Posts tagged "Hillary Clinton"

Yesterday, Chelsea Clinton announced that she and her husband are expecting their first child, which also means that Bill and Hillary Clinton will be welcoming their first grandchild right as the former Secretary of State begins her anticipated run for the White House.

And this is all just too much of a coincidence for Newsmax host Steve Malzberg, who went off yesterday speculating that Chelsea’s pregnancy was intentionally timed to benefit her mother’s presidential campaign.

Pointing to an interview Chelsea gave to Glamour Magazine last year in which she said that she and her husband had “decided we were going to make 2014 the Year of the Baby, and please, call my mother and tell her that. She asks us about it every single day,” Malzberg concluded that Bill and Hillary were pressuring Chelsea to get pregnant at a time that would benefit her campaign.

"Pardon the skeptic in me," Malzberg said, “but what great timing! I mean, purely accidental, purely an act of nature, purely just left up to God. And God answered Hillary Clinton’s prayers and she going to have the prop of being a new grandma while she runs for president. It just warms the heart. It brings a tear to my eye. It really does. Wow!”

From the 04.17.2014 edition of NewsMax.TV’s The Steve Malzberg Show:
h/t: Kyle Mantyla at RWW

h/t: Brian Tashman at RWW

h/t: Brian Tashman at RWW

In a stunning exercise in false equivalence, Fox News accused CBS News of maintaining a disciplinary double standard after it suspended correspondent Lara Logan for her botched 60 Minutes Benghazi report but continues to employ an analyst that Fox erroneously suggested was part of a Benghazi talking points conspiracy to provide political cover to President Obama and then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

On April 2, according to ABC News, former CIA deputy director, Michael Morell testied again before the House Intelligence Committee regarding the 2012 attacks on U.S. diplomatic facilities in Benghazi, Libya.

Fox News used today’s hearing as a launching point to spin its latest already-debunked Benghazi conspiracy, hosting Lt. Tony Schaffer on the April 2 edition of Fox & Friends to push allegations that Morell deliberately omitted the truth about the Benghazi attacks from talking points later used by the administration in return for a consulting position with a firm ostensibly close to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. 

Fox used the trumped up allegation to call for Morell’s suspension from his position as an analyst for CBS, citing suspended CBS correspondent Lara Logan’s botched and retracted 60 Minutes Benghazi report as a comparison. Fox co-host Steve Doocy accused CBS of maintaining a “crazy double standard” for disciplining Logan but not Morell:

DOOCY: Also what’s interesting is Mike Morell also works for CBS. He’s a consultant. Lara Logan, as you will recall, was fired or suspended from 60 Minutes for simply interviewing somebody who told a story that was not accurate. 


Mike Morell is a consultant an analyst on CBS and it looks like he lied to congress. It looks like CBS has got a crazy double standard.

Doocy’s attempt to equate a Fox conspiracy theory about Morell’s actions and motivations with Logan’s now-infamous breaches of ethics and journalistic standards is staggering, as the two circumstances bear no resemblance. The allegations against Morrell have been repeatedly debunked, while Logan’s 60 Minutesreport on Benghazi that featured questionable source, Dylan Davies, whose credibility has since crumbled, led to an internal investigation resulting in the retraction of the report, an apology from Logan, and the subsequent leave of absence of Logan and her producer, Max McClellan. 

This most recent groundless attack from Fox will surely be added to the network’s Benghazi hoax parade to push for further costly hearings into the tragedy.

h/t: Michelle Leung at MMFA

Will Mark Levin’s vulgar analysis of Hillary Clinton finally be enough to keep top GOP officials off his show?

On the March 21 edition of his radio show, Levin highlighted a Gallup poll showing that the majority of respondents, 18 percent, feel Clinton’s gender is the most positive aspect of her potential presidency. Levin summarized the results by asking "Hillary Clinton’s gender? Do they mean her genitalia is her top 2016 selling point? Is that what that means?" Levin later said "But the key is it’s her genitalia. That’s why so many people would vote for her. I wonder if Bill Clinton would vote for her because of that. He seems to — well, he likes genitalia but maybe not hers."

Levin has a long history of offensive commentary on his radio show. He has accused President Obama of abusing children, compared marriage equality to incest, polygamy, and drug use, compared supporters of the Affordable Care Act to Nazi “brown shirts,” and advocated for Obama to be impeached.

Despite this rhetoric, prominent conservatives have given tacit approval to Levin’s views by appearing on his show. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) called into his show as recently as February. Levin hosted House Budget Committee chairman Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) to talk about the new budget agreement reached in December. Levin criticized Ryan’s budget deal with Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) later that month.

Levin’s hateful rhetoric has also earned him praise from the conservative community — he was recently named the winner of the Conservative Political Action Conference’s Andrew Breitbart Defender of the First Amendment Award. He is also listed as one of the speakers on the NRA’s “Leadership Forum” in April, speaking alongside other prominent conservative GOP leaders like Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal (R-LA) and Sens. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Marco Rubio (R-FL).

From the 03.21.2014 edition of Premiere Radio Networks’ The Mark Levin Show:

h/t: Olivia Marshall at MMFA

See Also: RWW’s Brian Tashman: Austin Ruse, while filling for Sandy Rios, advocates “left-wing professors to be shot.”

h/t: Brian Tashman at RWW

h/t: Elise Foley at the Huffington Post

H/T: Jason Easley at PoliticusUSA

Fox News will host discredited smear merchant Kathleen Willey tonight to attack Hillary Clinton. Willey is not credible — she has repeatedly been caught contradicting her own sworn testimony and has pushed absurd conspiracies that the Clintons killed her husband and former White House aide Vince Foster.

The website for Fox’s The Kelly File currently features the following tease for tonight’s episode: “She claimed Bill Clinton sexually harassed her, but former aide Kathleen Willey now says Hillary is the bigger danger to women! Don’t miss this explosive interview.” Megyn Kelly’s interview will likely cover the same ground as anappearance Willey made on WND reporter Aaron Klein’s radio program, during which she claimed that “Hillary Clinton is the war on women.”

Willey’s claims about Bill Clinton’s supposed harassment have been thoroughly discredited. In 1998, Willeyalleged on CBS’ 60 Minutes that President Clinton fondled her against her will in 1993 during a private White House meeting in which she asked for a paid position in the administration (she was working as a volunteer at the time). Clinton denied making any sexual advance toward Willey, both at the time and in his memoir. The allegations were explored during discovery of Jones v. Clinton, the lawsuit in which Paula Jones claimed that Clinton sexually harassed her, and reviewed by Independent Counsel Robert Ray.

Ray’s report found that “Willey’s Jones deposition testimony differed from her grand jury testimony on material aspects of the alleged incident,” noting that Willey “said at her deposition … that [Clinton] did not fondle her.” Ray also pointed out that — despite Willey’s subsequent claims that she had been intimidated near her home shortly before giving her Jones deposition in 1998 — in her Jones deposition, she “testified no one had tried to discourage her from testifying.”  


Willey’s husband, Ed Willey, committed suicide on November 29, 1993 — the same day on which she claims Bill Clinton sexually harassed her after she asked him for a job. At the time, Edward Willey owed the IRS $400,000, had stolen $275,000 from a client, and was being threatened with disbarment. Kathleen Willey has since insinuated that her husband was actually murdered at the behest of the Clintons, and suggested a possible parallel to the death of Foster. Fringe conservatives have for years claimed that Foster was murdered in spite of numerous investigations proving that he took his own life.

In her 2007 autobiography, Target: Caught in the Crosshairs of Bill and Hillary Clinton, Willey wrote that her husband is on a list of “former Clinton associates who had died abruptly — and conveniently for the Clintons,” and claimed, “it has not escaped my notice that, less than five months after the left-handed Vince Foster drove to a wooded area in Virginia and used both hands to put a .38 caliber pistol into his mouth, so did my husband.” (The claim that the gun a left-handed Foster used to take his own life was found in his right hand is a common falsehood used to promote the conspiracy — Foster was actually right-handed.)

Willey then speculated that her husband could have been killed because he may have “illegally borrowed” money from the Clinton campaign to pay the IRS and other bills. Claiming that a medical examiner provided a “full report” in which the examiner “suggested that he [Ed Willey] held the gun with both hands but pulled the trigger with his right,” Willey added: “That’s exactly how Vince Foster is said to have killed himself.” Willey also wrote: “Despite the unanswered questions, I reconciled in my mind, long ago, that Ed killed himself. In my heart, I don’t want to think so and I still wonder, How could he possibly do that? I go back and forth. And, as I do, the possibility lingers, logical or not, that Ed was murdered.”

Extensive excerpts from Willey’s book are available here. She offered similar claims in a 2007 interview with conspiracy website WorldNetDaily promoting the book.

h/t: MMFA


Rand Paul seems to have cracked the code.

The Kentucky Republican senator and possible 2016 presidential candidate has found a winning formula for staying in the headlines this winter: dredging up decades-old Clinton scandals and talking about Monica Lewinsky. It seems an unlikely script for a politician who supposedly wants to address America’s future.

But what Paul has figured out, and sooner than any other potential Republican presidential candidates, is that every time he (indirectly) references Lewinsky and Oval Office sex, television producers start assembling panel discussions and editors quickly assign articles. It’s like sending out the Bat Signal inside the Beltway; a transmission that cannot be denied or ignored.

Paul’s attacks this week were boosted by the revelation of  personal, decades-old correspondences between Hillary Clinton and Diane Blair, a close friend and confidant to the former first lady. With contemporaneous notes and letters that addressed the Lewinsky scandal and other trials from Bill Clinton’s two terms, the newly uncovered archives were presented as big political news. They also gave the media an excuse to wade further into Clinton tumult nostalgia.

For Clinton critics, there appears to be no downside to the strategy. Any fear Paul might have had about the press condemning him likely evaporated weeks ago. Instead of scolding Ryan for looking backwards and attacking a female politician for her husband’s distant, personal indiscretions, as well as accusing him without evidence of “violence" against women in the workplace, much of the press has celebrated Paul’s Lewinsky star turn. According to CNN’s Candy Crowley the Kentucky senator is on a “roll lately.” Why? Because he called the former president a “sexual predator.” (Crowley dubbed the low-blow maneuver “smart politics.”)

Points are rarely deducted for taking the low road against the Clintons. For the press, Clinton name-calling passes for political momentum.

And those lobbying the insults are depicted as savvy. CNN political reporter Peter Hamby claimed Paul’s attack on Clinton’s personal life represents “a potent message for Republicans at the moment.”

Hurling personal attacks against the Clintons might be potent message for Republicans as long as there are Republicans who vote. But in terms of boosting Paul’s political aspirations? The strategy doesn’t seem to be working. In a national poll released on Tuesday, a McClatchy-Marist surveyed Republican voters and just nine percent of them said Rand Paul was their pick to be the GOP’s nominee in 2016. (Rand loses to Clinton by double digits in the poll’s hypothetical 2016 match-up.) Even some Republican leaders think the Paul strategy is an electoral loser

h/t: MMFA

In an interview on the Steve Malzberg Show yesterday, Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky claimed that if Democrats want “any consistency” in fighting for women’s rights, they should “disown” former president Bill Clinton, who he called “gross,” an “unsavory character” and a “sexual predator.” Paul specifically urged Hillary Clinton to disown her husband: “All the time, candidates are asked to return money if an unsavory character gives them money. What if that unsavory character is your husband?” 


Paul’s argument that the “War on Women” consists not of large-scale legislative attacks on women’s health, reproductive freedom, and rights in the workplace, but on individual instances of sexual harassment by Democratic politicians, has become popular among Republicans. It’s the same laughable argument that conservatives made last summer when they pointed to San Diego mayor Bob Filner and New York City mayoral hopeful Anthony Weiner to claim that it’s Democrats who don’t care about women’s rights. 

h/t: Miranda Blue at RWW

Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley is moving ahead with preparations for a possible presidential bid and said in an interview that if he’s going to lay the groundwork for a national campaign, he can’t wait for Hillary Rodham Clinton to decide whether she is running.

In some of his most extensive comments to date on his aspirations, O’Malley (D) said he has been meeting with foreign- and domestic-policy experts privately to flesh out his thinking about “a better way forward for our country.” And he said that he would make a good president “for these times especially.”

“I have a great deal of respect for Hillary Clinton,” O’Malley said. “But for my own part, I have a responsibility to prepare and to address the things that I feel a responsibility to address. . . . To squander this important period of preparation because of horse-race concerns and handicapping concerns is just not a very productive use of energy. . . . Right now, I’m going to keep doing what I’m doing — the thought work and the preparation work.”

At the moment, the governor is stuck in an awkward position. He clearly wants to run for the White House in 2016 but probably won’t, several close associates say, if Clinton runs. They expect he would defer to her in part out of loyalty to a friend and political ally — he was the second governor in the country to endorse her 2008 presidential bid— and in part because he would be such a long shot against Clinton. In the interview, O’Malley said a possible Clinton bid is not a factor in his thinking “at this point.”

With less than a year left in office, O’Malley is without a clear destination. Thus far, his political career has moved swiftly — from Baltimore council member, to mayor, to Maryland governor — but now it’s uncertain what his next job will be. If it could be the presidency, he said, there’s no time to waste.


O’Malley would face a steep climb. He has barely registered in early presidential polling, and even in Maryland, Democratic voters preferred Clinton by a 7-to-1 ratio ina Washington Post survey last year. In aPost poll published in the past week, Clinton was the first choice for president for 73 percent of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents nationally.

Moreover, Clinton, a former U.S. senator and former secretary of state, remains the first choice of many Democrats in Maryland.

In a recent interview, state Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller Jr. (D-Calvert) said, “There are people like myself who think it’s Hillary’s time.” U.S. House Minority Whip Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) told Roll Call recently that he considers Clinton the “odds-on favorite of most Democrats if she runs.” Hoyer added that if she doesn’t run, he would support O’Malley, who would make an “excellent” president.

O’Malley has been working diligently to promote himself and boost his prospects. Late last year, he traveled to New Hampshire, where, at a Democratic dinner, he touted his record of fighting crime and drugs in Baltimore and pushing progressive causes at the State House in Annapolis, including the legalization of same-sex marriage.

h/t: John Wagner at Washington Post

Just shut the fuck up already, Mr. Nugent!


Ted Nugent: Obama is a ‘subhuman mongrel’ and deserves ‘just due punishment’ for treason (via

By David January 22, 2014 9:47 am Conservative rocker Ted Nugent said recently that he wouldn’t rest until President Barack Obama — who he called a “subhuman mongrel” — and of the all “liberal Democrats” had gotten the “just due punishment” that they…


Fox News can’t seem to talk about the Chris Christie bridge closure scandal without invoking Benghazi.

Fox & Friends devoted five segments during its January 10 broadcast to the growing scandal surrounding Republican Gov. Chris Christie and his administration’s involvement in deliberate traffic gridlock across the George Washington Bridge as political retribution against the mayor of Fort Lee, NJ.

But in every segment purporting to discuss Christie, the hosts and guests used the story to attack President Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton by bringing up the September 2012 attacks on U.S. facilities in Benghazi, Libya.  

h/t: MMFA