Obama, Hillary, and Bill

en Dowd writes at the New York Times,

Obama lost touch with his revolutionary side and settled comfortably into being an Ivy League East Coast cerebral elitist who hung out with celebrities, lectured Congress and scorned the art of political persuasion.

He was cozy with Silicon Valley and dismissive of working-class voters anxious about globalization, shrugging that “We’re part of an interconnected global economy now, and there’s no going back from that.” He was dismissive of Americans anxious about terrorism after the Paris attacks, noting that you’d be more likely to die from a bathtub fall.

He was dismissive of Bernie Sanders and his voters, treating Sanders as a fairy tale, just as Bill Clinton treated him in 2008 when he was a senator with little record but with an army of passionate supporters who wanted to upend moldy politics.

...As she cuddled up to Wall Street, Hillary forgot about the forgotten man — and woman. Bill complained in meetings that campaign manager Robby Mook was ignoring white working-class voters, according to Politico, but his concern was waved off as the plea of “a talented but aging politician who simply refused to accept the new Democratic map.”

They should have listened. Bill ousted the first President Bush by focusing on “you” rather than “I,” what the voters wanted. Hillary’s campaign message boiled down to “It’s my turn, dammit.”

President Obama, trying to hoist Hillary over the finish line, offered a solipsistic message, saying it would be “a personal insult” if African-Americans did not vote for Hillary, and an accusatory message, suggesting that sexism was stopping men from voting for Hillary.

Read more here.

A Hillary insider comes clean

A blogger named Larry Johns writes,

I am shocked at the audacity of Hillary Clinton to decry Donald Trump as a birther because her campaign not only pushed that item in a bid to discredit Barack Obama, but mounted a sustained campaign attack Obama on a broad array of issues. How do I know? I was part of that effort and was in regular email and phone coordination with Sidney Blumenthal. Sidney was the conduit who fed damaging material to me that I subsequently posted on my blog.

In some cases Sid Blumenthal actually provided a draft piece that I would slightly modify and publish under my name. Most of the time, however, Sid provided background information and researched material that I would use to craft pieces. How many? I am providing the links to 63 blog articles that I posted (and in one case was posted by Susan Hudgens, who assisted with the blog) between January 2008 and June 30, 2008.

Here is simple summary of material (in writing or through a verbal briefing) that I received from Sid?

Information surrounding the corrupt business relationship between Barack Obama and Tony Rezko.

Information about Barack Obama’s ties to Palestinian radicals.

Information concerning Barack Obama’s longstanding ties to the American terrorist, Bill Ayers.

Information concerning Barack Obama’s close ties to radical clerics–i.e., Jeremiah Wright and Father Michael Pfleger.

Information concerning allegations that Barack Obama was not a Information concerning allegations that Barack Obama was not a natural born citizen.

Information concerning Barack Obama being adopted by Indonesian Muslim Lolo Soetoro.

Read more here.

War on women

Richard Pollock reports at Daily Caller,

Former President Bill Clinton collected $5.6 million in fees from GEMS Education, a Dubai-based company that teaches Sharia Law through its network of more than 100 schools in the Middle East, Asia and Africa, according to a Daily Caller News Foundation investigation.

The company’s finances strictly adhere to “Sharia Finance,” which includes giving “zakat,” a religious tax of which one-eighth of the proceeds is dedicated to funding Islamic jihad.

The company also contributed millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation.

...Sharia law is the Islamic religious legal system that many in the West see as intolerant of human rights and other religions, as well as violating the rights of women and gays. Sharia law is considered by Muslims to be superior to all secular authorities. Islamic jihadis regularly call for the imposition of Sharia law and want to impose it on the West.

Saudi Arabia is where Wahabism, the strictest form of Sharia, is observed. The Middle Eastern kingdom bars women from driving cars, requires women to wear the strictest form of the hijab, which covers everything but the eyes and hands. Gay men and women are persecuted in Saudi Arabia.

Read more here.

Hillary's story about Bill and Monica: "Bill was being attacked, in her view, for political motives, for his ministry of a troubled person.”

Ann Althouse writes a lot today about sacrifice, and the purposes people who are using that word might have in mind.

And we may very well be distracted, because there is social pressure to stop all other thinking and honor the war dead and empathize with their families. That's built into the power of the propaganda. We're getting some stern discipline this week — as Trump is pilloried for failing to perform the usual honor ritual. Never, ever, do anything but stop, honor, and empathize. Submit to the pressure or become a social outcast like Trump.

Read more here.

Ann links to a 2014 piece by Maureen Dowd:

...David Gregory asked (Rand) Paul about the comment of his wife, Kelley, in a Jason Horowitz profile of the senator in Vogue, that Bill Clinton should not be First Spouse, given his “predatory” behavior with Monica Lewinsky.

Paul backed up his wife, telling Gregory that there “is no excuse” for preying on a young intern and that it should affect history’s view of the ex-president. While he said it was “not Hillary’s fault,” he added that with the Clintons, “sometimes it’s hard to separate one from the other.”

Senator Claire McCaskill told Andrea Mitchell that she found Paul’s comments “infuriating,” and that he was just “grasping,” trying to show he could be tough in a bid to win the presidential nomination.

But back when McCaskill, now on Team Clinton, was trying to crush Team Clinton and get Barack Obama elected, she said this about Bill: “He’s been a great leader, but I don’t want my daughter near him.”

Paul brought that up with me, suggesting that if McCaskill were being honest and not partisan, she would still be worried about having her daughter around Bill and that maybe there’s a double standard for the famous.

“In my small town, we would disassociate, we would in some ways socially shun somebody that had an inappropriate affair with someone’s daughter or with a babysitter or something like that,” he said, adding: “There’s no reason why we should give up on having some sort of belief in social standards” and on what’s “appropriate, inappropriate, right, wrong.”

...I agree that Paul’s aim was true. He distracted from the Republicans’ abysmal war on women by pointing at an abysmal moment in feminist history, when feminists betrayed their principles to defend a president who had behaved in a regressive way with women because he had progressive policies on women.

Instead of owning up, Bill Clinton forced his humiliated wife, a feminist icon, and women in his cabinet — Madeleine Albright and Donna Shalala — into the dreadful position of defending him when he was lying about his conduct.

It is not so simple to cast Hillary as a victim; she was also part of the damage-control team to vouch for her husband and undermine his mistress. White House aides and other Democrats spread the word that Monica was a troubled young woman with stalker tendencies. Sidney Blumenthal, a senior White House adviser, later testified that Hillary told him that “she was distressed that the president was being attacked, in her view, for political motives, for his ministry of a troubled person.”

Monica had to be sacrificed for the greater good of the Clintons and feminist ambitions. Hillary was furious at Bill — stories were leaked that he was sleeping on the couch — but she also had to protect her political investment. If he collapsed, she was done. And she was going up — to the Senate and eventually the Oval Office.

Read more here.

No heavy lifting from Bill

I missed Bill Clinton's speech last night, because I was playing a glorious game of basketball with my sons. So I turned to Ace of Spades, a man whose analytical abilities I respect greatly, to get some idea of what happened in Philadelphia last night.

Last night wasn't particularly useful for Hillary. Bill Clinton, I would argue, basically swung the election for Obama in 2012. After all the good work Romney did in his convention, Bill Clinton came out and rebutted every claim made.

For a week I was pulling my hair out insisting the GOP must now rebut Clinton's rebuttal. They didn't. (Naturally.)

But Bill Clinton went on stage last night to do the impossible -- to humanize the inhuman. Instead of talking about policy and economics, about which he has some credibility, he instead chose to speak of love, commitment, and marriage, about which he has none.

I think their idea is that Biden and Obama will carry the policy-reinforcing load, and that Bill Clinton was therefore more useful in humanizing the woman he has been all but separated from for 15 years.

But Bill Clinton presided over a roaring economy. Biden and Obama have presided over a dismal one. What authority do they have to speak about good economic policy?

In addition, both men are exceeding arrogant. Obama has one mode, and that mode is contemptuous condescension. He is a deeply mediocre man who has confused himself for a world-beating intellect, and cannot lower himself to speak to people whose IQ and insight actually exceed his own.

The idea that Biden the idiot and Obama the vicious narcissist are capable of giving the folksy policy rebuttal that Clinton could have is just one more bad idea Hillary has had.

Maybe it was ego that caused her to refrain from asking her husband to do the heavy lifting for her. A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle, you may have heard.

Either way, we are now two days through this, and both days have been marked by discord and bitter feuding within the Democrat Party, with no appreciable help done for Hillary's side.

I can't see Obama's chin-arrogantly-lifted-eyes-gazing-heroically-into-the-middle-distance stage-whispering claims of how great we've all got it doing much to change that trajectory. We've heard it all from this failure before.

The only guy I see which any chance to do some damage is Tim Kaine, simply because he's new and doesn't (yet) have the stink of failure all over him.

The woman card

Matthew Burke reports at Politistick that Donald Trump has produced a new ad on Instagram depicting Bill Clinton

as a rapist and serial woman abuser by playing audio from two victims of Bill’s unwanted advances, Juanita Broaddrick and Kathleen Willey.

“He starts to bite on my top lip and I try to pull away from him,” a sobbing Broaddrick says in explaining Clinton’s sexual assault against her, as an ominous cigar-chomping black-and-white picture of Bill is superimposed over the White House. It is not known whether the cigar Bill is smoking is the same brand used on Monica Lewinsky.

The ultra-quick ad then pans to a meme of Bill and Hillary with the caption “Here we go again?” while the sound changes to Hillary’s infamous witch-like laugh.

The message here is obvious: Stop trying to play the “woman card” Hillary. You have your own problems.

Trump used the “rape” word for the first time last week in an interview with Sean Hannity, in describing Bill Clinton, while labeling Hillary as an enabler.

In the 1990’s during her husband’s presidency, Hillary was the architect of the shameful “Nuts and Sluts” campaign which ruined the reputations of the women coming forward with sexual abuse and/or rape accusations against Bill Clinton, occurrences that the Clinton war room referred to as “bimbo eruptions.”

The Clintons are caught in the ultimate hypocrisy. After society has been told for decades that female victims of alleged sexual abuse must be believed over the accused man — always — they are stuck into explaining why Bill’s victims must be discarded like trash, which they can’t and will not explain and nor will the biased liberal media force them to.

Go here to watch the video.

Will the shoe drop?

Ralph Nader gives his views on the primaries thus far. David Catanese reports at U.S.News,

The liberal activist says Trump has brought some important issues to the fore.

"He's questioned the trade agreements. He's done some challenging of Wall Street – I don't know how authentic that is. He said he's against the carried interest racket, for hedge funds. He's funded himself and therefore attacked special interest money, which is very important," Nader says. "But he's lowered the level of political debate to unheard-of depths of salacious, slanderous and vacuousness, garnished with massive self-boosterism and repetition."

"And that's not good, because that brought a lot of money into the media and that's the kind of debates they're going to want to goad."

When asked what positive contributions Clinton has made to the 2016 campaign, Nader called her a "corporatist, militarist Democrat" who would have been defeated by Sanders if every state held an open primary.

"She's going to win by dictatorship. Twenty-five percent of superdelegates are cronies, mostly. They weren't elected. They were there in order to stop somebody like Bernie Sanders, who would win by the vote," he says.

Nader thinks that Trump ultimately will defeat himself this fall – "Trump will turn the Republican Party into the Trump Dump," he quips – but says it's not impossible that the New York real estate mogul wins because of Clinton's vulnerability to scandal.

"You never know when the shoe's going to drop on either of them," Nader says of Hillary Clinton and her husband, former President Bill Clinton.

Read more here.

Black Lives Matter and much more

Jonah Goldberg notices that Bill Clinton got upset at some Black Lives Matter protesters the other day. Jonah's thoughts on Black Lives Matter:

The Black Lives Matter movement is not without its legitimate complaints and arguments -- I’m in favor of some criminal-justice reforms. But they want to work from the assumption that there are no black bad actors in this story. It’s white supremacy all the way down. The problem with this is that even if white supremacy -- whatever people mean by that -- is the massive problem some lefties imagine, it still doesn’t excuse bad individual moral choices. Excuses don’t become explanations simply because you shout them. It’s a very weird corollary to social-justice logic. If you see everyone simply as representatives of groups -- white oppressors and black victims -- you withdraw the moral agency from individual actors on both sides of the equation (which, technically speaking, is racist). White people become agents of oppression and morally culpable even if they’ve done nothing wrong. Black criminals who prey on innocent black people become victims, about whom no one can say an unkind word.

Jonah further notes about Bill and Hillary,

One fun consequence of all this is that Bill very well could turn out to be a liability for Hillary, which would be kind of hilarious given that Hillary would be just another left-wing activist lawyer were it not for her husband. She rode her Arkansas mule all of the way to the White House gates only to see the sign reading, “No Mules Allowed.”

Besides these comments, Jonah has many insightful things to say about such diverse topics as George W. Bush, Donald Trump, progressivism, Richard Nixon, classical liberalism, statism, and much more here.

"But mother, she's worked for it!"

Sally Miller (former Miss Arkansas) who had a three month affair with Bill Clinton, tells about Bill Clinton snorting cocaine. She also has some interesting things to say about the importance of Bill's mother in his life.



Sally Miller tells us about Hillary's abortions and about her lesbian experimentation.

Bill Clinton tells vet to shut up and listen

Well this is one Clinton rally you will not see on any of the networks. A marine vet who did 8 years in Iraq tries to talk Benghazi with Bill Clinton. The Democrats in attendance shout him down and Bill Clinton tells him to shut up. The vet is removed from the gymnasium, but then a woman takes the mike and continues what the vet started.

The Clintons

Amanda Prestigiacomo reports at The Daily Wire,

Bill and Hillary Clinton have been hounded by rumors that their marriage is nothing but an arrangement set up by two power-hungry budding politicians with big dreams. Rumors have even floated around the idea that the former First Lady is, in fact, a lesbian.

Possibly adding some credence to these rumors, two former mistresses of Bill Clinton, Sally Miller and Gennifer Flowers, have claimed that Mr. Clinton told the ladies that Hillary is a lesbian who apparently ate “more p*ssy” than he did.

On Tuesday, former Miss Arkansas Sally Miller claimed that Bill told her about Hillary’s preferences during their 1983 affair while Mr. Clinton was Governor of Arkansas.

“Hillary is a lesbian,” Miller bluntly told the Daily Mail.

“Let's just get down to the facts,” Miller added. “Firstly, Bill didn't mind telling me that Hillary doesn't like sex.”

...So Apparently Bill Went Around Telling His Mistresses Hillary Was a Lesbian

Continuing, Miller said, “I take him at his word and he told me she liked females more than men. She was the child of a more progressive community. She was exposed to all the liberals, she was a flower child.”

“Hillary does drugs too, that's the only time that she would entertain the idea - again, this is what Bill told me,” she added.

“While we were intimately involved he would say things like ‘gosh you need to come over and teach Hillary a few things.’”

Bill then told her Hillary “probably wouldn't take to that idea much.”

“I wasn't a spy, I wasn't looking for things I could remember 20 years later,” insisted Miller.

The former beauty queen also said that Bill “would sometimes unwind by smoking a marijuana cigarette.” The Daily Mail noted that on occasion, Miller would see Bill “produce a pouch of white powder” and “snort lines off her coffee table.”

“Do I make it a point to have affairs with married men, no. But most everyone in Arkansas assumed that their marriage was a business arrangement,” said Miller.

...Further, Gennifer Flowers, who reportedly had a 12-year affair with slick Willie which was exposed in 1992, claimed that Bill told her that Hillary was a lesbian, too.

“He said Hillary had eaten more p***y than he had,” she added.

In a 2013 interview with the Daily Mail, Flowers said that the Clinton’s marriage was far from “traditional,” adding that she was not surprised by the rumors between Hillary and her then-transition office chief, Huma Abedin.

“I know that Bill acknowledged to me that he was aware that she had a propensity for women and he didn’t care,” Flowers told radio host Aaron Klein in October of last year, only confirming what she had previously stated about Hillary. “I’m not saying that she is a lesbian, but he acknowledged that she, as we say down in Arkansas, took a liking to women. So why something hasn’t come out on that? That’s amazing.”

No, Bill, that's not what she means!

h/t Jon Agard

An affair? Or just a president being serviced?

Linda Tripp is intervied by Aaron Klein, and Breitbart News covers the story.

She described Lewinsky as a “young girl, smart, clever … but in this one area she was blinded and she fancied herself in love.”

Tripp continued:

He fancied himself entitled. It was nothing more than a servicing agreement. She romanticized that there was an affair. And when it didn’t pan out the way she had hoped it would – he had promised her he would bring her back to the White House as soon as the 1996 election campaign had finished. When he didn’t, she essentially lost her mind and started acting in erratic and frightening ways. Threatening the president.

There came a point in July of 1997 when she not only threatened to expose the affair, as she referred to it. But also she at that time informed him that I knew all about it. So at that time it became dangerous for Monica and for me. This was something that absolutely could never see the light of day. And she never realized the implications of threatening a president or her behavior. And I did.

...Tripp described the tense West Wing atmosphere between what she characterized as two almost diametrically opposed Clinton camps.

The dynamic between the two groups – the Bill Clinton people and the Hillary Clinton people. It was as though they were almost opposing forces. But I can tell you that the one with the power and the one that instilled the fear in the other was the Hillary camp.

And the [Bill] Clinton people would cower if she were coming into the area, just as an example, of the Oval without notice. There would be scurrying around to make sure there was no one in the wrong place at the wrong time, shall we say. It was a fascination to see the amount of energy that was expended covering up his behavior. It was horrifying.

...Tripp said Hillary personally targeted Bill’s female conquests and accusers, with the future presidential candidate exhibiting behavior that is “egregious and it’s so disingenuous.”

In my case, for instance, right after the Lewinsky story broke, she was heard directing her staff to get anything and everything on Linda Tripp. So the defamation of character and the absolute assurance that my credibility would be destroyed began right away. And it happens with any woman who is involved in any way, either with him in a physical relationship or an assault or anything that can endanger their political viability.

...“This is someone who had no real personal problem with any of this behavior. The problem was in it becoming public. They had to continue to become electable… She was the more aggressive one in ensuring that the political viability was not endangered in any way.”

Tripp told Klein that Hillary “does not possess integrity on any level. I just wish that your listeners could know the person that I knew. Because if they did there is not a chance she would be elected president.”

...Tripp’s ringside seat afforded her rare insight into the scandals of the 1990s and perhaps alleged wrongdoings to come, with the West Wing employee personally witnessing behavior that may have foreshadowed Clinton’s email scandal, in which she is accused of sending classified materials through her personal server.

Tripp said she noticed major differences in the manner in which classified material was handled by both the Clinton and Bush administrations in which she served.

President George H.W. Bush’s administration had “a completely different way of operating on every level, including on classified and secret material,” she said.

She continued:

All the regulations were followed, right down to a cover sheet being essential if the document had had any sort of classifications. The securing of classified documentation in safes. The burn bags that were used if any sensitive material was to be disposed of. All of this was familiar to me and followed every security protocol that I had experienced in the past.

When the Clintons came in this was one of the things that I found appalling right from day one. And it went hand and hand with the disdain for the military. The military was present in the White House in the form of presidential aides. The aide that carried the nuclear football, just as an example. And in the Bush White House they were respected, as they should be. In the Clinton White House, they were disdained. To see it treated this way and to see these people treated this way was disturbing.

Read more here.

A sociopathic gangster and his enabling wife who gleefully destroyed the women her husband abused.

Mark Steyn recognized the passing of former Arkansas Senator Dale bumpers last week.

Dale Bumpers, former Arkansas Governor and Senator, lived a long life, most of it spent in "public service". But it is strangely apt that he should have died as his protégé Bill Clinton's serial abuse of women returned to the news. Until Trump came along, Republicans had steered clear of Clinton's sexual pathologies for the entire millennium thus far, following the mordant advice of my own senator, Bob Smith. ("He's won. He always wins. Let's move on.") If one had to date precisely the moment when it became clear that Clinton had won against multiple accusations any of which would today sink anybody else, it would be the speech Dale Bumpers gave during the Senate impeachment trial in January 1999.

I was present in the Senate that day and felt queasy for a good 48 hours afterwards. Few self-respecting men, even senators, could have given that address with a straight face, but Bumpers, a courtly southern slicker, did so with accomplished ease. God evidently had more difficulty than I in keeping his lunch down, marking the historic occasion by afflicting Clinton and Bumpers' native Arkansas with a barrage of freakish tornadoes. The Almighty is, of course, not a US senator, lacking the necessary gravitas, solemnity and dignity. If He were a senator, He would have recognized Bumpers' sticky goo of Ozark swamp gibberish for the stroke of genius it was: an awesome invocation of senatorial self-importance. "Oh, colleagues!" wailed the former senator. "You have such an awesome responsibility!"

What a masterly move to sign up Bumpers for the defense's closing speech. Senators profess to revere this great republic, its constitution, their storied body ...but mostly they revere fellow senators just like them. "One of the finest performances I've ever seen on the Senate floor!" cooed Iowa hack and trial saboteur Tom Harkin, as ol' Dale outlined his admiration for the President apropos Monica Lewinsky - one of the finest performances ever seen on the Oval Office floor.

The President, Bumpers explained, had been devastated by his betrayal of the "wife whom he adored and a child he worshiped and for whom he would happily have died to ameliorate her shame". Mr Bumpers, alas, was speaking figuratively, not proposing a compromise solution.

Bill Clinton has discussed his boxers and briefs on TV; taken his penis along to a naval surgeon to be examined for the Paula Jones suit; and had his semen processed by the FBI crime lab. And yet, then as now, the truth of their marriage is more unknown and unknowable than ever. Is it really, as Bumpers suggested, that Hillary was blissfully unaware of Bill's lapses until the Monica business broke? As his teary peroration neared (unlike the President) completion, the old Arkansas hogswill peddler roared that the First Family "has already been about as decimated as a family can get... There's been nothing but mental agony, sleepless nights..."

Or maybe back home Bill and Hill were watching ol' Dale, slapping their thighs and weeping with laughter.

After the speech, Bumpers felt obliged to revise his bleak portrait of pain and agony in the Clinton household. "I'm sorry that people took that literally," he said. "Based on my observation, I think they're coping pretty well." As his friend and president would say, it depends what the meaning of the word "decimated" is.

But the hogwash worked its magic. "We all have a little Clinton in us," wrote Time's Margaret Carlson in a somewhat infelicitous formulation. And now it seems, notwithstanding his indifferent reception in New Hampshire only reported in the British papers, that it is time for us to all have a little more.



For Dale Bumpers, it was just taking care of business, even if it was the business of a sociopathic gangster and an enabling wife who gleefully destroyed the women her husband abused. But it worked - to the point that an entire generation of pajama-boy know-nothings now thinks Bill Clinton's extracurricular sex life was just one consensual blow job rather than a lifetime of groping, biting, pants-dropping, and, yes, bloody violent rape. I don't suppose Bumpers gave his showstopping exculpation another thought, even as his wife-adoring child-worshiping pal Bill spent much of the 21st century jetting off on convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein's Lolita Express to an island resort filled with underage "sex slaves" - and the court eunuchs of the US media as usual looked the other way. We all have a little Clinton in us, whether we want it or not.

Unlike most of the Republican senators in that impeachment trial, Trump is scared neither of the Clintons nor the approval ratings. If Hillary is so cossetted as to think she can run as an "advocate for women", he has determined to remind America that she is, in fact, the co-conspirator of a violent abuser. Contra Bumpers, their marriage is a cold, hard business arrangement that necessitated the trashing of Kathleen Willey, Juanita Broaddrick, Paula Jones and anyone else who got in their collective way. Dale Bumpers was close enough to Clinton to know the truth. Wherever he is now, I hope he is ashamed of the part he played in saving their racket.

Hillary's enthusiastic participation in the trashing of Bill Clinton's victims.

Mark Steyn writes,

Nobody needed criminal convictions to drop Cosby - just multiple accusations of sexual assault and some out-of-court payouts. But multiple accusations of sexual assault, out-of-court payouts and the loss of his law license are apparently not enough to bar Bill Clinton from another eight years in the White House.

...The President and Mrs Clinton's marriage is an arrangement, the protection of which necessitated Hillary's enthusiastic participation in the trashing of his victims. No doubt she'd do the same if the Epstein story were ever to receive the coverage in the US papers that it's received in Britain.

Read more here.

Wink, wink

Tyler Durbin writes at Zero Hedge,

On Thursday, WSJ is out with a fresh look at the connection between Clinton's State Department and her husband's speaking tour.

"More than two dozen companies and groups and one foreign government paid former President Bill Clinton a total of more than $8 million to give speeches around the time they also had matters before Mrs. Clinton’s State Department," The Journal says, adding that "fifteen of them also donated a total of between $5 million and $15 million to the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation, the family’s charity."

In several instances, State Department actions benefited those that paid Mr. Clinton.

Mr. Clinton, for example, collected $1 million for two appearances sponsored by the Abu Dhabi government that were arranged while Mrs. Clinton was secretary of state. His speeches there came during and after the State Department and the Department of Homeland Security were involved in discussions about a plan to open a U.S. facility in the Abu Dhabi airport to ease visa processing for travel to the U.S. The State Department supported the facility in the face of substantial opposition from unions, members of Congress and others.

Mr. Clinton was paid for more than 200 speeches while Mrs. Clinton was secretary of state, according to his wife’s disclosure forms. Documents released thus far by the State Department show the ethics office turned down five of his speech requests, including proposed talks sponsored by North Korea, China and the Republic of Congo.

The State Department got involved in the Abu Dhabi matter after the capital of the United Arab Emirates asked for a facility to clear travelers for U.S. entry before they boarded planes so they could avoid delays when arriving in the U.S.

According to two former State Department officials who worked on the matter, the U.S. wanted to help an important ally.

U.S.-based airlines, which have no direct flights between Abu Dhabi and the U.S., opposed the idea as a giveaway to the government-owned airline, Etihad Airways.

While Mrs. Clinton’s State Department and the Department of Homeland Security were working out a “letter of intent” with Abu Dhabi for the facility, Mr. Clinton sought permission to give a paid speech in Abu Dhabi.

On Dec. 6, 2011, U.S. officials signed the letter of intent. One week later, Mr. Clinton gave a 20-minute talk on climate change to the Abu Dhabi government environmental gathering. He collected $500,000, his wife’s disclosure report shows.

It might not be so pretty this time

Who will win the Oscar for best movie of 2016? At PJ Media Roger L. Simon predicts it will be Donald Trump.


Hillary Clinton is starting this drama by accusing the Donald of sexism. But Donald Trump always punches back twice as hard. Simon writes,

This is the woman who blamed her husband's affair with Monica Lewinsky on the "vast right-wing conspiracy," apparently imputing magical-mystical aphrodisiac powers to conservatives.

The Donald — you'll be surprised to hear if you've been living on Pluto — has been firing back, sweeping Mr. Hillary, now supposedly about to stump for his wife, into the fray.

"You look at whether it's Monica Lewinsky or Paula Jones or many of them," Trump said on NBC's TODAY. "That certainly will be fair game. Certainly if they play the woman's card with respect to me, that will be fair game."

In recent days, the GOP front-runner has been highlighting the former president's affair with intern Monica Lewinsky, saying that Bill Clinton has a pattern of "abuse of women."

Some, like Brent Budowsky over at The Hill, are warning Trump to keep his hands off our Bill:

When I was growing up in New York, I wanted to be a professional boxer, but was smart enough to know that if I entered the ring with Muhammad Ali — then heavyweight champion of the world — they'd have to bring out the smelling salts within seconds and the ambulance would soon arrive to cart me away on a stretcher!

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump should consider such thoughts as he ponders his plan to go mano a mano against Bill Clinton, the most popular living former president and the heavyweight champion of American politics today.

In the immortal words of the great Luigi Pirandello, "It Is So, If You Think So," Brent. Or "Right You Are, If You Think You Are."

In the real world of (soon-to-be) 2016, Bill may have met his match with The Donald. It's been many moons, roughly sixteen times twelve, since the yclept Bubba was in the White House and, yes, he has sorta been in the public eye, but not nearly on the level of Trump, and he doesn't have near the capability of commandeering the media the way Donald does. No one has. (When Ali attempted a comeback in 1980, he lost to Larry Holmes and then to the relatively-obscure Trevor Berbick. It wasn't pretty.)

Read more here.

Right in her house

The '90s are finally back. Photo: John Moore/2014 Getty Images

Margaret Hartman writes in New York Magazine,

While several of his rivals have tried and failed to turn Bill Clinton's decades-old sex scandals into a 2016 campaign issue, Trump is actually making it happen. After his complaint about Hillary calling him "ISIS's best recruiter" morphed into a debate about sexism just before Christmas, Trump changed the conversation again, tweeting on Monday "If Hillary thinks she can unleash her husband, with his terrible record of women abuse, while playing the women's card on me, she's wrong!" Tuesday on the Today show, he added, "there certainly were a lot of abuse of women, you look at whether it's Monica Lewinsky or Paula Jones, or any of them, and that certainly will be fair game."

...A Wall Street Journal opinion piece echoed her point, saying President Clinton "was a genuine sexual harasser in the classic definition of exploiting his power as a workplace superior, and the Clinton entourage worked hard to smear and discredit his many women accusers." It goes on to recount how Clinton adviser Sidney Blumenthal, who remains a friend of the couple, smeared Monica Lewinsky, and says this reflects on the "standards that would prevail in another Clinton Presidency."

So far the Clintons have remained mostly silent on the new round of accusations, but with Trump vowing to keep up his counterattacks, we'll soon see if the Clinton sex scandals are a serious campaign liability, or just a holiday distraction. "She's got a major problem, it happens to be right in her house," Trump said of Hillary's sexism allegations on Tuesday. "If she wants to do that we're going to go right after the president, the ex-president, and we'll see how it all comes out."

Ann Althouse adds,

Trump is in a good position here: 1. The bad stuff was already exposed like hell in the tabloid press back when it happened. 2. That was over 20 years ago. 3. He's been with his current wife for more than a decade. 3. His kids turned out great (including the one with Maples). They are beautiful, smart, respectful, and productive. 4. There are so many people who know him and have had a motivation to speak ill of him this year and there's been silence. 5. He's not resting his case on personal rectitude. 6. He hasn't flaunted his religion and being quiet about religion is one way -- a good way -- to seem sincere and respectful toward religion. He's not asking to be seen as a religious paragon and to be voted for on that ground. 7. He isn't saying much at all in the social conservative realm, but he needs to fend off his competitors who are doing that big time. I think subtle prods to regard them as insincere are fine and I agree with the insinuations. 8. Hillary is vulnerable and he's signaling to her that efforts to paint him as sexist will be met with criticism about what she did toward women in defense of her husband. She deserves that criticism.

If you leave the door open, no telling who might barge right through it!

Ruth Marcus writes at the Washington Post,

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 multiple offensive things 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, 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.

Read more here.

Chump change to the Clintons

Once again Dick Morris and Eileen McGann have caught Hillary Clinton in another big lie. Would you remember if someone gave you and your husband $20,000,000 directly into your joint bank account? Hillary doesn't.

When asked by an Iowa voter whether she would pledge to refuse campaign contributions from energy interests, Hillary Clinton said she didn’t think she ever took money from the oil and gas industry.

That’s a lie and she knows it.

The fact is that she’s benefited from almost $400 MILLION that came from the energy industry.

The total of her payments from oil, gas, and mining interests to her Senate and Presidential campaigns, along with the speaking fees paid to her and Bill, and donations to the Clinton Foundation have netted the Clintons over $325 MILLION. If you add on speaking fees and donations by oil-producing Middle Eastern countries, the total is between $368 – $398 MILLION. (Those countries include Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Brunei, Oman, and Kuwait) That’s almost $400 million.

She says that if she did get money from the energy industry, she doesn’t remember.

That’s a lot to forget. Especially since at least $20 million of it went directly into Bill and Hillary’s joint bank accounts and was reported as joint income. But who’s counting?

Hillary received almost $2 million in direct campaign contributions from individuals who work for oil and gas companies. And, of course, as she knows, corporations are not permitted to make campaign contributions. That’s why they get their employees to do it.

She says she won’t take money from oil and gas companies, but she knows she can’t — that’s illegal. But she sanctimoniously promises not to do it. She says she’ll take money from individuals who work for energy companies.

EARTH TO HILLARY: That’s how corporations make campaign contributions.

She says she’s not a favorite of the energy companies. That’s not true, wither.

In her current presidential campaign, she’s already received about $365,000 from the oil and gas folks. That makes her the third top recipient of all 22 presidential candidates. Only Ted Cruz and Jeb Bush — both with ties to Texas oil companies, raked in more than she did.

And energy industry lobbyists have jumped on the Hillary Bandwagon. Her own campaign released the names of 159 registered lobbyists who are bundlers for Hillary. Forty of them have worked against climate control, supported offshore drilling or promoted the Keystone Pipeline and other energy issues. Bundlers raise over $100,000 each for her campaign.

She says that if she did get money from the energy industry, she doesn’t remember.

Either she’s dumber than we think, or she thinks we’re really dumb.

The Keystone pipeline was a windfall for Bill and Hillary. The Clintons cleaned up on Pipeline investors. Hillary was personally paid $1.5 million by two Canadian banks that are investors in the Keystone Pipeline — right after she left the State Department, where she subtly endorsed the Pipeline that she now opposes.

And Bill Clinton was paid over $10 million by TD Bank, a major Pipeline investor. He also received another $1 million in speaking fees from other energy sources.

It didn’t stop there. The Clinton Foundation benefitted from the kindness of energy companies. Duke Energy, Cheniere Energy, Entergy. ExxonMobil, and NRG Energy all gave from $1 to $5 million.

Chevron and Energy Development gave between $500,000 – $1 million and Hess, Noble Energy, and Inter-Energy gave between $250,000 to $500,000.

Chevron and ExxonMobil also chipped in $5 million each for one of Hillary’s pet projects: the U.S. Pavilion at the China Expo. After that, both companies were featured at the Clinton Global Initiative.

Hillary must have been out of the room — or she certainly would have remembered.

And, finally, mega-donor Canadian mining billionaire Frank Giustra — who has investments in the Keystone Pipeline, has pledged over $300 million. Giustra also owns the Colombian oil company Pacific Rubiales and other international energy companies.

So, Hillary’s latest $400 million lie is easy to see through. It’s staring her right in the face.
- See more at: http://thehillarydaily.com/hillarys-latest-big-lie-she-never-took-money-from-oil-gas-interests/#sthash.wYpJolQD.dpuf