinton on Lewinsky is hardly hard hitting - it;s been an easy

mark for years now. Especially if that's the meme that's currently playing in all the London papers. Very safe. And Clinton hasn't been a sacred cow, probably ever. Always been ok to go after Clinton.
Everybody has a sell-by date.

[Vladimir]

48. Well many here regard him as a sacred cow

I agree the line of questioning is predicable, but what do you expect? Dimbleby's job is to follow the story and make the interviewees life uncomfortable. People, at least here, are going to buy the book because of the Monica thing. That's the story.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

50. He may be a sacred cow in Britain, but he's managed to demonstrate....

...that he's just another mainstream media hack over here.

If the best Dimbleby can do in regards to Clinton's book is to go after the same old tired bull that we put up with far too long over here, then I don't have much respect for him or the group for whom he works.

JMHO.

[Vladimir]

57. Well obviously I would prefer him to

go after Clinton for Kosovo, or the sanctions on Iraq, etc. I would also like to win the lottery - neither is gonna happen.

[glitch]

53. true, some people do consider Clinton a sacred cow here

but most 'journalists' don't. And an interviewers job is not to make the interviewee's life uncomfortable, it's to bring new information or insight to the public, and if that makes the interviewee sweat, well so be it.
Rehashing tired old memes just to piss some one off onscreen is not journalism, even if every one else is doing it. And I don't think Monica is the story anymore, but I'll have to take your word for it that it's big in London.
If so, Clinton should choose his interviewers more carefully, to at least try to raise the level of discourse beyond the level of distraction.
By the way, is 'The Hunting of the President' playing in London yet?

[Vladimir]

56. Don't know

btw. I don't mean that Monica is a big story as relating to all news stories, just as relating to Clinton's biography. Much has been made of his contrition.

[glitch]

59. I just checked the Hunting of the President site - not scheduled

to show in London or Seattle (where I am) yet. Too bad. Listening to airamericaradio.com right now rerun the interview with Joe Conason, it's pretty good.

Yea, Dimbleby would've been much more impressive to me if he'd gone after the sanctions on Iraq (responding to your post above).
Cheers!

[PaDUer]

68. Time to post on the british forums....

someone will certainly pick up on the posts.

[Vladimir]

70. What the hell does that mean? n/t

[PaDUer]

72. Go to the boards/forums

at bbc or the telegraph where these articles are appearing and post about their BS of what they're trying to do to Clinton. Let them know that we support the Clintons and the interviewers/media SHOULD be concentrating on the thugs and what they've been doing since there's plenty of true shit about what's going on.

[Vladimir]

75. My fuse was rather short last night

sorry about the outburst. Truth be told, I haven't got the energy or will to go around defending Clinton. And you may support them, but I most definitely do not (although as I said in an above post, I would much rather he was being taken to task for some actual wrongdoings than a bit of casual sex).

[Democat]

74. This is the exact opposite of how the media treats Reagan!

Right wing media bias is brutally obvious once you see how the media treats Reagan and how they treat Clinton.

[robbedvoter]

60. Wow! All democrats are crazy! Gore, Clinton and Kerry too I'm sure!

Just dare to say "No" to the media RW attacks - and you're nuts! yeah!
Of course, when W is mocking reporters' baldness or just snarling at them, it's "charm". yeah. Very revealing - but not for Clinton.
It might surprise some here, but there are freepers abroad too.

[Ernesto]

61. This is LBN?

who cares?

[genius]

62. Yea Bill!

[steely]

71. I love the Big Dawg.

For brains and "cool", he's like no other - but if Dimbleby is a little bit right-leaning, then maybe Bill's advance team should have picked up on this - and let's face it, sex sells. I think Bill lost his cool when he felt his veracity was being mocked, but maybe he should have seen this coming.

After all, Dimbulb didn't have Smirky in his studio.

I'd like to see the interview to see if it has any journalistic merit, or if it's just another TV tabloid.

[demigoddess]

73. I don't blame him at all, I just saw the 60 minutes interview and

they spent way too much time on the lewinsky stuff and not a whit on new questions. It is about time he got angry at them

[wurzel]

77. I can't remember Rather asking a single question about Starr.

What do these people really want? PHOTOGRAPHS.