Update III: Who knew our Hillary Clinton article would be so timely? The article is especially insightful for those that recall our ides of March article titled Clinton, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama, Hillary Clinton 2016, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton, Bush…
In that article and others we stated that Barack Obama and his thugs will do everything to prevent Hillary Clinton from getting the nomination in 2016. There is no way Obama wants to make himself a tiny footnote in between the Clinton versus Bush national drama. The Obama Chicago thug machine has not found a candidate yet to oppose Hillary, but they will. They will.
Yesterday and into today DrudgeReport headlined “It Begins”. The link was to an article about Jeb Bush getting ready to run for president in 2016:
“In an exclusive sit-down interview with The Brody File, Jeb Bush says that, “Hillary Clinton is a formidable force on the left.”
We sat down with Jeb Bush Friday morning at the Faith and Freedom Coalition event in DC. If Jeb Bush decides to run for president, he will most likely be considered the frontrunner for the GOP nomination.”
“What the crap” you say? Jeb Bush running for president? Nah! Sure George W. Bush, thanks to the incompetent, treacherous, golfing Boob Barack Obama, has higher popularity ratings that Obama… but, but, but, Jeb Bush for President? That’s insane, right? Well if you think that’s insane try this on for size (and try not to think about that second paragraph above):
“Is There Another Elected Obama In Our Future?
Have you noticed first lady Michelle Obama popping up a lot in the media lately? Like announcing the best picture winner at the Oscars? Or promoting healthier eating habits? And she recently touched on economic issues at a Democratic fundraiser for Virginia gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe.
Is the groundwork being laid for another elected Obama in our future?[snip]
She continued, “See, because when I was growing up, a family of four living on a single blue-collar salary could build a solid life without debt and without relying on any form of public assistance… But today, for so many families, that’s no longer possible. Folks are working harder than ever before and doing everything right, and it’s still not enough.”
Sounds like the first draft of a future campaign speech. [snip]
The White House powers-that-be have a plan, and they will implement that plan on their schedule. First, her handlers wanted to create an image, an endearing and noncontroversial one. They do not want to repeat the Hillary Clinton experience, in which the then-first lady alienated half of the country with her thinly veiled ambition and attitude. [snip]
Clinton’s political road to bigger things might have been a little less bumpy if she had been guided by some of the remarkable handlers that paved the way for Barack Obama. Michelle will be the number one heir of that machine. In fact, that may be one of the primary — though surely not the only — reasons the machine continues.
Organizing for America, now Organizing for Action — the president’s personal 501(c)(4) organization that is virtually all political but never seems to be troubled by the fine bureaucrats at the IRS’s nonprofit unit — carries on, raising money to push the president’s message. [snip]
While Michelle is her own woman with her own accomplishments, she would likely embrace virtually all of her husband’s economic policies — and could be even further to the left.
If (when?) Michelle Obama decides to run for office, she will have the Obama machine fully engaged to ensure she wins — the Chicago way if need be.”
Read the entire article if you want to empty your stomach.
Update II: MoonOnPluto in our comments section reports on what is happening in Turkey from his home there. Syria, the NSA scandals, the IRS scandals, Benghazi, and other scandals continue to dominate the news. For us the most important story of the day in the long run is this report from Bloomberg: Spy agencies sharing data with “thousands” of firms:
“This raises a number of interesting questions and concerns. First, are cooperating firms gaining competitive advantages against non-cooperating (and/or unaware) firms in the same market? That kind of distortion would corrupt markets in favor of snitching as a survival tactic, would it not? Second, are there political organizations that have this kind of friendly relationship with intelligence services that give them a competitive advantage? Two months ago, one might have laughed off such a suggestion, but after what took place at the IRS, it’s a little more difficult to dismiss.
The part about the Microsoft bug reporting is especially interesting in light of the Attkisson story today, too.”
We emphasize the sentence that raises the possibility of “political organizations” getting assistance from intelligence services. “Political organizations” is a polite way to say Barack Obama’s CREEP – the committee to re-elect the president. That was Nixon’s name for his campaign organization, Obama’s was called OFA, although we use OAF. Did the Obama OAFs get data mining information from the NSA or other intelligence organizations. We’ve been discussing that possibility in the comments section this this NSA scandal exploded this past week (yeah, it’s been only a week). We’re not a minority in our thinking: 57% Fear Government Will Use NSA Data to Harass Political Opponents
Update: No sooner do we publish than we get new developments which show Bill Clinton’s slap of Obama’s puss is even harder than we thought. Here we go: White House formally announces that Assad has used chemical weapons. The notion that Bill Clinton colluded with Barack Obama on this is risible.
As we write below, Bill Clinton mocked Obama in the most personal of terms on Syria. If anything Bill knew when to strike. Obama cannot be happy about this. Obama appears weak, a fool, a wuss, and lame (especially when compared to Bill Clinton). In addition to the humiliation inflicted upon him by Bill Clinton, what does Obama do now that everyone is agreed that Syrian President Assad has crossed Obama’s “red line”. Does Obama resort to “I double dare you!”? Then, “I triple dare you!”? Then “I quadruple cross my heart dare you!”?
What does Bambi do now? Go against the American public which does not want intervention? Go against his base which is already uneasy with his George W. Bush III warmonger persona? Are “wag the dog” type do-something/anything to get away from the scandals sure to follow? What will Syrian Tony Rezko do?
Bill Clinton is laughably inarticulate. The man cannot stitch together two words that make sense. Bill Clinton does not know how to employ the English language to make a point, let alone an complete argument. Bill Clinton’s rhetorical skills are nonexistent. Furthermore, Bill Clinton is incapable of skewering opponents verbally.
You have to believe all the above to miss or choose to ignore Bill Clinton’s latest resounding slap on Barack Obama’s puss.
Regular readers will recall our last guided tour through Borgia Italy (a.k.a. America 2013) concerned the published reports of a “secret deal” in which Bill Clinton would put aside his disgust with Barack Obama then spectacularly endorse and campaign for Barack Obama. In turn Barack the treacherous Boob would endorse Hillary Clinton 2016.
According to the book that purports this “secret deal” really did happen Bill Clinton kept his part of the deal but soon after the election treacherous Barack Obama let it be known that he wanted to remain “neutral”. “Bill Clinton went ballistic and threatened retaliation” the book states.
In order to placate Bill, treacherous Barack Obama went on 60 Minutes with Hillary Clinton and embarrassed himself, Hillary and the once prestigious show itself. If Obama thinks that one TV appearance pays a debt and he can back out on his purported “secret deal” promise…. Well this is how the book phrases it:
“He may yet try to back out of his promise to Hillary Clinton. But as Obama’s presidency sinks deeper into scandal and inaction, the question is — will Clinton even still want his endorsement?“
As far as we are concerned: “In 2016 the greatest threat to Hillary Clinton is once again Barack Obama – and his legacy of weakness and profligacy. Tie Hillary Clinton to Barack Obama and she loses.” It’s possible that after their long secret war against Barack Obama which we have periodically documented Hillary and Bill Clinton have finally learned Obama cannot be trusted.
The book states “Bill Clinton went ballistic and threatened retaliation.” Did we witness the beginnings of retaliation even as Big Media misses the obvious? Here’s what happened according to the entirely unreliable Maggie Haberman of Politico:
“At another point during a closed-press event Tuesday, Clinton implied that Obama or any president risks looking like “a total fool” if they listen too closely to opinion polls and act too cautiously. He used his own decisions on Kosovo and Bosnia as a point of reference. [snip]
Clinton repeatedly said it would be “lame” to blame a lack of intervention on opposition in polls or among members of Congress.
If Clinton had ever blamed a lack of action because “there was a poll in the morning paper that said 80 percent of you were against it … you’d look like a total wuss,” he said. “And you would be. I don’t mean that a leader should go out of his way or her way to do the unpopular thing, I simply mean when people are telling you ‘no’ in these situations, very often what they’re doing is flashing a giant yellow light and saying, ‘For God’s sakes, be careful, tell us what you’re doing, think this through, be careful.”
Clinton continued, “But still they hire their president to look around the corner and down the street, and you just think – if you refuse to act and you cause a calamity, the one thing you cannot say when all the eggs have been broken, is that, ‘Oh my God, two years ago there was a poll that said 80 percent of you were against it.’ Right? You’d look like a total fool. So you really have to in the end trust the American people, tell them what you’re doing, and hope to God you can sell it” and that it turns out okay in the end.”
Don’t be distracted by the policy Bill Clinton is discussing. Ask yourself instead if there was a different set of phrases, less insulting terms, Bill could have used to describe current Barack Obama policy? Notice how Bill Clinton is referencing a “president”, a “leader” in his acid comments. Who could that possibly be? Ask yourself if the terms Bill Clinton wielded are personal attacks in nature? The answer is yes. Bill Clinton is sufficiently skilled in the English language to discuss a policy and not use words such as “lame” (this one must particularly hurt Barack because it was paired with “blame”. Bill telling Obama it is “lame to blame” strips Obama of his favorite tactic), “wuss” and “fool“.
As to the policy Bill Clinton is discussing this appears to be a bit of legerdemain. We’re not sure what Bill Clinton is proposing. For that matter we are not sure what Hillary Clinton is proposing. The DailyBeast sees a Hillary policy on Syria:
“Last summer, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, CIA Director David Petraeus, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, and Joint Chiefs Chairman Martin Dempsey all supported arming vetted, moderate elements of the Syrian opposition but were rebuffed by the White House. Hillary Clinton told the New York Times in February she had been an advocate for more forceful action in Syria, a move seen by many as an attempt to distance herself from Obama’s Syria policy just before she left office and in advance of her 2016 presidential run.“
That last bit is pretty smart. In Borgia Italy do not look at policy, look at direction and purpose of the players. After Obama’s vapid campaigns of personal attacks, fear and smear and, as Seinfeld would say, about nothing, policy takes a seat outside the carriage. Look instead to the players hiding behind tapestries, the knives sheathed ‘neath velvets and brocades. Occasionally the knives do come out, but there has to be purpose and opportunity. Bill Clinton has a shiv to stick, with a target to strike.
Are there any “moderate” elements left in the Syrian insurrection against Assad? We doubt it. It certainly is too late now to find them. Bill and Hillary might be proposing the policy we had during the Iran-Iraq War of arming the side that’s losing to keep anyone from winning and thereby keeping everyone off balance. For purposes of our discussion the policy argument is near irrelevant. What matters is the choice words Bill said, and why he said them.
Is this just “retaliation” or is Bill in the “zig” mode after the “zag”? Republicans/conservatives, Obama Dimocrats (Obamacrats) and for that matter many Democrats do that understand that Bill Clinton always zigs and zags his way to a goal. Remember “era of big government” is over even as he proposed small programs upon small programs popular with middle class Americans? It was zig and zag Bill style. Now Bill is zigging. Why is Bill zigging now? Always kick a Boob when he is down. And Boob Obama is down.
On his signature accomplishment, ObamaCare, panic has set in. Congressional leaders fear staff and officials are in Flight from Congress over ObamaCare’s massive cost hikes.
According to the latest Gallup, Fox News polls: Public opposes broad NSA collection of records. The results from these polls spell trouble for Obama. The Fox News poll has Obama approval at 44% (Eric Holder is at 29%). Is Obama “honest and trustworthy” has a 48% split down from the 73% he garnered in 2009. On the economy few are happy. Most think we are in either a recession or a downturn. Most think Obama is as “transparent” as George W. Bush was. 64% believe the government is “too big”.
The poll results indicate most Americans (63%) believe the Department of Justice seizure of reporter phone records is “for political reasons” and that Eric Holder should resign (52%). The NSA scandal is viewed by 62% as “An unacceptable and alarming invasion of privacy rights”. 58% have lost confidence in the IRS. 68% believe the White House either knew or initiated the IRS was targeting conservative groups. 66% believe the attacks on conservatives by the IRS were high level officials punishing political opponents. 76% believe ObamaCare has to be yanked from the IRS. 55% oppose ObamaCare.
66% of Americans are following the Benghazi scandal closely. 59% think Obama could have done more to protect the Benghazi consulate. 55% think Hillary Clinton could have done more. 56% think Obama did not do more because of his reelection campaign.
As to investigations: On the “IRS targeting of hundreds of conservative and Tea Party groups for special scrutiny” 78% think Congress should continue to investigate. DOJ “monitoring of certain journalists as part of its leak investigations? 76% want more investigations. “The Obama administration’s handling of the terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya that resulted in the deaths of four Americans?” 73% want more investigations.
Recently we asked, “what is your favorite scandal”? This poll has it IRS 28%, DOJ 28%, Benghazi 23%.
Bill Clinton sees the trouble Obama is in. Hillary Clinton has her glasses on and sees the same thing. Even the not-too-bright Walter Shapiro sees the mess Obama in and has advice for an imaginary 2016 candidate not named Hillary or Joe. The advice is “How to Break with President Obama“.
But there are other idiot voices in Big Media doing all they can to save Barack Obama from his treacheries and incompetence. Joan Walsh wants Hillary Clinton to immolate herself like Joan of Arc in order to save the treacherous boob dauphin:
“Hillary must own 2014
Twitter’s a nice start. But if she wants to get serious about 2016, she needs to get involved in the 2014 midterms [snip]
It’s understandable: liberals are demoralized by the media hyping phony White House scandals, most notably Benghazi and the IRS mess, and they’re divided over revelations about the ever-growing national security state under President Obama. The media, meanwhile, seems to sense that Scandalgate is almost played out, while the genuine controversy over the NSA revelations is never going to gain traction with the audience, which polls show support security state overreach. So hey…Hillary!
But acting like we’re all going to be delivered into a parallel Democratic administration where everything is one long Tumblr tribute to said Democrat’s coolness is in some ways a return to the wishful thinking that troubled the otherwise brilliant Obama 2008 campaign. If the glass-ceiling cracker is going to shatter it this time, she needs to gear up with more than Twitter and shout-outs to the folks behind “Texts with Hillary”: She has to make the 2014 midterms a referendum on GOP obstruction, and campaign like her presidency depended on it. Because it does.
Joan Walsh proclaims herself a Hillary supporter but really only wants to throw Hillary overboard to serve as Barack Obama’s life preserver. It is Barack Obama that is going to have to “make the 2014 midterms a referendum on GOP obstruction” of his abominations and it is Barack Obama that must “campaign like
her his presidency depended on it.” Hillary Clinton should do exactly the opposite of the suicide strategy advised by MSNBC’s Joan Walsh:
“I started thinking about Clinton’s role in 2014 a couple of weeks ago, discussing her increasingly likely 2016 run on “Hardball.” Chris Matthews asked how bold a campaign she needed to run, and whether somehow, she had to run against or otherwise separate herself from Obama. If not, who or what was she running against?
It was pretty obvious to me: She cannot and should not separate herself from the president, and she’s running against the increasingly unhinged Republican Party that impeached her husband because they couldn’t beat him at the polls, and then tied her boss in knots of scandal and obstructionism when they couldn’t beat him, either.
Clinton can’t run against Obama because she worked for him — but also because she needs to consolidate the Obama coalition and make it a Clinton coalition. There are still embers of bitterness over the 2008 primary, and any effort to distance herself from the president, real or imagined, could fan them. Besides, Al Gore made a mistake by running away from Clinton record; Clinton’s 2016 message should be that she will consolidate the gains of the Obama presidency, from health care reform to banking regulation to women’s rights, and extend them. She will complete the president’s work by vanquishing his intransigent, unreasonable, race-baiting foes. And she is uniquely positioned to do it.”
It’s stunning to think that Chris Matthews O’Tingles has a better grasp on reality than Joan Walsh on the question of Hillary running from Obama as fast as she can and as far as she can. Joan Walsh has been shoveling that shi.. stuff about Hillary tying herself to Obama for a while now.
It is comical to read Joan Walsh as she states “There are still embers of bitterness over the 2008 primary.” But Walsh presumes the “bitterness” comes solely from Obama supporters and therefore Hillary cannot be suspect of “distancing herself” from Obama. Well we have news for Joan Walsh: once Hillary Clinton gets the nomination the blood of Obama supporters will flow, like excrement from Chris Matthews, through the halls of party headquarters.
No thanks Joan Walsh. Hillary Clinton has her own coalition. Hillary Clinton does not need Obama supporters to win the presidency. Hillary’s best bet is to gull the fools that voted for Obama during the nomination then chop heads once she has control of the party. Walsh like her fellow DailyKooks wants Hillary to destroy herself to save Obama:
“But Clinton can’t just begin to make this case in 2015 or 2016; she needs to be part of a Democratic team making the 2014 midterms a referendum on the uncompleted business of the Obama presidency – and on the GOP’s outrageous abuse of its minority status to block everything from popular legislation to agency nominations to thwart this Democratic president, the last one, and likely the next. If voting patterns follow the modern electoral norm, 2014 turnout will resemble 2010 turnout, not the Democratic waves of 2008 and 2012, and result in more power for the obstructionist GOP in the House and Senate.
Clinton has enormous political capital with the Democratic base, and beyond it. She needs to spend some of it turning out voters in 2014, or the presidency might not be a prize worth winning, except as another title in your Twitter bio.”
Joan Walsh must think that ObamaCare is popular. Joan Walsh must think that Obama is proposing “popular legislation”. Joan Walsh needs to get her head out of Obama’s rear end and see the light. Reading the latest polls might be a good idea for Joan.
The truth is that Joan Walsh knows what she suggests is crap. Walsh wants Hillary Clinton to campaign to save Obama’s presidency in 2014 because Walsh knows Obama is not popular and that Obama can campaign all he wants, like he did in 2010, but that he will lose.
Why should Hillary Clinton destroy herself to help Obama? Hillary has her own problems to take care of.
The current big Hillary problem is the one she has the least to worry about:
“A State Department whistleblower has accused high-ranking staff of a massive coverup — including keeping a lid on findings that members of then-Secretary Hillary Clinton’s security detail and the Belgian ambassador solicited prostitutes.
A chief investigator for the agency’s inspector general wrote a memo outlining eight cases that were derailed by senior officials, including one instance of interference by Clinton’s chief of staff, Cheryl Mills.
Any mention of the cases was removed from an IG report about problems within the Bureau of Diplomatic Security (DS), which provides protection and investigates crimes involving any State Department workers overseas.”
The allegations are lurid. They involve sex, prostitutes, child sex:
“US Ambassador to Belgium Howard Gutman, with his wife in Brussels, was investigated over claims he solicited prostitutes.
“It’s a coverup,” declared Cary Schulman, a lawyer representing the whistleblower, former State Department IG senior investigator Aurelia Fedenisn.“The whole agency is impaired.
“Undue influence . . . is coming from political appointees. It’s coming from above the criminal- investigation unit,” added Schulman, whose client provided the document with the revelations.
Some of the revelations were first reported by CBS News.
Among the bombshell findings:
* A DS agent was called off a case against US Ambassador to Belgium Howard Gutman over claims that he solicited prostitutes, including minors.
“The agent began his investigation and had determined that the ambassador routinely ditched his protective security detail in order to solicit sexual favors from both prostitutes and minor children,” says the memo.
“The ambassador’s protective detail and the embassy’s surveillance detection team . . . were well aware of the behavior.”
Undersecretary of State for Management Patrick Kennedy ordered the investigation ceased, and the ambassador remains in place, according to the memo.
Gutman was a big Democratic donor before taking the post, having raised $500,000 for President Obama’s 2008 campaign and helping finance his inaugural.
* At least seven agents in Clinton’s security detail hired prostitutes while traveling with her in various countries, including Russia and Colombia.
Investigators called the use of prostitutes by Clinton’s security agents “endemic.”
Some of the agents cavorted with the prostitutes in the same hotel that Hillary Clinton stayed at. These agents were slapped on the wrist and nothing more. The investigation further revealed that the Special Investigations Division (SID) shut down the, um, probes.
This is why we think to a great extent Hillary Clinton is OK on this scandal:
“The incident in Colombia occurred prior to the scandal involving President Obama’s Secret Service detail in Cartagena, Colombia, but the State Department’s misconduct did not come to light until now.
The memo references a “rumor” that after the Secret Service hooker scandal broke, Clinton asked the agent-in-charge of her security detail whether any “similar activities” had happened. “The response was: ‘No,’ ” according to the memo.
In the coverups and shut down, um, probes, the subjects of the investigation are “Obama people”. One is Brett McGurk, an aborted Obama nominee who had to withdraw his name from nomination due to extramarital affairs with a reporter and other reasons. The other is the disgusting Howard Gutman who attacked Sarah Palin in 2008 regarding her “parenting skills.” Gutman is an Obama bundler who raised $500,000 for Obama in 2008.
Hillary will be able to make the strong case that she inquired and was either lied to or misled. Hillary can cite the very memorandum the New York Post and CBS News rely on for their reports. But this does not mean that Hillary is in the clear.
As much as it will be a temptation for Hillary supporters to shout “look, a squirrel” and allege that this State Department scandal, and it is a scandal, is a squirrel set free by Barack Obama in order to distract from his troubles it is a squirrel that won’t hunt. Hillary needs to deal with this.
First, Hillary has to check with herself to see if she is too loyal to those that work for her. We’re not saying Cheryl Mills should be thrown under the bus but at some point Hillary has to clear up exactly what happened here.
The biggest danger for Hillary Clinton however is the case that can be made that she did not run the State Department well. In light of all the Obama scandals that will not go away – this allegation is a mortal threat to her.
Hillary Clinton did not have the authority to give a “stand down” order in regards to Benghazi. Hillary Clinton did not have the authority to arrest a video producer in California. We still do not know what happened in Benghazi. Someone(s) in the White House knows what happened in Benghazi and who did what to whom.
Benghazi is an Obama scandal and Hillary should assist Congress as much as possible. A few leaks from HillaryLand should be sprinkled over the next few months, and especially in September when Congress comes back from recess. We also would not mind if hearings on Benghazi took place during next year’s election campaigns.
The most important lesson for everyone is that we are in Borgia Italy not 21st century America. That means, Hillary, that you should watch your back. There are knives behind those tapestries.