What you have is a situation, unquestionably we went through a period in the nation's history we dealt with terrorism as law enforcement matter....As Attorney General Mukasey pointed out when we prosecuted and convicted people after the '93 World Trade Center bombing and East Africa bombing, what it got us was 9/11 and 3,000 dead Americans.
That's a rather flaccid thesis, as there was ample intelligence to support the fact that bin Laden was ready to carry out an attack within the first year of George W. Bush's initial term in office. So, to use Cheney's model for what does and what doesn't cause a terrorist attack, it would stand to reason that Bush's ignoring of a domestic agenda from January 20th 2001 up until Sept. 12 2001 was a cause of what happened on Sept. 11th.
The only difference between Liz's statements and mine is that there are multiple examples of how the later can be verified. From the Bush cabinet ignored warnings put forth by the intelligence community and advisers as early as five days after being sworn in as President.
I'm reminded of how John Brennan is being put under fire for calling out Republicans for politicizing terror. Isn't that precisely what Liz Cheney is doing?