View Full Version : Hillary Clinton - "in the news"

The Bobster
11-16-2015, 04:48 PM

Hillary is ‘often confused,’ says trusted aide Huma in fresh emails
By Marisa Schultz
November 16, 2015 | 5:00pm

Huma Abedin and Hillary Clinton in Iowa on Nov. 14. Photo: Reuters

WASHINGTON – Hillary Clinton’s longtime aide said her boss is “often confused” and needs plenty of guidance to understand the schedule, according fresh emails out Monday.

Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group, released new emails from Huma Abedin that show her concern among her State Department staff on making sure Clinton knew whom to call.

In one email exchange on Jan. 26, 2013, Abedin asks fellow staffer Monica Hanley whether Clinton knows to call Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

Hanley replies: “She was in bed for a nap by the time I heard that she had an 8am call. Will go over with her.”

Abedin stresses the importance of reviewing the schedule with Clinton: “Very imp to do that. She’s often confused.”

It’s not the first time the word “confused” has been used to describe the Democratic presidential front-runner and former top diplomat. Clinton herself admits she gets confused and even apologizes to her staff for mix-ups while she was Secretary of State.

The emails Clinton kept on her private email server and turned over to the State Department reveal a Clinton who is often stumped by technology — needing help with mobile devices, faxes and calls. A Post review of the disclosed emails show she’s also confused by her schedule.

On May 31, 2010, Clinton emailed Abedin on the timing of her meetings and travel schedule. After a back and forth over the time, she writes: “Ok but I’m confused since I remember talking w Lona about changing to 8 tonight.”

On Sept. 23, 2009, Clinton is emailing with chief of staff Cheryl Mills about an upcoming State Department senior leadership retreat. After reviewing the draft agenda, Clinton was thrown by whether Deputy Secretary of State Jim Steinberg would be there for an earlier presentation. “I’m confused–will he be there in am? Can he be urged to reschedule whatever else he has and come?”

Judicial Watch had filed several federal lawsuits for access to emails from Clinton’s private email server, including those of Abedin.

“Huma Abedin’s description of Hillary Clinton as ‘easily confused’ tells you all you need to know why it took a federal lawsuit to get these government emails from Clinton’s illegal email server,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement.

In emails Clinton turned over herself to the State Department, she apologizes several times for confusing her staff.

In an email to Daniel Baer on Dec. 13, 2009, Clinton said sorry for not making her edits clear on an upcoming speech. “I just looked at the first page and noticed I hadn’t crossed out the last typed line–did that confuse you?”

The emails show how Clinton, who is often perceived as polished and rehearsed, makes mistakes when emailing about foreign affairs.

A day earlier, Dec. 12, 2009, Clinton apologized for confusing Guinea and Morocco in an email. She sends a note to three staffers, including an assistant Secretary of State Jeffrey Feltman. “Good catch, Jeff! Yes–two issues. there will be a contact group about Guinea that the French want us to be strong on too. Sorry for the confusion.”

The Bobster
11-28-2015, 02:50 PM
Hillary Clinton’s million little lies (http://nypost.com/2015/11/28/hillary-clintons-million-little-lies/)
By Michael Walsh
November 28, 2015 | 2:26pm

Hillary Clinton's latest "little" lie? Apparently, she'd like you to believe that she tried to join the Marines in 1975.

To hear Hillary Clinton tell it, she was named for Sir Edmund Hillary, the conqueror of Mount Everest — even though she was already 6 years old when he made his famous ascent.

On a visit to war-torn Bosnia in 1996, she claimed she and her entourage landed under sniper fire and had to run “with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base” — although videos of her arrival show her waltzing serenely across the tarmac, waving to the crowd.

She blamed the 2012 attack on American diplomatic and intelligence-gathering installations in Benghazi on “a disgusting video” when she knew almost from the first moment that it was a jihadist assault that took the lives of four Americans, including the ambassador to Libya.

No wonder the late William Safire, writing in The New York Times in 1996, at the height of the Whitewater investigation, called her a “congenital liar.” Said Safire: “She is in the longtime habit of lying; and she has never been called to account for lying herself or in suborning lying in her aides and friends.”

Baron Munchausen has nothing on Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Now comes the recycling this month of another Clinton tall tale: that shortly before her 1975 marriage to Bill Clinton, she decided in a fit of patriotic fervor and dedication to “public service” to stroll into a recruiter’s office in Arkansas and join the Marine Corps.

It’s an anecdote she trots out to charm military audiences, whether it’s a group on Capitol Hill in 1994, or, most recently, to veterans in Derry, NH.

“He looks at me and goes, ‘Um, how old are you,’ ” Clinton recalled at the New Hampshire event on Nov. 10. “I said, ‘Well, I’m 26. I will be 27.’ And he goes, ‘Well, that is kind of old for us.’ And then he says to me, and this is what gets me, ‘Maybe the dogs will take you,’ meaning the Army,” she added.

Yeah, right. Never mind that the term is “dogface,” used to refer to the Army infantry. And never mind as well that, given the tenor of the times, the Marines or any other service would have taken young Ms. Rodham in a heartbeat, especially given their need for lawyers.

Like so many carefully parsed Clintonian statements, Hillary’s Leatherneck fantasy is either unverifiable or dependent upon how it’s phrased. When confronted with the obvious discrepancy in her “Edmund Hillary” story, she characteristically shifted the blame to her mother, Dorothy, saying the fable was something her mother told her.

But let’s assume for a moment that, unlike Clinton’s other whoppers, this story is actually, in some sense, true.

What are the odds that, in the immediate aftermath of Vietnam, the anti-war Wellesley graduate, who’d written her college senior thesis on “community organizer” Saul Alinsky, had a snazzy Yale Law degree, and who was already envisioning a career in state and national politics alongside Bill (then a candidate for Arkansas attorney general), would do such a thing — and actually mean it?

I’m betting zero.

A far more likely explanation is that Hillary entered the Marine recruiting office — if she did — not out of any desire to “serve her country,” but as an agent provocateur, determined to show that the Marines were a bunch of bigoted sexist, ageist pigs in order to fuel her sense of outrage.

This explanation is given credence by one of Hillary’s Fayetteville, Ark., friends at the time, Ann Henry, who said that Hillary was interested in probing the way the military treated women candidates. “I can remember discussing it, but I cannot give you the details of when and what was said,” Henry told a reporter. “Hillary would go and do things just to test it out, and I can totally see her doing that just to see what the reaction was.”

Given the mood of the time, and the vituperative nastiness of the left regarding all things military, it would have been just like the self-aggrandizing Hillary Rodham to try and manufacture a controversy where there was none, to make herself look good.

And now she allegedly recasts the story as a legitimate desire to join the military, to show her dedication to public service. Is the story true? And if it is true, were her motives as described?

What difference does it make!

The late Christopher Hitchens titled his memoir of the Whitewater/Monica Lewinsky circus “No One Left to Lie To,” but even someone as perceptive as Hitch couldn’t foresee that the Clintons, like cockroaches and the Kardashians, would always be with us, forever playing the same shell game on the American people and laughing as we fall for it.

That would be the same Clintons (combined current net worth: $101 million) who were “dead broke” when they left the White House.

The Bobster
01-01-2016, 06:23 AM

Hillary called author of critical book ‘totally wacko’: email
By Geoff Earle
January 1, 2016 | 1:59am

WASHINGTON — Hillary Clinton and her aides expressed displeasure when they heard controversial author Ed Klein was publishing another unflattering book about her, according to new emails released Thursday. :p

Klein’s name surfaced in a batch of 5,500 Clinton emails dumped by the State Department at 4 p.m. on New Year’s Eve.

“Our old Ed Klein is back with another book,” Clinton aide Philippe Reines wrote to the then-secretary of state in May 2012. “I assume . . . I can call bulls–t on him?”

“Righto — totally wacko :rolleyes:,” Clinton responded from her account, which shows up as being from “Evergreen.”

Klein had written a book about Clinton in 2005 called “The Truth About Hillary” and a book in 2012 about President Obama called “The Amateur,” which included criticisms of both Hillary and Bill Clinton, as well as Obama.

The department said it had posted 82 percent of the *emails that were on Hillary Clinton’s private server, but acknowledged it hadn’t completely met a court order of scheduled releases. :mad:

The Bobster
01-02-2016, 07:49 AM

Hillary Clinton’s $13M fail as Secretary of State
By Post Editorial Board
January 1, 2016 | 11:21pm

It turns out that Bill Clinton raked in millions from entities with matters before Hillary Clinton’s State Department. Oh, and the Clinton Foundation collected millions more from the same bunch.

In total, The Wall Street Journal reports, two dozen companies and groups, plus the Abu Dhabi government, gave Bill more than $8 million for speeches, even as they were hoping for favorable treatment from Hillary’s bureaucracy. And 15 of them also gave at least $5 million total to the foundation.

At her confirmation hearing, questioners raised the issue of her hubby’s global business. Hillary vowed to take “extraordinary steps . . . to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest.”

Count 13 million record fails for those “extraordinary steps.”

Hillary’s solemn promise recalls a line from George R.R. Martin: “Words are wind.” Heck, it must be the House Clinton slogan.

The issue first arose thanks to Peter Schweizer’s book, “Clinton Cash.”

“The really troubling thing about Bill’s speeches is the apparent correlation between his fees and Hillary’s decisions during her tenure as secretary of state,” he wrote.

“The timing of the payments, the much-higher-than-average size of some of them, and the subsequent actions taken by Hillary raise serious questions about just what those who underwrote these exorbitant fees were actually paying for.”

Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon says “no evidence exists” connecting State Department actions under Hillary to Bill’s lucrative speeches.

“No evidence” — there’s a compelling defense, right up there with “no smoking gun.”

But enough evidence exists to prove the Clintons are dedicated to blurring every possible ethical line. It’s “two for the price of one” — and anyone with the cash can buy.