I've seen Powerline dissect inaccuracies printed by the New York Times and other media outlets. One thing you can say for them is they don't give up until all the facts come out.
Looks like Bill Clinton is getting the same attention. Remember these guys are attorneys so have built in antennae for BS snow jobs, concealing truth. First mistake was attempt at censorship which sent up a red flag. Second mistake was "purple faced rage" in the interview with Chris Wallace.
That purple faced rage will be seen as a reaction to someone calling him on something he's concealing as shown in the next article after this one I'm posting with verifiable time-lines of events, people, etc.
"Play it as it lies
The most striking feature of Bill Clinton's bloviations on FOX News Sunday with Chris Wallace yesterday was the incredibly low ratio of facts to whoppers. If Chris Wallace could prompt that red-faced response with such an innocuous question, I wonder if a few minutes with Richard Miniter (author of Losing bin Laden, interviewed by NRO here), might not send him to intensive care. I would love to hear Miniter ask Clinton a few questions about Clinton's treatment of the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center -- an attack that Clinton shrugged off in a few paragraphs of his subsequent Saturday morning radio talk, never to return to the subject. (Miniter quotes the relevant paragraphs of the radio address at pages 28-30 of his book.)