7 Things To Know About The Clintons

7 Things To Know About the Clintons ... (unprecedented record of ethical failings & corruption)

Human Events ^ | 10/18/2007 | R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr



This week, it was reported in the authoritative Capitol Hill newspaper, The Hill, that Don Van Natta Jr. and Jeff Gerth included some unsavory news about Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton in "Her Way," their recent book about her. Hillary, during the 1992 presidential campaign, "listened to a secretly recorded audiotape of a phone conversation of Clinton critics." Washington observers appeared shocked. Mein Gott, where have they been all these years? The Clintons have engaged in brute behavior for decades, much of it a matter of record. The Hill's report moves me to list seven issues every American should know about the Clintons before 2008. Journalists should be particularly interested, as well as Democrats intent on avoiding a repeat of the Clinton 1990s.

1. Every Clinton scandal of the 1990s had a precedent in the Clinton governorship of the 1980s in Arkansas. Just as the Clintons abused the presidential pardon power when they left the White House and took property that was not their own, so did they abuse the pardon power and pilfer from the governor's mansion upon leaving it in 1981. Just as they have been caught taking money from the shadowy Norman Hsu this year and from other dubious Asian figures in the 1990s, so too were their 1980s campaigns marked by financial irregularities. The first Asian donors entered their political lives in 1986, with the Chinese-Indonesian Riady family. In 2001, the Riadys paid more than $8 million in Federal Election Commission fines for their munificence in the 1990s. Hsu's donations are of a piece with what might be called the Clintons' "Chop Suey Connection." The Clintons dismiss all this as old news, but that is only because they are what law enforcement officials call repeat offenders.

Even Hillary's health care fiasco of 1993-94 had a precedent in her statewide education reform in Arkansas that left Arkansas still at the bottom of the heap in national education ratings.

2. For years, the Clintons have bullied the press, political opponents, prosecutors and those women who caught Bill's eye. Their successful efforts to suppress the recent GQ story by Josh Green show that their bullying continues. Since the 1980s, the Clintons have employed private investigators, for instance, Terry Lenzner, Jack Palladino and Anthony Pellicano, the latter of whom is a convicted felon. Gennifer Flowers, Monica Lewinsky and Kathleen Willey are but the most famous of the many women who have been harassed by the Clintons' private detectives. In my recent book, "The Clinton Crack-Up," I report that at least one independent counsel in the 1990s took to carrying a gun after being harassed on Washington streets. The harassment was very similar to harassment my reporters experienced in Little Rock, Ark., in the mid-1990s.

3. Rumors of Sen. John McCain's temper have haunted his campaign. Hillary's temper is even more widely documented, by disaffected Secret Service agents, military aides, Arkansas state troopers and others. Hillary repeatedly has been in rows with agents whom she importuned to carry her bags despite Secret Service regulations against the practice. While first lady, Hillary threw a book at the back of an agent's head, as reported to me by White House military personnel. She repeatedly has thrown temper tantrums in front of staff, used foul language and hit her husband, as reported by security and other staff members.

4. Hillary is given to what the historian Richard Hofstadter termed "The Paranoid Style in American Politics." In 1998, she famously claimed that a "vast right-wing conspiracy" had mobilized against her and her husband. She repeatedly has characterized simple two-party partisanship as the consequence of secretive conspiratorial maneuverings. No modern politician so high in American politics has so frequently manifested the paranoid style, a style Hofstadter associated generally with political extremists, generally extremists on the far right.

5. The Clintons have, to use the words of President Harry Truman -- who, while president, scrupulously insulated the White House from fundraising and, in retirement, refused speaker's fees -- "commercialized the presidency." They used the White House, most notably the Lincoln Bedroom, to reward donors. Bill Clinton himself has earned more than $43 million in speaker's fees since leaving the White House, including millions from the Red Chinese and the United Arab Emirates. Such venality by a retired president is unprecedented, and his encroachments on campaign finance regulations have been numerous.

6. Very little of this has escaped the notice of journalists and of Democratic leaders. Yet after every scandal, they forget their public denunciations of the Clintons. Here are some flavorous reminders: After the Clintons and their siblings were caught in the 42nd president's last-minute pardon scandal, Jimmy Carter called them "disgraceful." Robert Reich opined that "Clinton is utterly disgraced." Al Hunt called Clinton the "albatross" of his party who should "drop dead." Al Gore's campaign manager, Donna Brazile, wrote in The New York Times, "It's time to let Bill Clinton go -- go on and live the rest of his life and allow a new generation of Democratic leaders to renew their fight on behalf of working families in America." New York Times columnist Bob Herbert affirmed that "Bill Clinton has been a disaster for the Democratic Party. Send him packing. â?¦ It's time for the Democratic Party to wise up. Ostracism would be a good first step. Bill Clinton should be cut completely loose. â?¦ Some of Mr. Clinton's closest associates and supporters are acknowledging what his enemies have argued for years -- the man is so thoroughly corrupt it is frightening."

Editorially in February 2001, The New York Times asserted that "the former president â?¦ seemed to make a redoubled effort in the last moments of his presidency to plunge further and further beneath the already low expectations of his most cynical critics and most of his world-weary friends." And the newspaper lamented that it might "never understand the process by which a departing president and his wife come to put sofas and flatware ahead of the acute sense of propriety that ought to go with high office." The New York Observer assessed Hillary's election to the Senate "a terrible mistake," adding that "Hillary Rodham Clinton is unfit for elective office."

Those are some of the unlovely things said about the Clintons by their friends. Now are the Democrats really going ahead with a Hillary nomination?

7. The media have been lax in reporting the Clintons' unprecedented record of ethical failings and outright corruption. Most glaringly even the conservative columnists remain inert. The conservatives have adopted the position that all of the above is passe and to dwell on it is unseemly and awkward.

Well, call me unfashionable, but I find the Clinton record alarming.

The Clintons are dirt, and nothing more. I would suggest to anyone who is even thinking about voting for this lady to do a lot of research into her background!

What a suprize! Torog and his extremist posts. Yay! It's great being able to watch CNN and know that you are 100% wrong on pretty much anything that crawls out of your head.

Bush sits in the oval office and marches our army around to do his work. Thank god he is the most unpopular president of all time (which has been stated numerously on pretty much any news station besides FOX).

Here's some facts about George Bush....

-He used to be a cocaine addict.
-He was stopped multiple times for drunk driving.
-He dodged the draft, went awol to avoid combat and drug testing, and then showed up a year later without reprecussion.
-He used the help of Osama Bin Laden to become elected, because he didn't have enough to even win the popular vote (he has never won the popular vote). He got in because he closed Democratic city voting booths before they could vote and take his state points. His political teams are smart, he is a moron.
-Then Osama Bin Laden crosses Bush, so Bush decides he is going to spend the countries surplus on a family grudge that the Bin Ladens got the best of. He then uses excuses to waste all of this money, and gets absolutely no results in over five years.


Now to close this in true Torog fashion. Anyone that believes in right wing crap is just a terrorist, or a terrorist harbor, or an idiot. There, thats how Torog rolls.

The last thing I want to see his Hillary Clinton in office, but I'm sorry, ANYONE IS BETTER THAN BUSH. Even a damn chimp, seriously.

^ and look at YOUR extremist post! Your no better than Torog.

IF you want to debate the topic.....great. If you choose to slam on members, I'll deal with that myself.

Have a good one!:jointsmile:

If you notice, the tone and word usage of my post is no different than any of his. By using what he had previously said, I'm not breaking any rules. I literally copied and pasted what he said and replaced it with the word "right" instead of "left."

i think it's time to wake up from the coma and remember that baby bush ain't runnin' for nothin' this time around. this sort of thinking is precisely why we might very well end up having hillary shoved down our throats in '08. with bush's bad press and the rep candidates being painted as nothing more than bush clones, no one seems to care that behind those c-cups hillary is nothing more than another corrupt lib politician who just can't wait to bankrupt an already tottering nation. though there may be a few deluded souls who might actually vote for clinton, the majority will only be voting against bush. we're looking at the same sort of backlash that put georgie in office after 8 years of billy boy's embarrassing tenure in the white house.

You are definately correct Delusion. In my eyes, all of the republican candidates are tainted because of Bush. It is hard for me to watch them, because I think of what Bush has accomplished in his two terms... pretty much nothing.

I do not want to see Hillary in office. Quite frankly, I don't see much in any candidate as of yet. I shouldn't have said anything in this thread, because I have no urge to elect Hillary. I posted because I'm tired of reading Torogs posts in the politics section, because everything he says is 100% conservative.

He doesn't realize that neither the republican nor the democratic way of thinking is ALWAYS correct. He thinks that taking the republican stance on every issue is the way to go, and in turn, is hateful to any idea that is democratic by bashing it and calling them terrorists.

Once again, I should have voiced this opinion in another thread, and for that, I apologize.

PS: Remember, I don't care for Hillary. I'm not a democrat or a republican. But I am American and I'm not a terrorist or a terrorist supporter. Torog, please come up with a different way to bash someone that comments on a thread of yours in a way other than 100% agreeing with you.

Howdy Comatose,

You plea:"PS: Remember, I don't care for Hillary. I'm not a democrat or a republican. But I am American and I'm not a terrorist or a terrorist supporter. Torog, please come up with a different way to bash someone that comments on a thread of yours in a way other than 100% agreeing with you."

That's a fair request,I'll try and accomodate ya..but it won't be easy ! :thumbsup:

I believe ya when ya say that yer not a 'terrorist or a terrorist supporter'..however,what do ya think of the term 'terrorist enabler' ? I ain't calling ya one-just wonder what ya think? I'm even trying not to use the label 'liberal',I'm trying to replace it with 'left-leaner'..what do ya think of that one ?

Have a good one ! :jointsmile:

All you can really do is vote for someone else. That's why I'm voting for Barack Obama. The Clinton's can criticize him for being "inexperienced" all they want but he is greatly open minded than most of these candidates. You can never really trust a presidential candidate but I see more in Obama than anyone else. There's my two cents.

Anyone who could end world hunger and poverty would be my messiah. And not to be pessimistic, I just don't see it happening in my lifetime(35yrs).

Howdy 4osiris,

You state: "Anyone who could end world hunger and poverty would be my messiah. And not to be pessimistic, I just don't see it happening in my lifetime(35yrs)."

Oh really ? Then ya need to support Christians,who are busy all over the world,as we speak,clothing the naked and feeding the hungry.

Jesus Christ will have to return,before ya git yer wish. :thumbsup:

Have a good one ! :jointsmile:

You don't get elected President by being aa altar boy in this day and age.They are all pigs.Bush Jr,Bush Sr,Clintons,Cheney,Reagan,Nixon,LBJ a long list of assholes who have done nothing for this country except get on the gravy train.

Vote Ron Paul!!!!

I am happy that there is finally a Republican who has the same views as I.

What I don't understand still to this day is why American politics is still bi-polar. You would figure that there maybe could be one or two more MAJOR political parties in Congress now, but it is still dominated by Democrats and Republicans.

Granted there are a few good ones in Congress, but the rest are simply scum.

What makes me mad is that Americans still vote for these scum bags. There are a whole bunch of true freedom loving Libertarians who are waiting to be elected into office. I mean, Clinton was impeached by Congress for a blowjob and Bush should be impeached for his lying about the Iraq War, and unfortunately has not happened. I think that is very sad in America if you keep on trying to impeach your leaders. Thats obviously a message saying "don't elect corrupt leaders anymore!"

One thing is for sure. Hilary is for the Iraq and soon to be Iran war. She will not get us out. If Bush bombs Iran before he leaves office, you can bet that Hilary will carry the torch of propaganda and operations.

We have the resources for change. But it is up to the American people to use it. We can't force ourselves into office without the votes we need! Thats how democracy works.

why are there two political party's? well its pretty simple actually. an example: my parents are repub. and just a little conservative, me im a liberal. (you should hear some of our arguments)to start with they will not vote for a dem under any cicumstance. if the republican canidate was to say that he would enslave all americans and put us into forced labor camps(im not aying they would but if)they would still vote for him just because hes a republican and hes of their party. while me on the other hand listenes to all canidates and wich ever one seems to agree with my point of veiw is the one ill vote for, and that has been mostly dems but not always. i vote for ross last perot time he ran.

then the smaller partys like liberatarian and natural law just dont have the funding to get their message out the way the 2 major partys can. plus many of these people wont vote for these partys because they figure its a wasted vote and vote for what they will consider the lesser of two evils.

so it just basically comes down to the almighty dollar