Patterico's Pontifications

12/29/2015

Is Bill Clinton Fair Game?

Filed under: General — Dana @ 7:00 pm

[guest post by Dana]

Because this campaign season seems so unlike any other, with its endless array of GOP candidates, an all out war within the Republican party, and Hillary Clinton coming back for a second round, I guess it really shouldn’t be surprising that Bill Clinton has now become the focal point of the silly season. And while we know that he loves nothing more than being the center of attention, I don’t think this particular kind of attention is what he had in mind.

Several days ago, Hillary Clinton’s campaign announced that beginning in January, Bill Clinton will hit the campaign trail to stump for his wife.

GOP front runner Donald Trump, already having experienced Hillary Clinton accuse him of having a “penchant for sexism” after his “schlonged” comment about her, responded to the announcement by throwing Hillary’s own words back at her and simultaneously hitting Bill Clinton with his past inappropriate sexual behavior toward women. Yes, he went there:

Hillary Clinton has announced that she is letting her husband out to campaign but HE’S DEMONSTRATED A PENCHANT FOR SEXISM, so inappropriate!

While Trump is a bombastic showman who stands for, well, Donald Trump, in light of Bill Clinton’s well known historical abuse of women, it’s easy to see which of these two men has a real penchant for sexism – and worse, far worse. Now the question being bandied about is whether an ex-president’s misconduct is fair game for attack as he takes to the stage to campaign for his wife. The same wife who enabled her ex-president husband’s gross sexual misconduct.

Over at the Washington Post, Ruth Marcus opines that yes, Bill Clinton’s history is fair game in the campaign. This in spite of her extreme distaste for Trump:

Well, Bill Clinton has a penchant for something. He had a successful presidency — with an ugly blot. “Sexism” isn’t the precise word for his predatory behavior toward women or his inexcusable relationship with a 22-year-old intern. Yet in the larger scheme of things, Bill Clinton’s conduct toward women is far worse than any of the offensive things that Trump has said.

Trump has smeared women because of their looks. Clinton has preyed on them, and in a workplace setting where he was by far the superior. That is uncomfortable for Clinton supporters but it is unavoidably true.

Which leads to the next question: What is the relevance of Bill Clinton’s conduct for Hillary Clinton’s campaign? Ordinarily, I would argue that the sins of the husband should not be visited on the wife. What Bill Clinton did counts against him, not her, and I would include in that her decision to stick with him. What happens inside a marriage is the couple’s business, and no one else’s, even when both halves crave the presidency.

But Hillary Clinton has made two moves that lead me, gulp, to agree with Trump on the “fair game” front. She is (smartly) using her husband as a campaign surrogate, and simultaneously (correctly) calling Trump sexist.

These moves open a dangerous door. It should surprise no one that Trump has barged right through it.

Why anyone would be surprised by anything Trump does is beyond me. If there is a door to break down, he will break it down. If there is a window to shatter, he will shatter it. If there is an unspoken taboo in political campaigning, in this case using Bill Clinton’s mistreatment of women as a weapon against Hillary Clinton, Trump will clumsily wield that weapon without a second thought.

And while GOP spouses and family members have already experienced attacks by the MSM in an effort to diminish their candidate’s credibility, not one of them has ever been accused of rape.

In light of that, if you were wondering how the media will handle Bill Clinton’s sexual misconduct being in the news again, as well as being used against his wife’s run for the presidency, wonder no more:

CNN:

Donald Trump on Saturday night slammed Hillary Clinton by citing her husband’s history of marital infidelity and alleged sexual misconduct, escalating the increasingly personal feud between the GOP front-runner and the leading Democratic presidential candidate.

NBC:

“You mention Monica Lewinsky,” Guthrie asked. “Are you saying an alleged extra-marital affair, that of course he has now admitted, is that fair game?”

“Is it alleged? I don’t think that’s alleged,” Trump pounced.

“No, he’s admitted it, he’s admitted it,” Guthrie agreed.

“If he’s admitted it, you don’t have to use the word alleged,” Trump replied.

“Right, exactly,” Guthrie said. “Are you saying an extramarital affair by Bill Clinton is fair game, is something that you think should be in the campaign?”

–Dana

75 Responses to “Is Bill Clinton Fair Game?”

  1. Hello.

    Dana (86e864)

  2. Good for Trump, I hope he makes the Clintons choke on it.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  3. Well I would go after his stewardship of the skim, I mean foundation.

    narciso (732bc0)

  4. Kathleen Wiley said “Hillary is the war on women” a year ago. Now that Trump is saying it, people are paying attention. I hope, hope, hope*, that Trump points out the decades of cover-ups by Hillary of her husband’s skirt-chasing, using the sleaziest of tactics. That would be going to the meat of the matter.

    *When there is despair, there are many hopes. — Proverb, possibly Arabian

    nk (dbc370)

  5. Jeff Epstein, convicted child sex trader and Friend of Bill, is about to be introduced to the American public. The Clintons could’ve slinked off with their fortune(suspect Bill Clinton would have preferred that). Instead Hillary! seeks this nomination at her peril, for this reason, among many.

    Bugg (fa64ec)

  6. I’m sorry, Dana, but who is the Trump guy of whom you write? I haven’t heard anything about him this election cycle.

    JVW (d60453)

  7. Not long ago Hillary! advised us that all allegations of sexual assault, even those we hear about on college campus these days, should be taken seriously, that the accuser should be believed Be believed!

    But Hillary! certainly did not take that position when the accuser was Ms. Willey, and the perpetrator her husband. Double standard, maybe. There are men doing hard time for lessor assaults than Bill Clinton has done…

    Slick Willy should have been part of the discussion way back when Hillary! was first spewing this manure about believing claims of sexual assault. How can she be the “women’s candidate” and get support from feminists with this history…. not to mention the “bimbo eruption” issues during the first campaign.

    Gramps (c50fca)

  8. Trump will clumsily wield that weapon without a second thought.

    “If he’s admitted it, you don’t have to use the word alleged,” Trump replied.

    The guy is egotistical and thin-skinned — and full of garden-variety left-leaning crud — but if clumsy also includes the comment he made to the interviewer, then, hell yes, we need more public figures (or certainly non-PC right-leaning people) to be clumsy.

    The crappola of political correctness and the phoniness of left-leaning courtesy (or decorum as prescribed by liberals, if not squish-squishes too) is the big reason we’ve ended up a Nidal-Hasan-ized society.

    Mark (74fce8)

  9. How can she be the “women’s candidate” and get support from feminists with this history

    Because Gramps, being the “women’s candidate” or being supported by women’s groups like NOW have nothing to do with promoting the welfare of actual women, it has everything to do with promoting the leftist/socialist ideology of our “betters”. Bill could rape a 10 year old on the Resolute Desk while Hillary! videoed it and they would both remain the favorites of the left. Hell, they even have their daughter in on the act. They will be the first billionaire Presidential family and they’re typically all leftists.

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie™ (f4eb27)

  10. Any and all Clintons are fair game; including the evil spawn Chelsea and her vile progeny. No one in both families are honorable people

    Angelo (1be77f)

  11. Which leads to the next question: What is the relevance of Bill Clinton’s conduct for Hillary Clinton’s campaign? Ordinarily, I would argue that the sins of the husband should not be visited on the wife. What Bill Clinton did counts against him, not her, and I would include in that her decision to stick with him. What happens inside a marriage is the couple’s business, and no one else’s, even when both halves crave the presidency.

    This is, as our British cousins might say, bollocks on stilts. Ruth Marcus is conveniently forgetting that Hillary! was one of her husband’s chief defenders in the Flowers, Jones, Broaddrick, Willey, et al. imbroglios, right up until the moment that we first learned of the existence of a blue dress with a curious stain. In fact, plenty of people (Christopher Hitchens springs to mind) reported that Hillary! and her evil Wormtongue Sid Blumenthal were the key figures in spreading the word among Democrat operatives and sympathetic lefty journalists that Monica Lewinsky was a crazed stalker who was making up her accusations. For Ruth Marcus to try to grant clemency to Hillary! for her lies and scheming goes to show that even when she (Marcus) is trying to sound reasonable, deep down inside she’s can’t help but be a shill for the Once and Future Inevitable Next President of the United States.

    JVW (d60453)

  12. Bill Clinton will find a way to sabotage Hillary’s campaign. I would bet money on it. Bill Clinton is the most selfish person on the planet. What is the upside for him to have his wife become president? If she is elected it will be SHE who will command the most coverage in the history books. THE FIRST FEMALE PRESIDENT! And Bill? The second president in our history to be impeached. Not even the first. With Hillary in the White House Bill will be on the shortest of leashes. No more trips to Lolita Island for you, Big Dawg! Can you imagine Bill Clinton hanging back while Hillary hogs the spotlight? While he has to sit and seethe that HE is the big political talent while she’s screwing up this and she is screwing up that. He is psychologically incapable of controlling his appetites. Who knows how many young girls he’s paying hush money to already? And that phony baloney foundation of theirs? There will come a time where some enterprising reporter will put his dreams of a Pulitzer Prize ahead of his ideology. Then we’ll see all the squiggly things that will come out from under that rock.

    Funeral Guy (2b0c22)

  13. It will be interesting. I think the chances of her winning are now much lower than expected. Elizabeth Warren will jump in; probably too late.

    Mike K (90dfdc)

  14. JVW @ 6,

    I know. Trump. Sigh. But, once again he’s made the point. It’s outrageous for Hillary and Bill to not be called out on their stunning hypocrisy. And if Trump’s the one to do it, so be it. It’s a smart move.

    Dana (86e864)

  15. How long until bill’s wife claims she is a homosexual?
    gotta get the tranny vote.
    Trump has did well in directing the people in the right direction. Immigration, lying republicans and now exposing the impeached president as a sexist pig.

    mg (31009b)

  16. I’ve said it before: Slick Willy will have a “heart attack” and die in June/July next year. The widow Hillery with emerge from morning just in time for the election. Nothing, including Willy, will stand in her way. Nothing, no matter what, will stop her. Just say’n.

    oldgeezer (9a3891)

  17. A better question is: Is the Manchester Union Leader and its publisher fair game? Trump went on and on about this.

    Sammy Finkelman (67f658)

  18. bill’s wife is on her last cankle…
    icy will be reporting her obit before the election.

    mg (31009b)

  19. Why anyone would be surprised by anything Trump does is beyond me. If there is a door to break down, he will break it down. If there is a window to shatter, he will shatter it.

    Yet, for some reason, Paul Krugman has yet to endorse him.

    “You mention Monica Lewinsky,” Guthrie asked. “Are you saying an alleged extra-marital affair, that of course he has now admitted, is that fair game?”

    You can’t prove that Bill Clinton was never married to Lewinsky.

    I’m sorry, Dana, but who is the Trump guy of whom you write? I haven’t heard anything about him this election cycle.

    Welp, the Internet has peaked. It can only go downhill from here.

    CayleyGraph (353727)

  20. Is Clinton (and the all the things he did ) fair game? Of course. We’re not talking about kids here; we’re talking about a former president married (and I use the term loosely) to a major candidate. Hillary intends to use Bubba in campaigning and talk up his record. There’s also that pesky little fact that his last name is the only qualification for the presidency that she has. It’s the same deal if Jeb (by some massive miracle) got the nomination. Dubya would be fair game for conversation, too. (Though I apologize profusely for comparing Dubya to a slimebag like Bubba. For all his faults, Dubya is a better man than Bubba could ever hope to be.)

    That said, speaking as someone who would never vote for a RINO like Trump, I’d give Donald some advice on this subject: tread carefully. If Clinton’s past actions are fair game, then so is that little story about Ivana Trump accusing Donald of rape. Yes, she tried to walk that back last summer, but it’s in a court document (i.e. the record). And if memory serves, Trump’s explanation last summer was “I was married to her, so it couldn’t have been rape.” Not exactly a good way of burying controversy, is it? Hillary is a worn out gasbag, but do you really believe she and her stooges wouldn’t hammer him over that? I don’t want Trump as the nominee, but he gets it, then he better be prepared to deal with this.

    top116 (d094f8)

  21. let bill’s wife and trump beat each other up while Cruz makes love to voters ears.

    mg (31009b)

  22. hillary and her potentially historic slightly hairy geriatric boobies have been defending rapists for many many moons

    happyfeet (831175)

  23. I have listened to her laugh about it, happyfeet and would bet trump does a recap of bill’s wife’s rape tape.

    mg (31009b)

  24. How was Trump “clumsy” in handling this? And how about Guthrie blaming Trump for calling B.Clinton a racist when Trump was clearly quoting what others called B.Clinton during the 08 campaign.

    I’m still not sold on Trump the political person but I do like his campaign style. And his willingness to say what should be said.

    seeRpea (0939e6)

  25. Mr. president trump will at least try to make america great again

    filthy hyper-entitled low-energy bushpig not so much – is too much effort

    happyfeet (831175)

  26. trump seems to enjoy big game hunting.

    mg (31009b)

  27. Given today’s micro-aggression mindset, this may prove to be extremely uncomfortable for teh Clintons, especially when talk of Slick Willie’s “alleged” sexual abuse of underage females procured by the “alleged” pedophile Jeffrey Epstein comes to light.

    Colonel Haiku (c7ccf8)

  28. “… Gawker recently wrote an interesting story titled, Flight Logs Put Clinton, Dershowitz on Pedophile Billionaire’s Sex Jet.” It discussed Mr. Epstein’s “predatory past, and his now-inconvenient relationships with a Who’s Who of the Davos set,” and reported that Bill Clinton had repeatedly flown on the “Lolita Express,” Mr. Epstein’s private jet, “with an actress in softcore porn movies whose name appears in Mr. Epstein’s address book under an entry for ‘massages’.”

    Colonel Haiku (c7ccf8)

  29. How many more, Mr. Speaker? How many more?

    mg (31009b)

  30. In October, the Justice Department announced it would not be filing criminal charges against former senior IRS official Lois Lerner or anyone else in the case, noting, “Poor management is not a crime.” In a sign that the controversy was abating, the GOP controlled Congress approved a $290 million increase in IRS funding as part of the $1.1 trillion fiscal 2016 spending package recently enacted.

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  31. re #29: yepp, i big part of me wants to vote for Trump just to stick it to the GOP hierarchy.

    seeRpea (0939e6)

  32. Put the focus where it belongs – on Hillary’s brutal and pitiless assaults on Bill’s victims. She orchestrated the ruthless attacks on women who came forward after Bill Clinton had already sexually assaulted them.

    Hillary’s campaign of smears and intimidation came to national attention during Bill’s first run for POTUS. Any woman brave enough to open her mouth about Bill’s sexual assaults was quickly targeted for the most ruthless attack on her character, her neighbors and fellow employees were interviewed by the State Police, her boyfriend or husband was questioned, her background was combed for indiscretions, etc. She was smeared, embarrassed, and silenced – and it was all Hillary’s special brand of very dirty work.

    Once in the White House Hillary’s attacks on Bill’s victims only escalated, now she had a full-blown personal staff with unlimited funding and a Bimbo Eruption team of government employees to really intimidate the hell out of Bill’s victims. She had government agencies to do black bag jobs, the FBI to investigate past sexual history, and even the IRS to “audit” Bill’s victims, and a compliant national media – both print and TV – to crucify any woman dumb enough to accuse her husband of rape.

    Later, when he was out of office, a reporter asked Bill why he did it, his response was Because I could.

    And, the only reason he could get away with rape was because Hillary was right behind him making sure his victims kept quite – or else!

    So, don’t get sidetracked, Bill’s disgusting behavior is only the first time all those women were raped – Hillary was right behind him doing the same damn thing – adding insult to injury – and making sure Bill’s victims knew there was no hope of ever getting any justice. Hillary made sure Bill could go right on raping women. She was much more than an enabler, she was an accomplice.

    ropelight (3f500f)

  33. I suppose as long as they are close to power, any retired Arkansas state police, FBI agent, SS person who has 1st hand knowledge of such things doesn’t want to become a target so stays quiet.

    Would it make a difference if someone came forward and told how they were ordered to do their bidding?
    That would make a great October surprise.

    I guess a lot depends on what you think happened to Vince Foster…

    MD in Philly (not in Philly) (deca84)

  34. Yup–time to beat Hillary around the head and shoulders with Willy’s stiff shtick.

    Comanche Voter (1d5c8b)

  35. i big part of me wants to vote for Trump just to stick it to the GOP hierarchy.

    seeRpea (0939e6) — 12/30/2015 @ 7:31 am

    I understand that feeling but I don’t think you actually intend to vote for him in the primaries. But there have been people actually arguing for giving Trump the nomination for that reason, which is childish.

    Gerald A (949d7d)

  36. This is some very interesting insight on Trump’s methods. I used to work with Adams and am both amazed and amused by what he’s accomplished since that time.

    http://donsurber.blogspot.com/2015/12/pundit-of-year-dilbert-creator-scott.html?spref=tw

    Colonel Haiku (c7ccf8)

  37. #32, MD, a select few of the Arkansas State Policemen who were on Governor Bill Clinton’s personal protection detail, and did his procuring and his dirty work on the side, moved to Washington DC when Bill became POTUS ostensibly to work as BATF agents.

    Several of them were killed in the raid on Waco. Since the Branch Dividians were warned an attack was coming and since the attackers were warned the Dividians knew they were coming and were armed and ready for the attack, it’s not beyond the pale to ask if the former Arkansas troopers wren’t set up for elimination.

    After all, Dead Men Tell No Tales.

    ropelight (3f500f)

  38. This is some very interesting insight on Trump’s methods.

    Colonel Haiku (c7ccf8) — 12/30/2015 @ 9:31 am

    His methods are well calculated to work with a large block of Republican voters. The general election, if he’s the nominee, would be another matter. But he’s a smart guy so maybe he’s got that figured out too. Then again maybe not.

    Gerald A (949d7d)

  39. h3ll yes Bubba is fair game: he’s a public figure for one, and, if he goes on the campaign trail for Shrillery, he’s even more of a legitimate target.

    it’s 5hit like this that makes me admire Trump, and why, in general, i, like a lot of people i meet every day, support him. he’s not perfect, but he’s also not moar of the same, and i’m sick of the “the same”, as fed to me by the GOPe, the MFM and our would be Leftard overloards…

    let it burn.

    redc1c4 (2e2c50)

  40. i’m sick of the “the same”, as fed to me by the GOPe

    me too

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  41. Well, ropelight, that is a strategy that has been around since at least king David.

    MD in Philly (not in Philly) (deca84)

  42. heh… even the MFM agrees.

    redc1c4 (321ba5)

  43. His methods are well calculated to work with a large block of Republican voters. The general election, if he’s the nominee, would be another matter. But he’s a smart guy so maybe he’s got that figured out too. Then again maybe not.

    from my daily travels around my par of Lost Angels, #Failifornia, and interacting with people of various genders, races, economic classes and what have you, i can testify that there is a strong undercurrent of support for The Fonald, or, at least for what he is saying.

    this support covers a rather broad spectrum of folks in what is traditionally a demonrat stronghold of leftard idiocy, as evidenced by the people they elect… not sure its enough folks to offset the Free 5hit Army with their Sanders 2016 stickers (which i see moar of than i do Hillary!), but it’s refreshing, none the less.

    maybe the sheep CAN look up… 😎

    redc1c4 (321ba5)

  44. redc1c4 (321ba5) — 12/30/2015 @ 10:33 am

    Recent polls show him clearly doing worse against Hillary than the other leading GOP contenders. A few months ago they showed him running stronger than the others and his supporters were touting those polls. I don’t put any stock in the “people I talk to say blah blah blah” stuff.

    As I said his campaign is based on pushing the right buttons to get a certain block of GOP voters and it’s working very well. I suspect he would start sounding different during the general. Or maybe not, in which case he’d get creamed IMO.

    Gerald A (949d7d)

  45. 38. …The general election, if he’s the nominee, would be another matter. But he’s a smart guy so maybe he’s got that figured out too. Then again maybe not.

    Gerald A (949d7d) — 12/30/2015 @ 9:47 am

    Trump has been successfully marketing The Apprentice and the Miss Universe Pageant to the average voter for years.

    I think he has it figured out.

    Steve57 (17e737)

  46. Gerald, it isn’t a certain block of GOP voters, who support Trump. The mass turnouts at his rallies and his continuing position at the top of the polls tell the tale when virtually every major media outlet, the GOPe, a good many so-called Conservative pundits and Bloggers, and almost all of the other candidates in both parties have been howling for his scalp since he announced.

    No, Trump’s appeal is wider than you’re willing to acknowledge. Trump appeals to a broad and deep range of Conservatives who are sick to death of being hoodwinked by the GOPe into supporting establishment candidates only to watch in shock and smoldering anger when they renege on campaign promises, vote for projects and programs anathema to conservative principles, and laugh in our faces because we have no other real options.

    Well, now we do. Some of us, me included, despise the arrogant, cowardly, two-faced crooks, liars, and boot-lickers who control the GOP. Trump appeals to me for a range of reasons. He’s the only one who had the balls to put the issue of illegal immigration front and center, he’s the one who called out Obama’s treacherous plan to import Islamic jihadis into the US and support them on the taxpayer’s dime. And Trump called out Hillary Clinton on her disastrous stint at the State Department, her corrupt money grubbing, her callous disregard for safety and security in Benghazi. All this and so much more.

    Trump attracts men and women, old and young, Conservatives and Liberals, native born and naturalized, serving military and veterans, rich and poor, highly educated and those not excessively burdened with too much (contradictory) information – in short Mr and Ms American voter.

    Trump is a genuine grassroots phenomena, a charismatic leader, come at the right time and place to lead the US out of the darkness of indenture to Washington’s political elite. It’s past time the American people had a chance to elect a leader of their own choosing instead of the Hobson’s choice between a GOP Tweedle Dum and a Democrat Tweedle Dee.

    Trump will cream Hillary or anyone else currently on the political stage because the people are behind him, they’ll support his run, and they’ll turn out in overwhelming numbers to vote for him. The only way to stop a Trump Presidency is for his Secret Service Security Detail to conspire to kill him. Otherwise, it’s out with the old (GOP and Democrooks alike) and a nationwide hardy Hail to President Trump.

    ropelight (3f500f)

  47. I’m with ropelight. (As usual). I’m a Cruz guy now but if Trump wins the nomination I’ll be a Trump man. I’m tired of as they say “holding my nose” to vote for some liberal Republican and getting screwed over and over. It’s the liberal Republicans turn to hold their nose like I’ve done time again and vote Trump if the time should come. If he’s not conservative enough or pro gun enough or anti abortion enough well, tough tit. I’ve been supporting every half-assed non-perfect guy the party threw my way for decades….your turn. Of course he’s not conservative enough for me, only I am. But he ain’t no leftist. And he ain’t no Hillary! or screwball Sanders.

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie™ (f4eb27)

  48. “Right, exactly,” Guthrie said. “Are you saying an extramarital affair by Bill Clinton is fair game, is something that you think should be in the campaign?”

    Did they go after Newt Gingrich in 2012 when he ran for President? I know the networks went hammer to anvil on Herman Cain and the sexual harassment allegations, pounding him out of the race.

    Another Anon (f9c823)

  49. Among his partisan fans in the Democratic Party, Bill Clinton has always been, and shall always be, a Teflon figure.

    As we most all know from first-hand experience with skillets and nonstick finishes, the thing about Teflon is:

    The slick wears off with continued use — always. And then, even when oily, things stick when the heat turns up.

    But Democrats will hold their noses, avert their eyes, refuse to contemplate the indisputable, and vote for Hillary! anyway.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  50. Re #49: A few differences – Newt did not commit perjury or obstruct justice with his adultery, and despite some early polling was never really in the forefront. But his adultery did come up (it was the reason i refused to support him) and it would have been a big time story if he had gained any traction.

    seeRpea (0939e6)

  51. 2015: The year the Democrats fully embraced corporatism

    In 2015, Obama bragged that — in addition to being a Nobel Prize winner, a Grammy Award winner and a best-selling author — he may be the world’s greatest Boeing salesman. “Other than, maybe, the CEO of Boeing,” Obama said in June, “I don’t know anyone who’s done more to sell Boeing planes around the world than me.”

    Obama will travel to Germany this spring

    President Barack Obama will travel to Germany in April for an industrial trade show and trade talks, the White House announced Wednesday.

    Obama will attend the Hannover Messe, the world’s largest industrial technology trade show. He is the first U.S. president to attend the 70-year-old trade fair, which attracts about 6,500 exhibitors and 250,000 visitors from around the world each year, according to the administration.

    happyfeet (831175)

  52. Trump appeals to me for a range of reasons. He’s the only one who had the balls to put the issue of illegal immigration front and center, he’s the one who called out Obama’s treacherous plan to import Islamic jihadis into the US and support them on the taxpayer’s dime. And Trump called out Hillary Clinton on her disastrous stint at the State Department, her corrupt money grubbing, her callous disregard for safety and security in Benghazi. All this and so much more.

    ropelight (3f500f) — 12/30/2015 @ 1:21 pm

    Yes he’s not timid about saying things or taking controversial positions – particularly on one thing. That’s about 95% of the reason he’s popular. That’s an asset, at least when running, and maybe to a lesser degree even if elected. After that there isn’t much else. I don’t what the “so much more” is – maybe the idea he’s a really good manager who can get things done or something.

    I see no actual evidence that he would be the strongest candidate against Clinton.

    Gerald A (949d7d)

  53. My comment, which doesn’t seem to have anything wrong with it, has never come out of moderation. Nor for that matter do any of my other comments.

    Gerald A (949d7d)

  54. you may have used the t word or the r word or the w word

    happyfeet (831175)

  55. I think I know what the t word is but what are the r and w words?

    But if you explain it you’ll go into moderation I guess…

    Gerald A (949d7d)

  56. greasy hyper-entitled bushfilth goes to national soros radio to lecture failmerica on the proper care and feeding of muslims

    “Trump clearly banning all Muslims would actually be so counterproductive in our efforts to destroy ISIS that it’s foolhardy,” the former Florida governor told NPR’s Steve Inskeep in an interview Wednesday in Boston. “I mean, it’s beyond ridiculous; it’s quite dangerous.”

    Republicans eff yeah

    man i think i just threw a chub

    happyfeet (831175)

  57. the r word is the ree ree word and the w word rhymes with dinah shore, who is dead not unlike kurt cobain and brittany murphy

    happyfeet (831175)

  58. “Trump clearly banning all Muslims would actually be so counterproductive in our efforts to destroy ISIS that it’s foolhardy,” the former Florida governor told NPR’s Steve Inskeep in an interview Wednesday in Boston. “I mean, it’s beyond ridiculous; it’s quite dangerous.”

    Well, who can argue with that?

    Difficult to argue with this either, and it would take a foolhardy person or just a fool to call the Middle East Forum squishy on Islamism.

    Milhouse (8489b1)

  59. mr. trump said maybe incompetent loser failmerica should temporarily stop importing terrorists

    bushfilth has a problem with that

    lol

    if you one of them R-pigs what gave greasy greasy bushfilth hundreds of millions of dollars

    put you hands in the air

    and wave em like you just don’t care

    happyfeet (831175)

  60. point taken, but I wouldn’t buy a used yugo from simon, who turned out to be backchannel to bashir, his ‘modest proposal’ keys off a more rigorous one by gaffney’s center for security policy,

    narciso (732bc0)

  61. Simon?

    Milhouse (8489b1)

  62. steve simon, the fellow mentioned in the link, not our mr, jester certainly, it does raise a question, what are the criteria for exclusion, tabligh membership would be one,

    narciso (732bc0)

  63. Gerald A,

    Just released your comment from moderation.

    Dana (86e864)

  64. Oh, him. Yeah, well the article’s authors seem to have about as much regard for him as you do, which is no surprise.

    Milhouse (8489b1)

  65. what’s sleazier than an american public school teacher and twice as horny?

    happyfeet (831175)

  66. yeah that one’s a stumper

    happyfeet (831175)

  67. omaha!

    somewhere in middle america

    happyfeet (831175)

  68. why is there no happy new year’s post?

    this is a travesty!

    i’m a notify the committee is what i’m a do

    standards people

    there are standards

    happyfeet (831175)

  69. RIP Wayne Rogers

    mg (31009b)

  70. The best thing about Wayne Rogers is he stopped acting to make money the old fashion way. RIP.

    Ag80 (eb6ffa)

  71. MD in Philly (not in Philly) (deca84) — 12/30/2015 @ 8:29 am

    I guess a lot depends on what you think happened to Vince Foster…

    He went to the Saudi Arabian Ambassador’s residence, or attempted to (the Ambassador had moved next door during renovations) which was across the street from Fort Marcy Park, in an attempt to blackmail him for money.

    He wanted one of the locked briefcases, which Prince Bandar bin Sultan used to tell reporters was used to keep secret files in. But think about it.

    This was after panicking because he’d read my e-mail which had been printed out and delivered to him because he said anything mentioning the Girgente Report on the evnts in Crown Heights on Augist 19-22, 1991, should be shown to hm, because Governor Cuomo was keeping it under wraps until its official release July 20, which gave the idea that it might have some stunning revelations.

    I had mentioned that Janet Reno should not cover up the murder of Yankel Rosenbaum like she did that of Don Aronow and had segued into not firing the FBO Director and that if he was fired reporters would be released from their pledges of confidentiality and William Sessions would be free to tell what he knew about Waco particularly how he was kept from the scene and how his water cannon plan was rejected in favor of tear gas.

    I said reporters knew more than what they wrote and for proof he should read that day’s (the e-mail message, routed through Rochester, was dated July 19, although it was only delievered on July 20) Wall Street Journal editorial – and the July 19, 1993 editoorial was about Vincent Foster. So he panicked, thinking the jig was up, and he needed to get money quickly to pay for a lawyer. I had no idea who would read it, of course

    Vincent Foster, however, had fogotten about… diplomatic immunity!

    He had gone there because he wss looking for someone who would not be in trouble when Clinton and his aides got into big trouble.

    Vincent Foster’s death was not a planned death and in fact the coverup got up to rocky start and was very unprofessional. And Clinton’s aides would not have taken part in it if they felt he had been murdered by Clinton, because they, or most of them, Hillary possibly excepted, – that’s maybe why she drinks – were not scared of him like the colleagues of Stalin were scared of Stalin.

    Clinton’s aides would have betrayed him instead had they felt Clinton was responsible for the death of high-ranking Vincent Foster. Vincent Foster was very high rank in the Clinton scheme of things – his rank was disguised by him being the deputy White House counsel, just like Sandy Berger’s importance to Bill Clinton was disguised by him being the deputy National Security adviser at that time. (And Janet Reno’s loyalty to Bill Clinton was disguised by making it look like she was his third choice and virtually forced on him by his determination to name a woman.)

    After the death – I think – the Saudi Arabian Ambassador to the United States rushed over to asecret unscheduled meeting in the White House where only President Clinton and Sandy Burglar (Berger) were present. Berger recently died, at age 70, we are told of cancer, but he workled until very shortly before his death.

    The fact of this meeting was leaked, with a dubious explanation of it, was leaked to Fred Barnes, then of the New Republic, and published in an article that appeared on page 10 of the March 14, 1994 New Republic, coming almost at the time of the culmination of known Foster case leaks, like the picture of a gun that he supposedly used.

    You can see a picture of the start of the article here, which I think could be the smoking gun in the Vincent Foster case.

    http://i58.tinypic.com/ih8nx3.jpg

    The key words are the two words at the end of line 9 and the beginning of line 10: “in July”

    In July = July, 1993.

    I suspected some record existed somewhere, or this would not have been leaked.

    I attempted, (albeit without too much hope) in 1997, to use the Freedom of Information Act in 1997 to confirm the existence and the date and time of this meeting – that is, to see whether that took place during the crucial missing hours in the afternoon of Tuesday, July 20, 1993.

    But to no avail.

    The Secret Service said it did not maintain records of who visited the White House and I should ask the White House counsel’s office which had these records, and the White House counsel’s office said it was not covered by the Freedom of Information Act. (they later on fooled many people into thinking records were generally available when they revealed the guests at the Lincoln Bedroom. Recently, the Obama Administrationn has made the list of Whote House vistors widely available, but that’s only for his Administration.)

    I attempted to confirm this meeting in a roundabout way by asking the State Department about reports of such meetings – if this meeting was for standard government business the State Department should have bene notified. This Freedom of Information Act request was answered early in the Bush Administration but was not informative.

    At that meeting, I think, President Clinton told Prince Bandar bin Sultan to move Vincent Foster’s body to nearby Fort Marcy Park, (putting it by the last cannon?) which would give the investigation of his death federal jurisdiction, and he would take care of the rest. Bandar must have said or shown something to the effect that the killing of Vincent Foster was somethig he should not be blamed for by Bill Clinton. (He could be held to account for it in his own country. His career would be ruined at least.)

    Of course they didn’t know what scandal Vincent Foster was worried about. They thought maybe that the grand jury in Little Rock investigating Whitewater had run away from the prosecutor. I am not too sure of the chronology here and need to get some more facts. I would like to double check when a decision was made to issue a search warrant for Davd Hale’s office or if that had any implications for Bill Clinton.

    In any case Clinton determined to take control of all investigations of himself by putting them into the hands of a lawyer whom he could trust: Robert B. Fiske, Jr. Fiske had successfully fended off Rudolph Giuliani in his investigation of Goldman and Sachs by getting Robert Freeman to plead guilty to a fictitious charge, which hed made up, that could not need lead to Robert E. Rubin.

    The thing that got the ball rolling was a complaint filed against Clinton by David Hale, says a Salon article. Anyway what you have to understand that Bill Clinton got the prosecutor he wanted – Robert B. Fiske Jr – he not only could control what that prosecutor did, but in so doing, he could stop all other investgations of himself by any other prosecutor in the country. State and local prosecutors don’t usually second guess federal ones.

    Bill Clinton arranged for Janet Reno to appoint what she called a special prosecutor, but wasn’t one legally. Then she called for one to be named, in the expectation that the 3 federal judges would ratify the choice of Robert B. Fiske, Jr, but they picked Kenneth Starr, instead.

    Janet Reno, however, had put Fiske of the Foster case, though, before, and so it remained.

    He was also able to manipulate Kenneth Starr’s investigation, except for the case involving Monica Lewinsky, which started too suddenly. I believe that Clinton was kept apprised of everything Starr was doing by a secret informant – Samuel Dash. In his own testimony he almost revealed he knew what Monica Lewisnky had given as the definitpon of sex – he wa snot supposed to know that. I don’t know who, if anyone else, spotted this when he almost gave away that he had access to Monica Lewinsky’s testimony, but if you examine his grand jury testimony, you can find it. Clinton catches himself maybe just in time.

    If Bill Clinton wanted to kill someone, he would have probably attempted to make it look like a natural death, or an accident or justifiable homicide. Not like what happened to Vincent Foster.

    As I said, Hillary Rodham Clinton may be afraid of something happening to her if she ever breaks from Bill. Bill does have some friends that aren’t friends of hers.

    Sammy Finkelman (67f658)

  72. Rogers was 82. I didn’t think he was that old.

    Gerald A (949d7d)

  73. Enjoyed watching Rogers on Cashin’ In these last few years… a no nonsense guy who said what he meant and meant what he said.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.6069 secs.