Klein offers this quote as supposedly coming from Bill: "My contacts and friends in newspapers and TV tell me that they’ve been contacted by the White House and offered all kinds of negative stories about us... The Obamas are behind the e-mail story, and they’re spreading rumors that I’ve been with women, that Hillary promoted people at the State Department who’d done favors for our foundation, that John Kerry had to clean up diplomatic messes Hillary left behind."
They’re spreading rumors that I’ve been with women...
It's so underhanded to make up the very stories people would be inclined to believe.
According to Klein, Obama/Jarrett's real objection to Hillary is that she's not liberal enough to preserve Obama's legacy:
“With Obama’s approval,” this source continued, “Valerie has been holding secret meetings with Martin O’Malley [the former Democratic governor of Maryland] and [Massachusetts Sen.] Elizabeth Warren. She’s promised O’Malley and Warren the full support of the White House if they will challenge Hillary for the presidential nomination.”
पोस्ट्स
१५८ टिप्पण्या:
How can Obama fully support two candidates? Full support means to the exclusion of others.
Anyway, this story has the ring of truth. I never believed that the Clintons and Obamas became friends or allies.
But is "the full support of the White House" what the Democratic candidate will want in 2016?
If Hillary wants to fight back, start opening the door on the IRS scandal and Obama's location during Bengahzi. I can't imagine the Clinton's holding back.
But is "the full support of the White House" what the Democratic candidate will want in 2016?
That might be read to mean "full support of the IRS" or "full support of the NSA"
The Clintons and the Obamas: the Jets and Sharks of the Democratic Party.
I decided not to extrapolate with the obvious "from your first cigarette" line. Lie, teleprompter, joint, private email, intern, etc. Cigarette still works, too.
Hillary would see herself as Maria. Without the dying. Of course.
I am Laslo.
Are you trying to get me to use up all my free NYT views on my first morning of vacation?
"...and they’re spreading rumors that I’ve been with women..."
Women are the least of your problem buddy.
What a pile of human trash, the whole stinking lot pf them.
We'll be stuck with this pack of thieves (Clintons and Obamas)forever.
Will this punishment ever end?
Bill should start spreading rumors that Barack has been with women....
The Big Card the Obamas are waiting to play is the leak about how Hillary was black-out drunk and fell when she had her head injury.
Two problems (of many) with black-out drunks when they are black-out drunk:
1. They can't remember what they said (or wrote in an email, say);
2. They can't remember who was there watching.
Paranoia strikes deep, etc etc.
I am Laslo.
O'Malley is Bill with better taste in women. And he may actually like his wife.
Tagged as "stories people would be unlikely to believe.
You miss the real point. Two Democrat former presidents running around giving speeches means competition and reduced fees for each. Two huge foundations run by Democrat former presidents means competition and reduced donations for each. If there is going to be a Democrat in the WH in 2017, Obama wants to control who it is, though the preferred approach would be to tank all Democrats and destroy Hillary. Obama would be free to roam the planet stirring up trouble and raking in stunning sums of money.
Not preserve Obama's legacy? That's ridiculous!
Hillary is perfectly capable of continuing to run this country into the ground and aiding and abetting the destruction of Israel.
Mr Biden must be feeling hurt that nothing is being promised to him.
"House of Cards", season 3.
"Democrats... are the party of the student council, and Bill Clinton has spent 50-odd years proving to the world that he is the cleverest boy at Hot Springs High School..."
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/415417/monster-our-own-kevin-d-williamson
Obama/Jarrett's real objection to Hillary is that she's not liberal enough to preserve Obama's legacy
This is believable as most of his 'accomplishments' are unsustainable economically or otherwise and would require constant attention and maintenece. The White House reached out to The Little Dutch Boy to run in 2016, but not a US citizen, alas.
Obama/Jarrett's real objection to Hillary is that she's not liberal enough to preserve Obama's legacy
They are scared to death of what will come out after they leave and they are not getting any guarantees from Hillary.. that is what this means.
. . . as the worm turns:
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty: [1/23/08]
It's getting nasty between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, and Bill Clinton seems to be enjoying it.
The former president had this to say: "I kind of like seeing Barack and Hillary fight. They're flesh-and-blood people and they have their differences – let' em at it."
But not everyone thinks it's becoming. Several top Democrats are concerned that the gutter politics will end up harming the party's image ahead of the general election.
Senator John Kerry . . . wrote in an e-mail to supporters saying: "The truth matters, but how you fight the lies matters even more." Kerry doesn't mention Clinton by name, but says they're fighting back against anonymous e-mails questioning Obama's Christian faith.
Meanwhile, an editorial in today's Wall Street Journal suggests that Obama "seems to be awakening slowly to what everyone else already knows about the Clintons, which is that they will say and do whatever they 'gotta' say or do to win." unquote.
This is a perfect situation for a duel!
Obama's legacy
1) Unbelievable narcissism
2) Ackkkkkkk
3)Ackkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk......
Obama's legacy??
Here's the past 15 years of NICS firearm background checks.
Barry's done one hell of a job selling firearms.....not that there is anything wrong with that....but I'm pretty sure this is not the legacy for which he was hoping.
Time to pop the popcorn...
I first read this as:
"The author, Edward Klein, cites sources inside "Bill Clinton’s head"
Vile scorpions in a bottle. You want to see both of them lose.
Oh, here is another tidbit I read on a comment in another blog. The State's spokesperson, Saaki (?), is now in the WH under the 'protection' of VJ. This is war, people.
Billary as Trotsky. Yawn.
I believe the "not liberal enough" or rather "not leftist enough" more correctly line.
Chavez got to hand pick his successor, what kind of a democracy is this when we can't even achieve the level of state-craft of Venezuela.
You've got this tagged 'Elizabeth Wurtzel' but she is never mentioned in the post.
Imagine my bitter disappointment.
As Kissinger said, "It's too bad both can't lose."
Legacy voters will decide Obama's "legacy,"
As they should.
The expected attack by Barry's thugs was a prime reason for Hillary!'s email concealment in the first place.
The Clintons counted on TINA. Barry & Co. are trying to create an alternative.
In the short run, it will be fun to watch. What's a loyal Dem to do? Will Dems with bylines prop up Hillary when the dust settles or wait for Barry's command and go all in with Liz?
Upside for the GOP is a better shot against Warren or O'Malley. Downside for the country is even the slight possibility of another leftist president.
The expected attack by Barry's thugs was a prime reason for Hillary!'s email concealment in the first place
Yes! I think I put the same thought here in a comment a while ago. She didn't trust VJ and Obama in the first place and used all she could do within the 'rules' to keep them at bay.
This explains why the MSM took seriously the anti-Clinton stories. If Republicans or an outside source broke the stories they would be ignored, but with the Obama gang behind them, they had traction.
There is precedent for this high-level, vicious infighting. Bobby Kennedy and LBJ absolutely hated each other (See, Mutual Contempt by Jeff Shesol). They both wanted to be President after JFK. Before the assassination, the Kennedys derided and marginalized LBJ, excluding him from nearly all major policy decisions.
After the assassination, LBJ got the upper hand and canned Bobby as Attorney General. But both men jockeyed for the inevitable showdown in 1968.
In 2016, what does Obama want? He will make $50 - 100 Million in speeches and books. He will start a "Foundation" to make millions more. He will want a Democrat successor to preserve and protect his historical legacy.
Does Hillary's ascent advance these aims or thwart these aims? We must assume there remains residual bad blood between them from the 2008 primary.
Hillary's email flap - which caused a lot of unneccessary headache prior to her announcement - certainly had White House fingerprints all over it. I seriously doubt the major media lapdogs did any real investigative journalistic digging to make the story. It was likely spoon-fed by high-ranking folks with an anti-Hillary agenda.
So the question before the house is whether there is truth in Edward Klein's reporting on Bubba or if the author is just selling his new book on the Clinton-Obama feud.
As reported by the Washington Times, Klein told Newsmax TV that Jarrett was meeting in secret with Pocahontas Warren.
“President Obama has authorized Valerie Jarrett, his most important political adviser, to hold secret meetings with Elizabeth Warren to encourage her to challenge Hillary Clinton because the Obamas do not want to see the Clintons succeed them in the White House,” Mr. Klein said . . .
Perhaps Bill is clever enough to understand the public's weariness with Obama is, at this point, and is trying to slyly frame Hillary as the "anti-Obama"choice? She is in the unenviable position of having to run against the memory of an unpopular administration that she was part of. So, why not try to make it sound like those treacherous connivers in the White House are trying to smear her? He does seem to be trying to build the case that Hillary is the moderate in this scenario. He also lays out which of her potential leftist future opponents Obama would approve of are.
This may just be Bill's version of a double mind-fuck to give always-the-victim Hillary some distance from both Obama and her own leftism in the voter's minds.
Also, don't rule out how much Bill is still stinging from Obama using the race card against him. If building up Hillary means tearing down Obama, don't think Bill wouldn't relish it.
If true (and that is a big if) this is amazingly stupid conduct on the part of the White House. They are lighting a fire that could consume them as well.
I doubt there is any love between Jarrett and Clinton. In addition to everything else, a very successful black woman from the city vs. a white girl from the suburbs who has built her career on her husbands soiled coattails. It's not hard to imagine them hating each other.
This story does shed some light on why the email story first broke in the New York Times.
I think Beth B's comment is the most likely explanation for all of this. Very astute.
Blood Feud is an eye opener. Bill wants to get revenge on Obama for winning by using lies. And Bill is not going to surrender to Iranian agents.
So Clinton lurking behind the door?
All: Please hear me out.
This will not matter.
No one - I mean, No One - can deny HRC the POTUS-ship.
It is her right. It is her destiny.
She will be the 45th POTUS.
The election is over.
Save yourself. Save your time. Save your energy.
Just support HRC and you life will be infinitely better.
...or is it Obama behind the door?
Livia: Vanity. Tiberius wants to be loved, at least after his death if not before. And the best way to ensure that-
Claudius: Is to have someone worse to follow him, naturally. He's certainly no fool.
Livia: He's the biggest fool in my family. . .
OH noes! Now Hillary is being targeted by a vast, left-wing conspiracy...
She'll go down as history's greatest victim.
I do not see how Obama and Jarrett could find someone worse than they to follow, but they must believe that Hillary will be a much better president than Obama.
Klein video 6 more shoes to drop.... drip drip drip...
... that Hillary promoted people at the State Department who’d done favors for our foundation, that John Kerry had to clean up diplomatic messes Hillary left behind.
More rumors people are inclined to believe, especially since at least the John Kerry one is demonstrably true.
How much money did the Clinton Foundation raise for Haitian relief and how much did they spend in Haiti?
Back in the 1990s I thought that the Clintons and their designated goons (e.g., the "Talking Skull" Carville) spent so much time whining that they were practically walking, talking tear ducts. Nothing's changed.
but they must believe that Hillary will be a much better president than Obama.
Their fear is that she will expose the corruption while correcting course. This is bound to happen in a GoP administration also if they get elected. I am not sure how they will fight that but looks like their offense is to put a puppet there for the next cycle so nothing gets revealed too much.
Dear lefties,
If you had any morals or ethics yourselves, we wouldn't have to put up with the lying, cheating, sleazy underhanded Clintons, nor would we have to put up with the likes of the
Lanny Davises, the Carvilles, the Susan Estridges, the Begalas, Brocks and Gloria "One Free Grope" Steinems trying to cover up their trails of slime and crime.
Can't you nominate someone who's honest?
And now starring as Cardinal Richelieu, Valerie Jarrett.
Can you imagine a Secretary of State so bad that you've got to rely on John Kerry to clean up the mess?
If Republicans or an outside source broke the stories they would be ignored
The republicans knew of this since Benghazi hearings last year. They did not have any motive at this very point to make this leak. And you are right that it may not have got the media traction if it were not the right time or the right source.
Beth B is right. This is just more of the Clintons, trying to distract people from the issue of their corruption and all-around unfitness for anything decent. If they can make people think this is just a smear by someone, anyone - if not the Republicans, it must be the Obamas - then Hillary can keep going, and they can keep raking in the $$$$.
Unsurprising. An election that doesn't have a viable "Obama candidate" even in the Democratic primary would be a pretty comprehensive repudiation of his administration.
It's interesting how few people could even be labeled as proteges of Obama. Warren, maybe? But she has no role in the Obama administration, and I have trouble seeing her as a viable candidate. Obama's already the left wing candidate of the left wing party, and Warren positions herself to the left of him. How is she supposed to win a tossup state that doesn't care about ideological purity?
As I have said before, all leaks targeting Democrats at this point are spread by other Democrats. All leaks targeting Republicans are spread by other Republicans.
Nobody in the Republican field cares about Hillary at this point. She's not competing with them for money, and you'd have to think she's beatable in the general election. The only reason you would leak about Hillary now is to open up a space for a primary challenger.
Bill was heard to sing:
Someone’s got it in for me, they’re planting stories in the press
Whoever it is I wish they’d cut it out but when they will I can only guess
Warren, maybe? But she has no role in the Obama administration,
he rejected her to head the agency he made her create.
No doubt in my mind. Look at what happened to Jesse Jackson. Used to be the big dog, now it is the vile Al Sharpton. Jesse Jr, in jail.
Why? Among other things, ".. a hot mike caught Jackson whispering, "See, Barack's been talking down to black people. ... I want to cut his nuts off."
Widely publicized at the time.
On the other hand, maybe the Clintons are trying to sabatoge O'Malley by connecting him with the Obamas
Obama's legacy
1) Unbelievable narcissism
2) ????????
3) Profit
Maybe Valerie didn't do well in the interview for Hillary's BFF.
"The Obamas are behind the e-mail story, and they’re spreading rumors that [1] I’ve been with women, that [2] Hillary promoted people at the State Department who’d done favors for our foundation, that [3] John Kerry had to clean up diplomatic messes Hillary left behind."
[1] This has been characteristic of Bill Clinton since his pubes sprouted.
[2] Does Bill think Huma Abedin is a figment of our collective imagination?
[3] If true this would be like using an incontinent chimpanzee to clean up after another incontinent chimpanzee.
So the charges are true, true, and absurdly true. The one thing that isn't obviously true is whether Obama's myrmidons are behind the revelations of Hillary's ethical and possibly criminal transgressions. It's plausible. One must keep in mind that a skillful liar needs to deal in truths now and then to maintain his credibility.
I hope the leftists are able to find their suitable substitute for Barack Obama.
I'd hate to think they'd be forced to explore "other options"
...and they’re spreading rumors that I’ve been with women…
Rumors?
RUMORS?
Bill Clinton doesn't want to get up in the morning without figuring out how he's going to get it on that day.
Trust me, I know how it goes.
Although those stories of him taking rides on a billionaire friend's "orgy plane" were pretty funny.
If the Obamas spread them, kudos - as they're just extravagant enough to test exactly what you'd believe about Billy the Blow Job Clinton. And I believed them.
I gotta hand it to Obama.
Ask Hillary to work for him, set her up good, so he could easily, if displeased by her, knock her out of the way later.
You have to realize also that Obama is going to be competing with Clinton for the limited post presidential limelight.
Will donors curry more favor with the husband of a current president (Hillary) himself a former president than with just a former president Obama?
Obama strikes me as not the George W Bush type, content to paint hula girls in Maui.
"Tiberius wants to be loved, at least after his death if not before."
Damned good quote, Hilts... sorry. Captain Hilts.
It would be interesting to compare a list of Bills "contacts and friends in newspapers and TV" vs Scott Walkers.
Hillary's going to have to step up her game. Do some oppo research on herself like they did with Bill. And get some new shills. Using the ones that defended Bill makes her seem tired and old. Well, more tired and old than she already seems to be.
It was kind of dumb that she ever agreed to be in the Obama administration but I guess the chance for all that foreign cash was too hard to resist.
"Can't you nominate someone who's honest?"
Democrats ???
Seriously, this all resembles the old days of Kremlinology when the doings in secret had to be deduced by watching for tiny clues, like who is in the photo on May Day.
How the country has fallen into these times is going to be a topic for History, assuming here is History some day.
It's interesting how few people could even be labeled as proteges of Obama.
Indeed. Interesting point. Offhand, I can't think of any. It is all about him, and only about him. No partners and no successors.
I must say, I really like this "new" Obama - unafraid to take pot shots at either Republicans or their Clintonian doppelgängers.
Sweet, autocorrect is filling in umlauts for me. Cool. ;-)
Ask yourself how much more Obama could command in speeches where the Clintons not in the White House.
Republicans have reacted contemptuously to the HRC email scandal because she threatens their monopoly on the use of sneaky, dirty tricks.
They're all like, "What? Private email accounts for gov't biznack? Why didn't Mark Foley try that? Dayumn!"
Ridiculous. To believe this, one would have to believe that the Obama Administration would use federal agencies to investigate and harass its political enemies.
You shut up, Tea Party.
Edward Klein is a fantasy writer--he just makes stuff up, especially the veerrrrry long verbatim quotes he writes out. This is basically fiction for Clinton-Obama haters.
I think someone out there could get a lot of attention and page views interspersing clips of Clinton with well-imitated audio of I'm saying really nasty, disgusting-sexual things. Really over the top things, especially involving his use of words like "slurp", "gobble," and "suck."
I think Repubbies are afraid of that because they already went there with the Starr Report. But I'm talking about a comedic approach, full of irony.
Oy, if only Republicans understood humor.
Wouldn/t it be sweet to see the next President use the full force of the Federal Government to go after the Obama gang?
Investigations and convictions.
Throw in Pelosi, Reed, Kerry Boxer. All of the progressive liars and obstructionists.
Audits everybody.
Appoint hard liners as heads of all agencies.
Good for Obama et al if they're/he's behind it. And why shouldn't they leak that? It was corrupt as all get-out. It's not like Obama minced words over Congressman Weiner's stupid dick-pic pseudo-scandal, pretty minor in comparison to this. And if they waited to time leaks to coincide with these expectations, more power to them. It only makes me respect him more. Cool, savvy and not taking any chances with the Clintons whatsoever.
Troubled Voter wrote: Edward Klein is a fantasy writer--he just makes stuff up, especially the veerrrrry long verbatim quotes he writes out...
Kübler-Ross Stage One.
The first time in 20 years the mayor of Boston is marching in our Saint Patrick's day parade because fags are marching.
I just went to the French Cafe on the first floor of my exclusive Cambridge loft building. The place was packed. Do any of your know how liberal Harvard and Cambridge really are? The place was packed with dykes, old hippies, fags, trans, profs, blacks, and forneignrs who didn't speak english. The thing that made my egg sandwich had tits and a beard-even I look around and think what a bunch of freaks.
According to Klein, Obama/Jarrett's real objection to Hillary is that she's not liberal enough to preserve Obama's legacy:
“With Obama’s approval,” this source continued, “Valerie has been holding secret meetings with Martin O’Malley [the former Democratic governor of Maryland] and [Massachusetts Sen.] Elizabeth Warren. She’s promised O’Malley and Warren the full support of the White House if they will challenge Hillary for the presidential nomination.”
Best story I've heard all week. Althouse, you just made my Sunday. ;-)
This explains a lot. It never made sense that the Hillary email story was so big. It's not that it isn't revealing of Hillary's character, but is this scandal worse than Benghazi? Is it worse than non-Hillary scandals like the IRS Tea Party audits or Fast and Furious? Hardly. And yet, unlike for those stories, the media are banging on and talking in serious voices about the "secret" server.
Team Obama pushing the story plus the availability of further-to-the-left candidates give the media lefties all the incentive they need to pimp the scandal.
Bill has got to be giving that convention speech endorsement of Obama some second thoughts.
This is #142 on the list of why I'm not voting for Hillary.
I'm tired of Bill trying to maintain relevance. Tired of the sycophants in the press quoting him.
He could learn something from GWB about how to be a former President. In other words: You had your turn. Now leave.
It's not that it isn't revealing of Hillary's character, but is this scandal worse than Benghazi?
Um, yes.
One thing was about a minor (if fatal) incident in the desert that no one could change.
The emails are about how Hillary handled all business going through that office.
Every democrat that runs this state and city are at the parade...even are "republican" governor, who would be a liberal democrat in any other state.
Mass is fab and really expensive-you pubes could not afford a room!!!! You can buy a single room for only 500k!
MadisonMan said...
This is #142 on the list of why I'm not voting for Hillary.
Wherein Madison Man tries to convince everyone here that he's really not a secret Republican at heart.
The place was packed with dykes, old hippies, fags, trans, profs, blacks, and forneignrs who didn't speak english.
That's not all that was being packed there.
When you wake up from a black-out drunk in your Secretary of State Office and there is a 12-inch black dildo still sticking in your ass you know that SOMEONE put it there.
Kinda like the Mafia sending dead fish. But it is a 12-inch black dildo, Stuck in your ass. Makes a statement.
And the damned vodka bottles are empty.
I am Laslo.
Some easy observations:
This story was written by Ed Klein, who wrote a book last year called "Blood Fued" about a supposed bad relationship between Bill and Hillary Clinton and Barack and Michelle Obama.
His sources were entirely on the Clinton side, you could tell, and I did not feel the story that was told was true, (but rather was designed to make opponents of Hillary Clinton feel they knew the truth) and would eventually cause people to come up empty of they believed it) and I spotted something very wrong there what he says about Benghazi, and I'll go into this later. (Hillary Clinton did in fact finesse her way out of a problem)
The bottomm line is, I don't believe this story as to why this leaked.
It leaked because some people were genuinely outraged, and it might have something to do with the content of the emails received by the House committee because I think this leaked two weeks after the Gowdy committee obtained copies of the e-mails.
It leaked around the time more people became aware of this.
Hillary Clinton wanting all her emails to become public fits with that idea, because she hopes to bury something amidst a lot of other email.
And this is not to say that's the worst thing she actually sent or that she's not hiding some very important things but there is something in what she was forced to disclose that undercuts something that the public has been led to believe.
Crawling hung-over on your hands-and-knees in your Secretary of State Office with a 12-inch black dildo sticking in your ass, looking to see if you somehow had left a full bottle of Vodka SOMEWHERE. Not under the desk. Must've already drank that one.
I am Laslo.
Can't understand the all too clever by-half game of the Democrats but it suits me fine they are fighting each other. Whomever the Democrats pick as their candidate that candidate can't distance himself from Obama and after the last miserable years and the next two years to come it's hardly likely the country is going to vote for an even more strident leftist.
As for Bill, from his 'legacy' position after Obama he will still be the last two term successful Democrat president.
Obama is not out to 'get' Hillary (or Bill.)
Hillary has laid down with dogs all her life, and the fleas are overwhelming her.
Kevin Williamson has an inspired column on Hillary at NRO.
Following the health-care debacle, she abandoned any ambition of securing the sort of radical change she once embraced. Since then, it has been all politics — all calculation. And she is not a very good politician or calculator, as Barack Obama could tell you with a self-satisfied smirk.
She just isn't very good at this.
No vodka to be found in your Secretary of State Office and with a 12-inch black dildo sticking in your ass, the RAGE builds. If people understood the Secrets I know they would NOT treat me this way: a 12-inch black dildo sticking in my ass? Big deal: I've had bigger. And thicker. Bigger AND thicker, you hear? No one scares me! Do you hear that, microphones in the walls? NO ONE scares me!
Oops: dizzy there for a second.
Perhaps it is best to stay here on the spinning carpet and remain calm: a Secret Service Agent with a TOP SECRET file box of 'Project Vodka' is on his way.
I am Laslo.
Back last June, before the House Committee was informed about the fact that the State Department had no emails from her, but after they'd noticed that some e-mail had come from her from one or two clintoneamil.com addresses, Ed Klein wrote an article
http://nypost.com/2014/06/22/clinton-bristled-at-benghazi-deception-book/
(and that's in the book too, I assume)
...that said a lawyer working for Hillary Clinton had told him (and that means on her instructions, or they'd be violating attorney client privilege) that Hillary was stunned when she heard the president talk about the Benghazi attack in which they discussed how ridiculous the story was, and debated whether Hillary should resign over it. Ultimately, according to the book, she didn’t — and decided to put out the press release as requested by Obama.
The Clintons' lawyer said (according to Ed Klein) that Obama wanted her to say that "the attack had been a spontaneous demonstration triggered by an obscure video on the Internet that demeaned the Prophet Mohammed" and that she had told him that story wasn't credible - for one thing, she mentioned, the attack occurred on a September 11th. She used that as one reason for thinking it was planned in advance.
But, said her lawyer, Obama told her "I need you to put out a State Department release as soon as possible.”
Then she called Bill Clinton on the telephone (as we've been learning he doesn't use e-mail) who was in Little Rock that day, in his penthouse apartment on top of the William J. Clinton Presidential Library. (no joke)
And then this Clinton lawyer went on to describe what he said was the conversation they had.
Hillary said "I'm sick about it."
Bill: That story won't hold up.
Hillary: I know.
Bill: It’s an impossible story.
Bill: “I can’t believe the president is claiming it wasn’t terrorism. Then again, maybe I can. It looks like Obama isn’t going to allow anyone to say that terrorism has occurred on his watch.”
(Now actually at that time, Obama was not claiming it wasn't terrorism. But we'll leave that alone.)
Then, says the Clinton's lawyer, Bill and Hillary discussed what she could do.
Anonymous Clinton lawyer, quoted by Ed Klein:
"During their phone call, Bill started playing with various doomsday scenarios, up to and including the idea that Hillary consider resigning as secretary of state over the issue. But both he and Hillary quickly agreed that resigning was not a realistic option.
If her resignation hurt Obama’s chances of winning re-election, her fellow Democrats would never forgive her. Hillary was already thinking of running for president in 2016, and her political future, as well as Obama’s, hung in the balance.”
,
she'd told him
And then, according to Ed Klein, she then issued a statement - this was a little after 10 O'clock Eastern Daylight Time on September 11, 2012, that blamed the Benghazi attack on an “inflammatory (video) posted on the Internet.”
The only thing is, she didn't!
That's inaccurate.
Actually, she and Bill Clinton did come up with some wording that allowed her to finesse her way out of that.
All the talk about whether Hillary "wants to run" is ridiculous -- Bill calls the shots and Hillary will not say no if he insists she run. He sees her Presidency as a way to resurrect his image in history. When he left office he tried to create a groundswell for a Constitutional Amendment that would allow him to run again. That never caught fire, so his next option was to run using Hillary's name.
Whomever the Democrats pick as their candidate that candidate can't distance himself from Obama and after the last miserable years and the next two years to come it's hardly likely the country is going to vote for an even more strident leftist.
Oh I know. The "Tea Party years" have been full of left-wing policy and very high regard for the right-wing Congress doing its bestest to obstruct everything left-wing coming out of the White House.
HRC, our 45th POTUS, will successfully serve two terms.
The GOP will lose the WH, House, and Senate in 2016.
Why?
HRC.
You heard here first.
Do yourself a favor: Contribute to her campaign NOW. Then VOTE for her. Save yourself.
Obama wants a republican to win. That person will solidify his legacy, just like Obama solidified W's war on terror policies
I've noticed, in my romantic comedy survey, that a lot of the plots involve making a mistake.
It's always a mistake that's so stupid that you don't care how it turns out.
This is something of a plot flaw.
No dramatic structure, in other words.
A few exceptions are good.
What you want is two people opposite enough to be antagonistic, an opposite that turns into fitting well.
No mistake except discovering the change.
Obama and Clinton would be a mistake plot. You don't care.
The excerpt of the book I saw in the New York Post contains two obvious errors or half truths:
1) It strongly implies that Obama had no basis for saying it was a spontaneous demonstration caused by a video.
But I think maybe the Ansar al Sharia Facebook post he was informed about at 6:07 pm that night said just that.
Nobody seems to have the text of that Facebook post. But reports are it said something like that.
The problem was not that Obama had no basis for that, but rather that he, or others, were believing that.
Hillary’s people are lying if they are implying Obama made it all up. It’s actually quite provable that he didn’t. The story did not originate in Washington. It originated at the scene of the crime.
Hillary may not want to cast suspicion on the CIA and/or DNI Clapper, who probably sold Obama on this idea.
The second misstatement is:
2) that Hillary released a statement that blamed the attack on the video.
Actually, it was much more carefully written than that, and she didn’t blame it on the video..
The New York Times has all the different early statements here:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/09/12/us/politics/libya-statements.html?_r=0
In her third paragraph, she said:
Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet.
N.B. She did NOT endorse the idea that in fact the video had caused it, or even that the assailants had said that’s why they were doing it, or that anybody in fact did. And she used the wrong word too: "justify" rather than "explain"
When Edward Klein writes that:
And so, shortly after 10 o’clock on the night of September 11, she released an official statement that blamed the Benghazi attack on an “inflammatory [video] posted on the Internet
..
He’s wrong!!!
Of course, that may very well be what Hillary’s people told him, since that is what everybody on the right was going around saying.
But she never endorsed it.
She maybe did call Bill Clinton to discuss how to get out of this.
And maybe even a little bit of the email discusses this problem.
It is also a fact that when the talking points were being prepared, the State Department argued with the CIA about its claim that they been warned, and about the labeling of the place in Benghazi as a "consulate" but did not fight the claims that there had been a demonstration in Benghazi before the assault, or that was happened there had been "spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo"
Which would mean, if true, not planned because there was no time to plan it. And if not planned, then there are no culprits to find.
When asked about the talking points, Hillary Clinton said:
What difference does it make? .
The key point was 4 people had been killed, not the stories the Administration said.
But of course, if you want to understand what went wrong, what probably is still wrong with U.S. intelligence, it makes a great deal of difference.
There's a lot. There a lot to go into.
Sure, I was on the floor in my Secretary of State Office with a 12-inch black dildo sticking in my ass when the Secret Service Agent with a TOP SECRET file box of 'Project Vodka' came in, but I felt no shame: take it all in, Secret Service Agent, this is how Washington works.
Shame and embarrassment only stop you from getting to the top, that is why I feel free accidentally urinating on the carpet in front of you: don't avert your eyes, weakling.
I am Laslo.
Troubled Voter said...
"Edward Klein is a fantasy writer--he just makes stuff up, especially the veerrrrry long verbatim quotes he writes out. This is basically fiction for Clinton-Obama haters."
I don't think he would dare try that.
He is the recipient of deniable leaks from the Clinton's that are designed to:
1) Sound true.
2) Make her look better than Obama.
3) Be rebuttable, if used against Hillary
Ed Klein has made a career out of making out stuff about the Clintons and passing it along as coming from always unnamed Clinton
"insiders." He has zero credibility.
It goes without saying that politicians are competing against one another, and part of that competition is that if one camp has information about a rival, they will try to get that information to the public by telling some reporter.
I do not see why this is newsworthy. It does appear to be an attempt to somehow manage the negative news about Hillary. Yes, she violated our trust by destroying our property, those emails, and the reason for doing so is obviously worse than that.
This is probably the best answer Hillary has to the scandal, that Obama is trying to keep her from being nominated. That is amusing, as democrats probably like Obama a lot. The timing makes it impossible for her campaign to pick up momentum, which is crucial given her baggage. She has to be a true force of nature in the primary, at the onset, or she can't compete with a younger, smarter, less baggaged opponent.
I am on the floor in my Secretary of State Office beside a pool of urine, with a 12-inch black dildo sticking in my ass. I could remove it, but that is what they WANT me to do. I will remove the 12-inch black dildo sticking in my ass when I am good and ready, and no sooner.
Plus I sense that it is now holding some stuff in. In Washington there are leaks of all kinds.
I am Laslo.
If there are indeed six separate probes going into Hillary Clinton's tenure at the State Department, they almost certainly were not started by Valerie Jarrett but came from what they read in the emails they got from her, nor are the Obama people spreading any kinds of rumors that Bill Clinton has been with women.
Secretly, I believe America WANTS a Female president that can handle a 12-inch black dildo sticking in her ass. Could Putin handle a 12-inch black dildo sticking in HIS ass? How about you bend over, Vladimir, and we hit that 'reset' button again, buddy.
I am Laslo.
@Jerry Bowles
I agree that this is mostly not true.
I don't agree that he is making it up.
I think maybe one of the purposes of this leak is to get out the idea that Hillary is doomed anyway, so that nobody will make an effort to research her lies.
I've very much been enjoying Season 3 of House of Cards - it's so over the top, I thought don't have to worry about how ridiculous it is anymore. But then Val and Hil come along and they're ruining everything. How can I enjoy a fantasy show about nasty politics that is being upstaged by a reality show about nasty politics?
I think I need to pay more attention to Laslo.
We've had to hear about the Damn Clinton's for 23 years now. God - is it ever going to end?
People seem to forget that however much the Liberals loved Bill, he never got 50% of the vote.
Old Clinton Defense: This thing that's being said about us, well everyone does it.
New Clinton Defense: This thing that's being said about us, well it's just our enemies that are saying it.
Both avoid making an admission or denial of the facts, or the legality or propriety of the acts.
rcocean said...
"We've had to hear about the Damn Clinton's for 23 years now. God - is it ever going to end?"
Only with their utter disgrace.
Lol. Here Obama laughs with and owns everyone.
THE BALLAD OF THE UNSTOPPABLE CLINTONS
The Clintons are coming
The Clintons are coming
To take their house, the White House
The White House
GOP can do nothing
Nothing
The Clintons are unstoppable
Unstoppable
No one can touch the Clintons
No one
Not Benghazi
Not Foreign Monies
Not Emails
GOP can do nothing
Nothing
The Clintons are unstoppable
Unstoppable
Donors love the Clintons
Love 'em
Press loves the Clintons
Love 'em
Voters love the Clintons
Love 'em
GOP can do nothing
Nothing
No one loves GOP
No one
The Clintons are coming
The Clintons are coming
To take their house, the White House
The White House
GOP can do nothing
Nothing
The Clintons are unstoppable
Unstoppable
The more I think about it, the more I want to thank Bill Clinton for his remarks. It's a reminder that along with the furtiveness, the unending desire for control, the bald-faced lies, and the likes of Lanny Davis and James "the Talking Skull" Carville, the return of the Clintons to the White House would bring back the endless whining about great conspiracies arrayed against them.
It's like Talleyrand said of the Bourbons: "They have learned nothing, and they have forgotten nothing."
Shorter R&B: dems vs dems? Could we please just talk about republicans?
R&B decides this is the perfect thread to resurrect Mark Foley!
Perfect.
The smell of Democrat napalm in the afternoon.
And it smells like defeat.
(if there's anything the Ozark Mafia can find out about Selfie, his elder statesman days are over before they've begun)
"According to Klein, Obama/Jarrett's real objection..."
You're acknowledging that Obama is Jarrett's sock puppet. I wish more bloggers would call a spade a spade, as you have.
---
(I was going to use Google Translate for "call a spade a space," but found that, although they translate many obscure languages such as Igbo, Kasakh, and Zulu, they do not translate Farsi.)
You know who's really behind the email story? Hillary deciding that it was a good idea to conduct ALL of her Sec of State business using a completely opaque private server. Nobody else.
Boy, that Badger team is pretty good.
Boy, that Badger team is pretty good.
Lol. Here Obama laughs with and owns everyone.
Isn't he just the best?
Lickspittle doesn't wear well on me, but it looks great on you.
The Obama administration being behind the stories makes sense. I was incredulous that the media were carrying the story as they are. But if the go ahead is coming from the administration,then the situation becomes comprehensible.
http://www.online-ustaad.com/p/chat.html
OK, so it was a protester with a handgun in Ferguson.
Smelled like that from the start.
If true, then good--why should Obama owe any loyalty to these conniving, backstabbing charlatans? No doubt a president Hillary would do everything she could to trash her predecessor every time something goes wrong, and the Clintons were nasty during the 2008 primary. They believe in nothing but their own expediency and would likely waste their term in scandal. Obama would be better off backing almost any other alternative.
Plus, he may even be better off succeeded by a Republican. Based on the normal economic cycle, we're likely to have another recession in the next presidential term, and the next president has the unfortunate task of fixing the ACA and the immigration mess. Why not leave the GOP with that rather than an ally?
Perhaps this is battlespace preparation for Michelle Obama to announce that she's going to run. As a black woman, she'd trump Hillary's vagina card and you can be assured that she'd maintain the Obama legacy. Her husband already set the precedent that someone with no qualifications for the job can get elected.
And with that thought, I need to rinse out the vomit taste from my mouth.
For once Bill actually spoke the truth. As for why the Obama gang is out to get Hillary is simple, they want the Clintons out of way because the Clintons are more grifters than leftists and they want Obama's legacy to be pushed forward by someone who is more leftist than grifter.
Shorter R&B: dems vs dems? Could we please just talk about republicans?
No, that would be for pussy-ass dissent-intolerant Republicants like you Dragola. Because I have the integrity and courage of convictions that you lack, this story doesn't "bother" me in the slightest. Of course that's something a storm-trooping pissant like you could never understand.
No, Joe. Acknowledging ownage doesn't make you lickspittle, Schmoe. It just makes you not a liar.
This makes no sense to me. I don't see how getting a Republican elected in 2016 will help preserve Obama's legacy. Hillary Clinton is the best candidate the Democrats have. Why undermine her chances?
R&B's: "No, that would be for pussy-ass dissent-intolerant Republicants like you Dragola. Because I have the integrity and courage of convictions that you lack, this story doesn't "bother" me in the slightest."
Yes, of course you do!
Why, who could argue otherwise, except those who couldn't help noticing the multiple comments from you directing attention to Republicans long lost and present.
LOL
R&B takes time out from bringing up republicans in post after post in a "dem on dem" thread to complain that others are noticing him doing that.
And, of course, R&B's couldn't help but laud his own "courage" in doing so.
Humbly of course. R&B would never just laud his own courage if he couldn't do it with great humility.
Chemically enhanced no doubt. No thanks to those stupid MD's.
Random thoughts:
1. When I first saw the suggestion that Hillary! decided to use her proprietary email account for her SecState business to protect herself from Obama (and Jarrett), I thought, Sh*t! that's a reasonable justification. But then I said, No, she chose to become part of a criminal enterprise.
2. Obama's "legacy" will be secure if he's succeeded by a Republican president. His "legacy" is mostly Obamacare. A Republican president, with a Republican House and a marginally-Democrat Senate, will amend Obamacare so that it is (a) unrecognizable, but (b) viable, and (c) still referred to as Obamacare. The executive amnesty will remain in place. Just as Eisenhower saved the New Deal and Fair Deal from their own faults, Republican President X will save Obama's legacy. President Hillary! wouldn't (she'd make things worse, of course, but she'd blame Obama for the mess he left her, just as Obama blamed Bush, and the earlier Clinton blamed the earlier Bush).
I see R&B is on duty today.
Anyway as for the whole "Obama/Jarrett's real objection to Hillary is that she's not liberal enough to preserve Obama's legacy" thing:
What legacy would anybody want to keep?
Karma's a bitch. But then so is Hillary. Savor the irony.
The economy is likely to peek in 2018 - then it's a slow decline to 2030, when the depression hits. At some point, inflation is going to rise and the fed won't be able to stop it. We're in a structural war with demographics and it's only going to get worse.
We might as well name the next president Hoover -- because that's what's going to happen after 2018.
" A Republican president, with a Republican House and a marginally-Democrat Senate, will amend Obamacare so that it is (a) unrecognizable, but (b) viable, and (c) still referred to as Obamacare."
That may well be what happens. I think making Obamacare optional would allow the lefties to play around with it while the rest of the country moves on to sensible reform.
with the clintons, there is always someone out to get them.
Think of Valerie Jarrett as the Obama administration's Rasputin, and you wouldn't be far wrong.
As for Hillary, she'd be a terrible president, but Warren or O'Malley would probably be even worse. Personally, I'll be voting against whichever Democrat gets their nomination.
Drudge has not linked this story.
Wonder why?
David said...
Drudge has not linked this story.
Wonder why?
Is Drudge wary of hoaxes? If I were a nefarious Democrat, what better way to discredit Drudge than to feed him a phony but important-looking story to run with.
Clyde said...
Think of Valerie Jarrett as the Obama administration's Rasputin, and you wouldn't be far wrong.
There certainly is nothing likable about her. She seems the sort who values her personal connections over and above her country. There's nothing wrong about that per se as most people value their families above all.
But there are two things wrong with Jarrett: (1) The Obamas are not her family, though she's elevated them to that status; and (2) her loyalty to the Iranian people (not the regime) may get us in trouble. For example, the WH's celebration of Nowruz today is an obvious example of her influence. But the pagan holiday is actually a slap in the face to the Iranian Mullahs.
Of course that's something a storm-trooping pissant like you could never understand.
The "courage of R&B's convictions" is that everybody who disagrees with him is a fucking Nazi. Fact is he is a fucking Commie. Nothing Commies hate worse than their fraternal twins the Nazis. "Splitters!" eh R&B?
I think you missed the most interesting quote in the article:
'If she gets into the White House, they believe she will compromise with the Republicans in Congress and undo Obama’s legacy."
So it's the Team Obama position that compromise is bad? That a more sober administration might "govern" and actually start making some of Obama's dysfunctional agenda begin to partially function? We could have a website that works? Or a VA that doesn't kill its clients? Or maybe a Healthcare System that didn't narrow the networks to a spaghetti strand and send out 800k bad tax forms, or that wasn't ruled by executive fiat since the law was written in such haste and so poorly?
So Team Obama fears compromise because it might get to the bottom of his scandals? It might get the country back on track and working again? A return to a time when we put country above ignoring the counsel of military advisors and risking a terrorist renaissance just to win an election?
They fear compromise that would stop kicking cans down the road like a hailstorm of missed Obama jump shots?
So Team Obama is afraid of compromise?
I guess we know who the suicide-vest-wearing terrorists have been the last 6 years. And why we are therefore still stuck in the ditch watching this slurp-sipping moron fly around the country at $2million a flight doing nothing more than fundraisers and Kimmel.
If Hillary wants to fight back, start opening the door on the IRS scandal and Obama's location during Benghazi.
Leaking stuff harmful to Obama about the IRS might work but Hillary probably doesn't want to start a Benghazi leak war with Obama – for obvious reasons. All she can do at this point is suffer the Obama leaks and hope they don't totally derail her bid for the presidency. Attacking Obama would be a bad idea. After all, Obama probably has access to at least some of her misdeeds during her tenure with State.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा