Canada had no equivalent of the Glass-Steagall Act, but its banks didn't suffer like the US banks did. Why would the seperation of commercial and investment banks only be important in the United States and not in other countries?
Canada did suffer during the 2007-8 crisis, though its banking system didn't collapse as the US system did.
The reasons suggested are various. I'm not an expert on either the US or Canadian experiences, though some quick searches suggest a few explanations, including an overall different regulatory and banking environment in Canada (far more centralised to the Federal government rather than distributed to numerous states). NBER and a few other sources look promising.
But you also seem to be assuming that there was a single causal factor or that people are claiming there is a single causal factor. Neither of these are true. There were many factors at play.
My only claim with Clinton was that he did things that helped lead to the events and people do not attribute that to him because he was not the acting head of state. My claim was not about a singular causality, and that would be a pretty bad faith read.