The Press Has Tried to Derail a Clinton Election with Fake "Scandals" Before...

[dutch508]

ericson00 (576 posts) http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251526331

The Press Has Tried to Derail a Clinton Election with Fake "Scandals" Before, and failed miserably!

Does anyone here remember how Bill Clinton beat Bob Dole nationally by 8.5% and won 379 electoral votes in 1996? Yet this was at the time after Susan McDougall and Jim Guy Tucker (whose removal gave us Huckabee) had been framed, and Hillary had been "the first First Lady to be subpoenaed" in early 1996, File/Travel "gates" were fresh in the minds of voters and other fake controversies had occurred? Constant GOP-led congressional investigations were also going on too and the Paula Jones show as well?

Yet all throughout the race, Clinton held large leads over Dole, in spite of equal opportunity vote-thief and mandate-killer pro-choice pro-gay anti-NAFTA pro-gun-control Perot (The lie about 1992 has also been debunked before). Clinton also spent the last week of the '96 trying to take back Congress, both house and Senate races (instead of innundating large media markets which woulda given him a bigger margin and total), which shrunk his margin of victory over Dole. But still, he won, repeated and cemented many electoral votes we take for granted today, but back in 1996, were revolutionary to be Dem given their 1968-1988 records (CA, IL, MI, NJ, PA, VT, ME, CT, MD, DE, NH, NM). And a win is a win is a win, bragging rights and "mandates" aside.

Oh yes, the Clintons were exonerated in Whitewater, File"gate,", Travel"gate,". You think the media is bad today? At least today we have bloggers, Facebook, and Twitter to debunk stuff to the world. Back then in 1996, we only had CNN and the nascent Fox News to give us the 24-hour politics/news fix.

You guys who claim Hillary has "baggage" make me sick. There's a reason why "where's the outrage" a la Bob Dole didn't work.

Yeah... Hillary is innocent. 

delrem (7,547 posts)
1. "You guys who claim Hillary has "baggage" make me sick."

Others are made sick by the baggage.
Esp. since in every case it's baggage created by choice.

But if you want to be Hillary Clinton's butler, to take care of her baggage - to make it somehow "not exist" - then hey, I like a good clown.

The Bernietrolls heard from.

7962 (5,308 posts)
7. Hillary was not exonerated at all, especially in the so-called travelgate.

Unless you also think OJ was innocent since he was found not guilty.
According to the prosecutor, there was "substantial evidence" that she was the impetus behind the firing of those people but they didnt feel it would be enough to convince a grand jury
Then there are the illegal fundraisers, rose law firm records, etc. Th email issue is hardly "fake".
Certainly the republicans have had their share of scandals too, but to simply dismiss ALL instances against Hillary as "fake" is ridiculous. No charges doesnt mean not guilty.

Meanwhile, I havent seen ANY investigations into ANY activities of Bernie Sanders from ANY time

tularetom (21,095 posts)
4. You're talking about a totally different Clinton

Bill Clinton had a sort of goofy charm. He had people skills and charisma up the wazoo. So even though his entire political career was marked by rumors and allegations, people were ready to cut him some slack. And he was fortunate to have an opponent like poor old Bob Dole.

Hillary Clinton is completely different. She has no charm, no charisma. People are far less likely to overlook her scandals than they were for Bill because she acts guilty. She comes across as paranoid, resentful and defensive. Her explanations are opaque and they change often as new facts emerge.

In the final analysis, Clinton scandals will stick to her a lot longer than they did for Bill because people just don't like her. Sure, she might have 99% support but 98% of it is from "lesser evil" voters, those who think that she is the only alternative.

She isn't Bill. He could bullshit his way out of this stuff because people warmed to him. She'll never be able to do that.

 

Scarsdale (497 posts)
8. Baggage?

There is not a single candidate for the WH who is "pure as the driven snow" Not ONE. How about the tainted governors Walker, Perry and Christie? Luckily, they are republicans, so they are given a pass. People expect more from Democratic contenders. They are held to a much higher standard. If W had not been a repub. he would still be unemployed, just as Reagan described him. He complained that Bush's son "not the governor of Florida, the unemployed one" was hanging around, looking for a job. If $arah PayMe had been a democratic politician, she would not even be a fly speck on the window by now. Instead she is spouting garbage on Facebook, and having Nancy French publish the same stuff pretending to be Bristol PayMe.

 

[txradioguy]

I think the MSM has given less time to the Hillary email scandals than they have the PP videos.

How in the hell are they "derailing? her?

[Rebel]

Scarsdale (497 posts)
8. Baggage?

There is not a single candidate for the WH who is "pure as the driven snow" Not ONE. How about the tainted governors Walker, Perry and Christie? Luckily, they are republicans, so they are given a pass. People expect more from Democratic contenders. They are held to a much higher standard.

 

[Patriot Guard Rider]

Luckily, they are republicans, so they are given a pass. People expect more from Democratic contenders. They are held to a much higher standard.

Exactly what planet is this idiot from? Dems are NEVER held to the same principle as a Republican. Alinsky tactic, "make the opposition abide by their rules" (paraphrased). If they were, Hillary would have been hounded out of the race 6 months ago.

[txradioguy]

Exactly what planet is this idiot from? Dems are NEVER held to the same principle as a Republican. Alinsky tactic, "make the opposition abide by their rules" (paraphrased). If they were, Hillary would have been hounded out of the race 6 months ago.

This is one of the reasons why we say the DUmmies live in an echo chamber.  Not only do they spout silly shit like that...primarily because they never talk to anyone but other Libtards...they actually believe it's true.

[Big Dog]

tu-ra-lu-ra-lu-ral primitive

4. You're talking about a totally different Clinton

Bill Clinton had a sort of goofy charm. He had people skills and charisma up the wazoo. So even though his entire political career was marked by rumors and allegations, people were ready to cut him some slack. And he was fortunate to have an opponent like poor old Bob Dole. 

Hillary Clinton is completely different. She has no charm, no charisma. People are far less likely to overlook her scandals than they were for Bill because she acts guilty. She comes across as paranoid, resentful and defensive. Her explanations are opaque and they change often as new facts emerge.

In the final analysis, Clinton scandals will stick to her a lot longer than they did for Bill because people just don't like her. Sure, she might have 99% support but 98% of it is from "lesser evil" voters, those who think that she is the only alternative. 

She isn't Bill. He could bullshit his way out of this stuff because people warmed to him. She'll never be able to do that.

"Dead Americans, national security breaches, and violations of federal law? What difference does it make? The real issue is the strawberries!"

[JohnnyReb]

Democrats are held to a higher standard....

[DumbAss Tanker]

Oh "The Press" has, has it?  Aside from Fox News, which I know none of you DUmmtards can watch without melting, I don't recall the press ever doing anything except shielding her from the consequences of her own arrogance and conceit, as best they could given that old saw about silk purses and sows' ears.

[obumazombie]

Bob Woodward has had just about enough static from the Hitlary camp.
When you start to lose a big and influential lib like Bob, you are slipping into deep trouble...

During an appearance on MSNBC’s Morning Joe on Monday, veteran journalist Bob Woodward expressed his frustration with Hillary Clinton’s private e-mail system and her continued refusal to turn over her server “reminds me of the Nixon tapes.” 
Woodward proclaimed it was “extraordinary” that of the 60,000 e-mails on Clinton’s server she “has said 30,000 of them, half, were personal and they were deleted.

Who decided that?
What's on those e-mails?”


The veteran journalist said he “would love to have all 60,000 read them, it would be a character study about her personal life and, also, what she did as Secretary of State” and then proceeded to note that Clinton’s e-mail setup has caused outrage within the Intel community:

You've got the FBI, you've got the inspector generals, you've got lots of people in government who are furious, because they spent hours being trained, like the example of Madeleine Albright.
You have to be careful about this.

Hillary Clinton went in -- I mean, what was the origin?
Who knew about this idea of using a private server?

When I first read about that, it's unimaginable.
Later in the segment, Woodward observed that Clinton’s refusal to turn over her server to the FBI was Nixonesque, and although she eventually handed it over, its contents will likely not be “pretty”:

So you've got a massive amount of data.
It, in a way, reminds me of the Nixon tapes.

Thousands of hours of secretly recorded conversations that Nixon thought were exclusively hers, his, that he was not going to get them.
Hillary Clinton initially took that position.

I'm not turning this over.
There's going to be no cooperation.

Now they're cooperating.
But, this is -- this has to go on a long, long time.

And the answers are probably not going to be pretty.
While Woodward did note that currently there are no charges against Clinton, he did stress that it was dishonest for her to claim that the investigation into her server was purely partisan:

[F]or Hillary Clinton to go out, as she did, in recent days and say, this is politics.
This is dirty politics.

They're trying to smear me in an unfair way, that dog will not hunt, at all.
You have got Barack Obama's government now investigating her and looking at this.

See relevant transcript below.

MSNBC’s Morning Joe

August 17, 2015

JOE SCARBOROUGH:
And Bob Woodward, obviously, you hear that not only from a lot of career diplomats, you also hear that, of course, off the record from an awful lot of people in the Intel agency, who just cannot believe how sloppily ((ala Sandy Burglar))all of this was handled.

BOB WOODWARD:
It's extraordinary.
And, again, it's the volume. 60,000 e-mails and Hillary Clinton has said 30,000 of them, half, were personal and they were deleted.

Who decided that?
What's on those e-mails?

I would love to have all 60,000, read them, it would be a character study about her personal life and, also, what she did as Secretary of State.
And let's step back for a moment the big question about Hillary Clinton is, who is she.

Is she this secretive, hidden person, or is she this valiant public servant?
Look at those 60,000 e-mails, and you're going to get some answers.

And there's a hydraulic pressure always in the system here.
You've got the FBI, you've got the inspector generals, you've got lots of people in government who are furious, because they spent hours being trained, like the example of Madeleine Albright.

You have to be careful about this. Hillary Clinton went in -- I mean, what was the origin?
Who knew about this idea of using a private server?

When I first read about that, it's unimaginable.

SCARBOROUGH:
And Bob, that's what I hear.
When you talk to people in the FBI and other Intel -- and people in Intel agencies, and even people that have worked at the State Department, they are furious that this was ever allowed to happen in the first place.

And that they didn't immediately seize -- we've been talking about this for a couple of days.
They're all asking the same question.

Why did they allow Hillary Clinton and David Kendall, her lawyer, to allow whether they were going to turn over that classified information or not?
I think this is unprecedented.



WOODWARD:
Well, it certainly is, but, I mean, follow the trail here.
You know, there are all of these e-mails.

Well, they were sent to someone or someone sent them to her.
So if things have been erased here, there's a way to go back to who originated these e-mails or who received them from Hillary Clinton.

So you've got a massive amount of data.
It, in a way, reminds me of the Nixon tapes.

Thousands of hours of secretly recorded conversations that Nixon thought were exclusively hers, his, that he was not going to get them.
Hillary Clinton initially took that position.

I'm not turning this over.
There's going to be no cooperation.

Now they're cooperating. But, this is -- this has to go on a long, long time.
And the answers are probably not going to be pretty.

NICOLLE WALLACE:
Bob, is there any legal jeopardy that her staffers would face, anywhere from a senior staffer who may have been aware of this or a low-level staffer, who may have simply been instructed to do something that turns out to be illegal, like take off the classification?

WOODWARD:
You know, I don't think that's really the question, but that's also a possibility.

WALLACE:
If you're a staffer it is, though.
I mean, worked in the White House staff during investigations.

It can be a scary place when an investigation like this picks up steam and the FBI gets involved.

WOODWARD:
That's exactly right.
That's why this, you know, who knows how long this is going to go on.

But, the other issue here is, for Hillary Clinton to go out, as she did, in recent days and say, this is politics.
This is dirty politics.

They're trying to smear me in an unfair way, that dog will not hunt, at all.
You have got Barack Obama's government now investigating her and looking at this.

Now, at the same time, nothing's been proven to be illegal and Rendell there had a good point that, you know, kind of slow down.
I think in the media and political environment we're in, where everything is driven by impatience and speed, that's going to not be possible.

But, they're going to have to get some answers.

full article...


http://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/jeffrey-meyer/2015/08/17/bob-woodward-hillary-e-mails-reminds-me-nixon-tapes#sthash.nWDQlui2.dpuf

[98ZJUSMC]

And he was fortunate to have an opponent like poor old Bob Dole.

'Ya think?

[JohnnyReb]

OH but these fake scandals ARE accurate.

[Ptarmigan]

The press is pushing Hillary Clinton. More so than Bernie Sanders.

[Patriot Guard Rider]

Democrats are held to a higher standard....

I have an older brother, retired, who is a bleeding heart liberal. He absolutely loves Obama and insists that it's the right wing out to get Hillary. His reasoning defies logic. In the face of the e-mails, wiping of servers, classified info on unsecured servers, he calls it a non-issue and he would vote for hitlary in a heartbeat. It's hard to believe we're related. He's of the "anyone with a D after their name must be staunchly defended and anyone with an R after their name must be mercilessly mocked" crowd.

[obumazombie]

The press cacophony and feeding frenzy are right on the verge of becoming voracious...

If she were anyone but a Clinton, would Hillary's campaign not be kaput?
Imagine:
you're a big Dem donor, elected official in an early primary state or grassroots organizer trying to decide whose bandwagon to jump on. 

You turn on Morning Joe today, and there's Ron Fournier, MSM member-in-good-standing and someone who's said he's voted for Clintons more than anyone in DC, saying about the email scandal that Hillary "might pay a big price criminally."
Schnikes!

Where did you say Bernie Sanders is appearing next? 
As baleful as Fournier was about Hillary's fortunes, something Joe Scarborough said might be even more ominous. 

Scarborough revealed that he's receiving emails from aides to President Obama who "cannot believe she keeps saying that this was okay with the White House . . . they cannot believe inside the Obama White House that she continues to act this way."

Consider:
all President Obama needs to do is raise an eyebrow at his Attorney General Lynch, and Hillary could be in indictment-land.

The segment began with clips from Hilllary's press conference of yesterday in which she disdained Ed Henry's question as to whether she wiped her server, answering "like with a cloth?" 
As she walked away from the mic, Hillary said back over her shoulder that "nobody has talked to me about it--other than you guys." 

Right.


ED HENRY:
Did you try to wipe the whole server?

HILLRY CLINTON:
I, I, I'm not --
I have no idea.

That's why we turned it over.

HENRY:
You were in charge of it. 
You were the official in charge.

Did you wipe the server?

HILLARY:
Well, like with a cloth or something?

HENRY:
I don't know.
I don't know how it works digitally.

Did you try to wipe the whole server?
 
HILLARY:
I don't know how it works digitally at all.

. . .

REPORTER: 
Is this an indication that this issue isn't going to go away for the remainder of your campaign?

HILLARY:
Nobody talks to me about it--other than you guys.

. . .

RON FOURNIER:
I know here's what's going to happen.
The FBI is looking into this.

The same person who prosecuted Petraeus is looking into this.
Coincidentally, the same person who represented Petraeus is now representing Hillary Clinton.

She's paying a big price politically.
And she might pay a big price criminally.

. . .

JOE:
I will tell you just for people at home that are wondering, well gee, is this partisan.
I don't think anybody thinks this is partisan anymore, cause the FBI.

I can tell you I get flooded with e-mails and if you want to know where a collection of gasps came up during Hillary Clinton's e-mail conference, I mean the conference?
The White House.

The White House, people working in the White House cannot believe she keeps saying that this was okay with the White House, that this was okay according to the law.
They cannot believe it.

Inside the Obama White House that she continues to act this way.

Hitlary probably hopes it will go away, but it is on the verge of achieving critical mass.


full article...


http://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/mark-finkelstein/2015/08/19/fournier-hillary-might-pay-big-price-criminally#sthash.p8TqZsaP.dpuf

[GOBUCKS]

And he was fortunate to have an opponent like poor old Bob Dole.

He was even more fortunate to have Ross Perot, the Trump-nut of the '90s, taking 10% of the vote.

[Patriot Guard Rider]

He was even more fortunate to have Ross Perot, the Trump-nut of the '90s, taking 10% of the vote.

I though Perot got 19% of the vote (with 0 electoral votes).

[GOBUCKS]

I though Perot got 19% of the vote (with 0 electoral votes).

He ran in 1992 and 1996. Got more votes in 1992 against Bush41.

He and the crazy, know-nothing wing of the Republican party elected Clinton twice.

He provided the blueprint the far left is following with Trump.

[SVPete]

It looks to me like the mountain of evidence has combined with Tsaritsa CHILL's natural UNcharm to create a critical mass sufficient to force the MSM to play catch-up and give this mess some of the coverage it deserves.

Whether HRC knowingly had classified info in her e-mails, did so unknowingly, broke preservation and disclosure laws, or "merely" violated State Department preservation and disclosure policies, it's a massive morass of illegalities and incompetencies. And then there's her two right-hand women ... I wonder how far they're willing go in taking falls for Tsaritsa CHILL.

[BlueStateSaint]

Well, there's this . . .

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/watchdog-two-national-security-laws-appear-broken-in-clinton-email-scandal/

[GOBUCKS]

More to the point, there is this:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/aug/19/monica-crowley-why-obama-is-trying-to-torpedo-hill/?page=all#pagebreak

Hillary's problems are entirely the work of the jug-eared Kenyan.

Get ready for President Slow Joe, i.e., the white Kenyan.

[BlueStateSaint]

More to the point, there is this:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/aug/19/monica-crowley-why-obama-is-trying-to-torpedo-hill/?page=all#pagebreak

Hillary's problems are entirely the work of the jug-eared Kenyan.

Get ready for President Slow Joe, i.e., the white Kenyan.

I had posted that in Politics this morning.

[Fourwinds]

The press doesn't really have to do a damn thing. If Hillary doesn't get the Presidency or even the nomination, it will be her fault alone. She alone put herself in the position of having all of this crap come home to roost.

[zeitgeist]

The press doesn't really have to do a damn thing. If Hillary doesn't get the Presidency or even the nomination, it will be her fault alone. She alone put herself in the position of having all of this crap come home to roost.

Dummies on both sides of the big divide have gone total paranoid.  As I posted on another thread (http://conservativecave.com/index.php?topic=103940.0) they are  paranoid that Hillary's campaign is "Rat F#cking" Barney Slanders.  They have convinced themselves not only are they under assault from the those nasty folk on the Right, there is also a fifth column movement in their ranks as Progressive Socialists.   If you have never seen this type paranoia play out it is something to behold.   Who is the rat?  Rizzo??   
Donald Segretti ??  Hillary?  Barney?  The Man??    More butter.

[miskie]

Any idiot can see what's coming..

Hillary has been very careful to always state that she 'never received or sent any emails MARKED AS classified' - Which makes it clear that the classified headers were stripped before sending the contents of the Emails.  Hillary will then play dumb, claim she had 'no idea' and toss everyone under the bus who sent the emails to her.

Even if they were sent because she requested them.

Wait and see..

[BlueStateSaint]

Any idiot can see what's coming..

Hillary has been very careful to always state that she 'never received or sent any emails MARKED AS classified' - Which makes it clear that the classified headers were stripped before sending the contents of the Emails.  Hillary will then play dumb, claim she had 'no idea' and toss everyone under the bus who sent the emails to her.

Even if they were sent because she requested them.

Wait and see..

The problem with that is because of the very nature of what was in those emails, she was supposed to know that the emails were Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information.  To plead ignorance of this would probably contradict some briefing (and something she signed, most probably) that she had received at some point in learning the SofS job.