Who paltered? Why?

Who's lying..... Bill or Madeline?
Knowing the threat Bin Ladden posed, why wasn't he worth taking when he was offered? If he was never offered, Clinton lied. If he was offered Albright lied. What motives might Albright have to lie? What motives would Clinton have? Is it not just a little awkward that we would have such a hard time determining and no surprise that either one would lie? I have the audio of Clinton saying this and I posted about it two times. This one in 2004 and earlier in 2002. I have still yet to hear a rational explanation as to why someone can view the Clinton admin. as anything but disastrous for our nation and the future of the world.

From News Max
Wednesday, May 3, 2006 12:46 a.m. EDT
Madeliene Albright: Bill Clinton 'Misstated' Bin Laden Offer

Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright insisted Tuesday that Sudan never offered to round up Osama bin Laden and extradite him to the U.S. - saying President Clinton's claim to the contrary was "a misstatement."
Asked about Clinton's 2002 admission that six years earlier he had turned down Sudan's offer to extradite bin Laden because "he had commited no crime against America," Albright told Fox News Channel's "Hannity & Colmes": "He was not [offered]. He was not."
"If you look at the people who were saying that, there were many people who were lobbying for Sudan," she claimed.
But in a Feb. 2002 speech to a New York business group, Mr. Clinton detailed the episode, explaining: "We'd been hearing that the Sudanese wanted America to start dealing with them again. They released him. At the time, 1996, he had committed no crime against America so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America."

Clinton recalled that he "pleaded with the Saudis to take him, 'cause they could have. But they thought it was a hot potato and they didn't and that's how he wound up in Afghanistan."
Asked why her old boss would make such a startling confession if it wasn't true, a flustered Albright told Sean Hannity: "Well, because there was movement. But believe me, if we had been offered Osama bin Laden then that offer would have been taken up."
The former top diplomat insisted that Clinton simply got it wrong, explaining: "What's been very hard is kind of a misstatement of a lot of facts on [the Sudanese offer]. Look - we worked very hard to try to deal with the terrorist issue. It was very different before 9/11."

Transcript of Clinton's speech on the Sudan's offer of Bin Laden (Before 9/11)" Mr. Bin laden use to live in Sudan, He was expelled from Saudi Arabia in '91, then he went to the Sudan, and when it was apparent the Sudanese wanted America to start dealing with them again.......They released him. At the time ,'96,He had committed no crime against America so I didn't want to bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him,though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America.So I pleaded with the Saudis to take him,'cuz they could have; But they thought he was a hot potatoe, and they didn't,and so that's how he ended up in Afghanistan. " - Bill Clinton, 2002