About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

CNN's Schneider falsely claimed increase in those who blame Clinton for 9-11

September 11, 2006 5:35 pm ET

Trouble viewing clip? Download: QT | WMV

6 Comments

On the September 11 edition of CNN Newsroom, senior political analyst Bill Schneider falsely claimed that a newly released CNN poll found that more Americans are willing to blame former president Bill Clinton for the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks than they were in 2001. In fact, the poll showed just the opposite -- the number of people who blamed Clinton went down from 45 percent to 41 percent.

Schneider reported: "A year after the attacks, 32 percent said they blamed President Bush a great deal or a moderate amount for the attacks. But that number has now gone up to 45 percent." CNN flashed a graphic showing that, according to the new poll, conducted August 30-September 2, the percentage of Americans who blame the Bush administration for 9-11 had increased from 32 percent to 45 percent since 2002:

screenshot-1

Schneider then claimed: "But it is indeed a more partisan era, and so the willingness to blame President Bush has gone up, as well as the willingness to blame President Clinton. As you know, that's the subject of a controversy involving an ABC television movie." Schneider was apparently referring to The Path to 9/11, a "docudrama" miniseries that contains numerous falsehoods and distortions, as Media Matters for America has documented. Schneider continued: "But if you see here, 41 percent of Americans say they think that the Clinton administration deserves at least some of the blame." CNN then showed a graphic that displayed results from the new CNN poll, but not the numbers from the 2001 polling:

screenshot 2

In fact, as the poll analysis on CNN.com noted:

The latest poll, conducted by Opinion Research Corporation for CNN, found that 41 percent of respondents blamed his administration a "great deal" or a "moderate amount" for the attacks.

That's only slightly less than the 45 percent who blamed his administration in a poll carried out less than a week after the attacks.

From the September 11 edition of CNN Newsroom:

BETTY NGUYEN (anchor): And looking at all of it, the question is: Who are Americans blaming for this?

SCHNEIDER: Well, of course we're in a very partisan and a very polarized political environment. That wasn't the case immediately after 9-11. For a year, the country was united. Even a majority of Democrats supported President Bush. A year after the attacks, 32 percent said they blamed President Bush a great deal or a moderate amount for the attacks. But that number has now gone up to 45 percent. Why? Well, President Bush's popularity has declined. More people are willing to criticize a president they no longer like. But also, there were congressional investigations that uncovered some damaging information about briefings that the president received even month before the 9-11 attacks.

But it is indeed a more partisan era, and so the willingness to blame President Bush has gone up, as well as the willingness to blame President Clinton. As you know, that's the subject of a controversy involving an ABC television movie. But if you see here, 41 percent of Americans say they think that the Clinton administration deserves at least some of the blame. Not quite as high as President Bush, but Americans are willing to blame -- really a lot of Americans, not most -- are willing to blame either President Bush or President Clinton.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by Intergalatic Purveyor (September 11, 2006 5:49 pm ET)
         

      Gee, I guess a little context would help eh Bill? You know like pointing out that it has gone down for Clinton since 2001 while Bush's numbers have gone up.

      Why would he leave out that critical piece of info...I just can't imagine. I am sure he is "objective" in his reporting and has absolutely no "bias" at all.

      Thanks to MMFA for keeping an eye on this stuff.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by ufleirx (September 11, 2006 5:56 pm ET)
         

      like dice in a back alley game in Vegas.

      Basically the question lumped any degree of blame to Clinton, from 1% to 99.9% and directed the person answer of the question subtly to say yes. It is the pinnacle of, "Have you quit beating your wife questions?"

      Report Abuse
    • Author by loonz (September 11, 2006 6:30 pm ET)
         

      "Schneider then claimed: 'But it is indeed a more partisan era, and so the willingness to blame President Bush has gone up, as well as the willingness to blame President Clinton.' "

      This might not be a partisan issue. Because of the way they ask the question there could have a lot of people blaming both administrations for the attacks so the 45% and 41% could be overlapping.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by commonsenseliberal (September 11, 2006 7:54 pm ET)
         

      SHEESH! When will you right wing shills quit blaming Clinton for the crap Bush is responsible?

      Again, blaming Clinton for 9/11 is like blaming Hoover for the attack on Pearl Harbor. Who should we blame? We should blame the 19 terrorists who took part in the attacks on 9/11 - and their links to al-Qaeda. On whose watch did these attacks take place? Bush II. Who ignored PDB's regarding possible terror attacks on the nation? Bush II.

      It's logically insufficient to say that Clinton is responsible for the 9/11 attacks just because Clinton didn't kill bin Laden. You cannot say that because bin Laden wasn't killed, that the 9/11 attacks would not have happened. In fact, even if bin Laden had been captured or killed, the terrorist attacks on 9/11 could very well have gone forward. It's a logical fallacy to argue that Clinton is responsible for 9/11. Period.

      Prove me wrong. I dare you.

      CSL

      Report Abuse
    • Author by Romario (September 12, 2006 1:02 am ET)
         

      I guess the Reichwingers then agree that Bush 41 should be blamed for the 1993 WTC bombing, since it was planned and plotted while he was President, and happened 3 weeks into Clinton's presidency? Amazing how these losers blame Clinton for 9/11 as well as the 93 attack....what's next...blaming Clinton for Raygun's "cut and run" strategy in Beirut after we lost 247 Marines to Hezbollah attacks?

      What a sad bunch....

      Report Abuse
    • Author by princeofwheels (September 12, 2006 7:43 am ET)
         

      The Con's cannot and will never admit that they had control of America on 9/11/2001. We all know, and history cannot change the fact that George Bush was the President on that fateful day. If the hatred for the Clinton's weren't the driving factor of the Repub followers maybe they could open their eyes and see the truth. Rather they chose to use their "common scents"(with all due respect to CSL) and sniff the Republican bile and follow whichever path the odor dictates. Sheep have a way of doing that...they think they are safe and are happy until someone cries WOLF(owitz).

      Commonsenseliberal, I cannot answer your question maybe we need CSI and the gang.

      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.