Just Say No To Hillary Clinton

WOW! Talk about political sidestepping. Not only has the Clinton campaign raised the issue of Obama’s drug use right before the Iowa caucus, but they are preemptively blaming the Republicans in advance!

Shaheen, an attorney and veteran organizer, said much of Obama’s background is unknown and could be a problem in November 2008 if he is the Democratic nominee. He said Republicans would work hard to discover new aspects of Obama’s admittedly spotty youth.
“It’ll be, ‘When was the last time? Did you ever give drugs to anyone? Did you sell them to anyone?’” said Shaheen, whose wife, Jeanne, is the state’s former governor and is running for the U.S. Senate next year.
“There are so many openings for Republican dirty tricks. It’s hard to overcome,” Shaheen said.
Clinton’s campaign said it had nothing to do with his comments, and Shaheen said later he regretted them.Source

The latest attack on Obama from the Hillary Clinton camp is a classic example of the Clinton’s adherence to the theory of “plausible deniability”. For those of you unfamiliar with the term:

Plausible deniability is the term given to the creation of loose and informal chains of command in governments and other large organizations. In the case that assassinations, false flag or black ops or any other illegal or otherwise disreputable and unpopular activities become public, high-ranking officials may deny any connection to or awareness of such act, or the agents used to carry out such act.

In politics and espionage, deniability refers to the ability of a “powerful player” or actor to avoid “blowback” by secretly arranging for an action to be taken on their behalf by a third party—ostensibly unconnected with the major player.
Source

Yet again, a low level staffer takes the fall, the information gets out, and Hillary says she’s not responsible. This is the person you want to run this country? When are the Democrats going to wake up to the fact that this woman is waaaaay more dangerous than any Republican?

That’s not really a big surprise, now is it? The last thing Hillary and her ventriloquist dummy Bill want is for a light to be shown on their past.

Democratic frontrunner Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., has been taking heat from her Democratic and Republican opponents for the reams of papers detailing her various activities as First Lady that the National Archives has yet to release from the William Jefferson Clinton Presidential Library.

And now questions are being raised about why another set of papers relevant to her political career at yet another Arkansas library will not be available to the public until well after election day 2008, despite earlier indications that the papers would have been released by now.
Source

Does it strike you as strange that Hillary Clinton is receiving political contributions in the thousands of dollars from waiters and busboys in Chinatown? Well to the LA Times, it’s perfectly understandable.

Dishwashers, waiters and others whose jobs and dilapidated home addresses seem to make them unpromising targets for political fundraisers are pouring $1,000 and $2,000 contributions into Clinton’s campaign treasury. In April, a single fundraiser in an area long known for its gritty urban poverty yielded a whopping $380,000. When Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) ran for president in 2004, he received $24,000 from Chinatown.

At this point in the presidential campaign cycle, Clinton has raised more money than any candidate in history. Those dishwashers, waiters and street stall hawkers are part of the reason. And Clinton’s success in gathering money from Chinatown’s least-affluent residents stems from a two-pronged strategy: mutually beneficial alliances with powerful groups, and appeals to the hopes and dreams of people now consigned to the margins.
Source

The writers seem to blithely accept that all these people are telling them the truth. If this story was about a Republican, you can bet that nobody at the LA Times would accept the following as truth:

Many of Clinton’s Chinatown donors said they had contributed because leaders in neighborhood associations told them to. In some cases, donors said they felt pressure to give.

Are they idiots at the LA Times? Seriously, are they idiots? Why else would you write a story like this and accept the donations as real. Have they forgotten the Hsu scandal already?
One does not need to be Edward R Murrow to figure out this is more of Hillary’s illegal campaign fundraising activity. They hint around about all the money might not be real. The writers mention that they can’t track down 2/3 of the donars. Yet in the end, their conclusion is….nothing. They say nothing. Obviously the LA Time only cares about Republican corruption.
What’s more disturbing about this story to us though, is the obvious Chinese connection to the Clinton campaign. It harkens back to Bubba and his Chinese fundraising scandal involving John Huang. If the Chinese are trying to buy influence with Hillary, and we believe they are, the question is WHY? Obviously it will not be the LA Times that gets to the bottom of this story.

We grabbed this from the folks over at thehill.com. It’s a fascinating piece about Hillary’s past predilection for spying on people that might upset her personal apple cart, and her present day hypocrisy regarding the US Intelligence services need to do the same.

Republicans are focusing on an allegation in a recent book by two Pulitzer Prize-winning reporters, which suggests Clinton listened to a secretly recorded conversation between political opponents.

In their book about Clinton’s rise to power, Her Way, Don Van Natta Jr., an investigative reporter at The New York Times, and Jeff Gerth, who spent 30 years as an investigative reporter at the paper, wrote: “Hillary’s defense activities ranged from the inspirational to the microscopic to the down and dirty. She received memos about the status of various press inquiries; she vetted senior campaign aides; and she listened to a secretly recorded audiotape of a phone conversation of Clinton critics plotting their next attack.

“The tape contained discussions of another woman who might surface with allegations about an affair with Bill,” Gerth and Van Natta wrote in reference to Clinton’s husband, former President Bill Clinton. “Bill’s supporters monitored frequencies used by cell phones, and the tape was made during one of those monitoring sessions.”
Source

We could go on for days about how the liberal media and the Far Left swept Sandy Berger’s lying, stealing, and some would say, outright treason, under the rug. It would be laughable if it wasn’t so commonplace. The facts remain: He stole classified documents and destroyed them to protect somebody! And now he’s one of Hillary’s advisors? Are you kidding us?

Sandy Berger, who stole highly classified terrorism documents from the National Archives, destroyed them and lied to investigators, is now an adviser to presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Berger, who was fired from John Kerry’s presidential campaign when the scandal broke in 2004, has assumed a similar role in Clinton’s campaign, even though his security clearance has been suspended until September 2008. This is raising eyebrows even among Clinton’s admirers.
Source

And yet, millions of blind sheep want this woman to be President. It boggles the mind!

Why else would she make a statement like this to General Petraeus?

“Despite what I view is your rather extraordinary efforts in your testimony both yesterday and today,” said Clinton, “I think that the reports that you provide to us really require a willing suspension of disbelief.”

How much hubris must one have to challenge a General of Petraeus’ standing and knowledge? It’s blatantly obvious that Hill has become a participant in MoveOn’s blackmail scheme. Why else would she refrain from supporting Senator Cornyn’s resolution condemning MoveOn’s slanderous ad in the New York Slimes? She and the rest of the Democan’ts refused to support the measure, and it failed to come up for a binding vote. If it had, then there would have been more of a record of this shameless act by Hillary and her thieving pals. (Just because we haven’t mentioned the whole Hsu affair, does not mean we are not aware of it )

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, introduced a Senate resolution Tuesday condemning MoveOn.org’s recent attack on Gen. David Petraeus in a New York Times advertisement. The move comes the same day the top U.S. general in Iraq is set to testify before key Senate committees.

The measure was offered as a nonbinding amendment to the transportation appropriations bill currently on the floor, and but was ruled “not germane” and will not be put to a vote.
Source

Bravo to Rudy Giuliani for slamming her in on the radio,

“Hillary Clinton, questioning Gen. (David) Petraeus, said you had to suspend disbelief,” Giuliani said after a brief campaign stop at an Akron restaurant. “Why would you say that about an American general?”

He made his point, but we think he should have gone further. Let’s hope he’s saving it for their first debate…

What’s next Hillary, small bodegas funneling cash to the campaign?

One of the biggest sources of political donations to Hillary Rodham Clinton is a tiny, lime-green bungalow that lies under the flight path from San Francisco International Airport.

Six members of the Paw family, each listing the house at 41 Shelbourne Ave. as their residence, have donated a combined $45,000 to the Democratic senator from New York since 2005, for her presidential campaign, her Senate re-election last year and her political action committee. In all, the six Paws have donated a total of $200,000 to Democratic candidates since 2005, election records show.

That total ranks the house with residences in Greenwich, Conn., and Manhattan’s Upper East Side among the top addresses to donate to the Democratic presidential front-runner over the past two years, according to an analysis by The Wall Street Journal of donations listed with the Federal Election Commission.
Full Story

Stop the presses! Extra! Extra!
Okay, we’re kidding, but you wouldn’t know it to hear the story from her Democratic rivals. This is Hillary Clinton we’re talking about. Remember? She will sell her soul to anybody willing to cough up the cash. Remember her husband Bubba, and his particular affinity for Chinese money? We do!
Hillary learned from the best when it comes to accepting money and hiding its origin. So this shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone; least of all her opponents or supporters.

Democratic presidential front-runner Sen. Hillary Clinton is being taken to task by her two closest rivals for accepting $400,000 in campaign contributions from Washington lobbyists. Sen. Hillary Clinton dismissed criticism that she took money from lobbyists, saying it would not influence her.

Over the weekend, Clinton was booed by an audience of liberal bloggers in Chicago when she defended taking money from Washington lobbyists, something both Sen. Barack Obama and former Sen. John Edwards have vowed not to do. “I don’t think, based on my 35 years fighting for what I believe in, anybody seriously believes I’m going to be influenced by a lobbyist or a particular interest group,” Clinton said… Full Story

Yeah, right Hillary!

Judicial Watch has filed a lawsuit against The Clinton Library trying to obtain access to Hillary Clinton’s daily schedules from her White House days. Why is this news worthy? Because the Clintonistas have been less than forthcoming with the release of her actual activity while Bubba was in the Oval Office. We all know what he was doing, but what was she really up to?

udicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption announced today that it filed a lawsuit on July 16, 2007 in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration to obtain access to the following records from the Clinton Presidential Library: “First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton’s calendar, to include but not limited to her daily office diary, schedule, day planner, telephone log book, and chronological file.” The Archives, which operates and maintains Clinton Presidential Library records, failed to respond to Judicial Watch’s April 5, 2006 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.

Full Story

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s former finance director has been indicted on charges of filing fictitious reports that misstated contributions for a Hollywood fund-raising gala for the senator, the Justice Department said Friday…

The indictment, rare for a political campaign, was unsealed in Los Angeles charging David Rosen with four counts of filing false reports with the Federal Election Commission…

The indictment charged that he provided some documents to an FEC compliance officer but withheld the true costs of the event and provided false documents to substantiate the lower figure…
full story

We’ve talked about this before (see here) but we never really thought that an indictment would happen. This should make Peter Paul very happy. It remains to be seen if this is the first in a series of dominos to fall. Stay tuned…