Trump Falsely Claims That He Predicted Bin Laden Threat Before 9/11

“Fools!”

Jim Loscalzo/ZUMA

For indispensable reporting on the coronavirus crisis, the election, and more, subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter.

Fresh off his remarks deriding the former Navy SEAL who oversaw the raid that killed Osama bin Laden, President Donald Trump on Monday claimed that he had predicted the national security threat posed by the Al Qaeda leader in a book published one year before the 9/11 attacks.

This isn’t the first time Trump has falsely claimed to have foreseen Bin Laden’s rise. As Mother Jones explained back when he first made the assertion on the campaign trail, Trump’s 2000 book, The America We Deserve, did not include such astute observations. Bin Laden is mentioned once in passing in the book, and the brief paragraph merely references the fact that Bin Laden had already been labeled “public enemy number one.” 

The president on Monday also repeated his insistence that Bin Laden should have been captured sooner and criticized former President Bill Clinton for “famously” missing his chance to take out the Al Qaeda leader in a 1998 bombing raid. 

The tweets come on the heels of Trump’s attacks against William McRaven, the retired four-star admiral and onetime Navy SEAL who oversaw the 2011 raid that killed Bin Laden. McRaven has been critical of Trump, writing in a scathing Washington Post op-ed this summer that Trump has “embarrassed us in the eyes of children, humiliated us on the world stage and, worst of all, divided us as a nation.” During an interview with Fox News’ Chris Wallace that aired Sunday, Trump dismissed McRaven as a “Hillary Clinton fan” and an “Obama backer.”  

“I did not back Hillary Clinton or anyone else,” McRaven said in a statement responding to Trump’s remarks. “I am a fan of President Obama and President George W. Bush, both of whom I worked for.”

“I stand by my comment that the President’s attack on the media is the greatest threat to our democracy in my lifetime.”

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest