Thread: Hillary in 2016 ?

Hillary A Diva, Told Secret Service Agent Who Refused To Carry Her Bag To “Get The F*ck Away From Me”…
Posted on 11 June, 2014 by Dylan Smythe



Daily Mail: If Hillary Clinton runs, and wins the Presidential race in 2016, the Republicans won’t be the only ones with agita. The Secret Service, who have tangled with Hillary since she became First Lady in 1993, will also be quaking in their lace-ups. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ll-expose.html

Hillary has been known to hurl a book at the back of the head of one agent driving her in the Presidential limo accusing him of eavesdropping, forget her p’s and q’s by never thanking her protectors and lob profanity-laced orders when she just wanted the agents to carry her bags – a job not on agents’ ‘to do’ list.

‘Stay the f**k away from me! Just f*****g do as I say!!!’ she is quoted as saying to an agent who refused to carry her luggage in the book Unlimited Access by FBI agent Gary Aldridge.

Compared to Hillary’s salty language, Bill Clinton was a gentleman, according to now-retired Secret Service agent, Dan Emmett, who began covering President Clinton on his first day in office in 1993 and writes about guarding the President in a new version of his book Within Arm’s Length, published by St. Martin’s Press.

http://weaselzippers.us/189368-hilla...-away-from-me/

http://gopthedailydose.com/2014/06/1...-get-fck-away/

“We came out of the White House not only dead broke, but in debt,” Clinton said. “We had no money when we got there, and we struggled to, you know, piece together the resources for mortgages, for houses, for Chelsea’s education. You know, it was not easy.”

Here’s why there won’t be a Hillary Pity Party

Written by Allen West on June 11, 2014

Poor Mrs. Clinton! She feels the suffering of all of us because she and Bill left the White House in debt with hardly a penny to their names! Yeah, riiight.

As Reince Priebus, RNC Chairman said, “Between an $8 million book advance and their family’s six-figure taxpayer-funded salary, it’s astonishing that Bill and Hillary Clinton thought they were broke. With Hillary Clinton bellyaching about her family’s finances, nobody will be attending her Pity Party.”



http://allenbwest.com/2014/06/heres-...ry-pity-party/

MSNBC Panel Mocks Hillary Clinton,But the Real Story is the Disturbing ‘Fact’ About Politics
June 11, 2014 By Jennifer Burke

This panel on MSNBC’s Morning Joe had quite a few laughs at Hillary Clinton’s expense. As they addressed the ridiculous claim by Clinton that she and Bill struggled after leaving the White House, going so far as to claim that they were ‘dead broke’ despite the fact that she received an $8 million advance on her book, the panelists mocked her for how ludicrous such a distortion of reality is.

Frank Bruni, from the New York Times, joins in the discussion and, aside from calling Hillary Clinton out for her stretching and changing of the truth, he says something even more curious and disturbing. Bruni says, at approximately the 36 second mark, that “in politics, it almost seems to go with the territory that you’re rich.”

Say what?

That comment made almost as an understood afterthought explains so much of what is wrong with Washington, D.C. and why Americans are struggling to make ends meet to help catapult our elected officials, so called ‘public servants’ to economic prosperity.




http://www.tpnn.com/2014/06/11/msnbc...bout-politics/

...



‘Please don’t tell me about how poor you are’: Glenn excoriates Hillary Clinton’s latest claims about being ‘dead broke’
Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 11:25 AM CDT

Ahead of the release of her memoir Hard Choices, former secretary of state Hillary Clinton has been making the rounds to discuss some of the more savory aspects of the book including the assertion that her family was “dead broke” when they left the White House in 2000 and why she deferred to “the experts” when it came to the September 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya. On radio this morning, Glenn struggled to reconcile Clinton’s remarks.

“I guess I can handle the Hillary Clinton stuff now – ease myself into it,” Glenn said. “We have to put good food in our body. Hillary Clinton is not good food. You are what you eat. I don’t want to be Hillary Clinton.”

While Clinton has appeared in several interviews on several networks already, they chose to focus on the Diane Sawyer interview that aired Monday night on ABC.

On the issue of Benghazi, Sawyer asked Clinton about the security threat Ambassador Chris Stevens faced. Clinton reiterated that Stevens was at the consulate by “his own choosing,” and refused to classify Benghazi as one of the most dangerous diplomatic posts.

It was important to have diplomatic assets. Were there security threats? Yes, and there are,” Clinton said. “There’s a long list of countries where there are security threats to Americans interests.”

When Sawyer asked if the consulate in Benghazi would be in the top 10 most dangerous, Clinton said “maybe in the top upper 10.”

“It wasn’t the top five, maybe the top upper 10,” Glenn said disgusted. “This person is such a politician, I can’t take it.”

One of the more surprising tidbits to come from Clinton’s book tour is the talking point that she and former President Bill Clinton were somehow “dead broke” upon leaving the White House. Considering, both Clintons command several hundred thousand dollars (minimum) for speaking engagements, and Hillary signed a $8 million book deal upon leaving the White House, her claims are hard to believe. Clinton has, however, doubled down on the claim.

“We came out of the White House not only dead broke, but in debt,” Clinton told Sawyer. “We had no money when we got there, and we struggled to, you know, piece together the resources for mortgages, for houses, for Chelsea’s education. You know, it was not easy.”

“Is that when she and Bill lived in the cardboard box under the bridge,” Pat quipped.

As she explained, Clinton believes it was better to make money through speaking engagements “than getting connected with any one group or company as so many people who leave public life do.”

“Please don’t tell me about how poor you are,” Glenn said. “’Honey, we’re going to have Hamburger Helper. Of course next week, we’re going to give that million-dollar speech and I guess we have my $8 million book deal. But we’re having Hamburger Helper this week. Nobody knows the trouble we’ve seen.’”

While there is absolutely nothing wrong with the Clintons using their clout to make money via speeches or anything else, it is utterly disingenuous when you consider the ‘income inequality,’ progressive narrative they preach.

“How disingenuous are these people in general? Here are people who come out and tell us all the time about income inequality… and campaign finance laws. We can’t have big money from these corporations influencing these campaigns,” Stu explained. “[Yet] she will sit here for the next year making $200,000 speeches… which she can use, if needed, for her campaign. [The money is] coming directly from corporations… It will go around all the campaign finance laws that they wrote. It will go against all the premises of income and equality they fight for so hard and nobody will say anything. It’s infuriating.”

The silver lining in this otherwise infuriating situation? You many recall Clinton tried – and failed – to run for president just six years ago. “The positive reminder here is, while everyone is telling you this woman is an absolute shoe in into president already, remember the reason she’s not our current president is because she is awful,” Stu concluded. “She blew it last time. She could easily blow it again this time. She’s not likable.”

http://www.glennbeck.com/2014/06/10/...ng-dead-broke/

....and why she deferred to “the experts” when it came to the September 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya...

If she - as Sect of State - felt that she didn't know what to do ... and "deferred to experts" ... then why in the world would we want her in the Oval Office. Face it- the three o'clock call came - Hillary hung up on the caller while BO rolled over and went back to sleep.

,,,

The Clinton's "left the White House" and moved into three separate, multi-million dollar estates (and they have overseas estates as well). While on a visit to the WHouse in 2007, I was admiring an original painting when a staff member told me that it was one of the pieces of art taken by the Clinton's when they departed the WHouse. The donor of the painting (a well-known movie producer) personally went to the Clinton's to "retrieve the painting" and return it to the White House curator. This statement by Ms Clinton is (1) false and (2) underscores why she should NOT be in charge of the Federal Budget.

..

Bill also gets a tax free $200,000.00 a year pension. So while i dont consider $200,000/year rich a $16,000.00/month income is lot deffirent then being broke....

..

As career public "servants" they have pensions from each of their prior jobs, totaling hundreds of thousands per year for the rest of their lives. POTUS and Governor don't exactly pay small potatoes for pensions, and that was before she picked up some pensions of her own for Senator and SecState.

The only reason they could be "broke" would be if they'd incurred debts exceeding their substantial income, which wouldn't be surprising considering how they manage money while in office.

..

Glenn, people have forgotten the deal the Clintons negotiated for their house in Chappaqua, N.Y. The mortgage payment was 10 k / month. They provided office space for the Secret Service detail on the property. They charged the Secret Service rent .... 10 k / month. No former President had ever done this before or since. Watch out for the Obama's .

CNN Admits to Giving Hillary Clinton a ‘Free Ride’
June 14, 2014 By TPNN Staff Writer

As the hosts at CNN speculate on whether or not Hillary Clinton will run for office and when she’ll make that announcement, Chris Cuomo makes an admission about the the ‘Democrat Media Complex’ that many of us have know all along. Rather than report the news, good or bad involving people on both sides of the aisle, they instead act as cheerleaders for the selected Leftist people they want to prop up and protect.

During the discussion about Hillary ‘freezing pockets,’ preventing big donors from donating to anyone else as long as they are not sure if she is going to run, Cuomo makes this stunning admission. While their actions and failure to cover certain news, even huge news like the VA Scandal, Benghazi, among numerous other things, makes their allegiance to the Democrat party obvious, to hear him say it, while laughing about it, is pretty astounding.



http://www.tpnn.com/2014/06/14/video...n-a-free-ride/

comments

So CNN is now openly admitting they are no longer a news organization? The only surprise is that they admitted it.

..

A news organization is supposed to be impartial - just another reason CNN is losing credibility.

..

This is unbelievable! Wait, no it's not! This is CNN, right? They have just admitted they never were a news agency. This extreme bias just proves that that they are socialists and will say and do anything for the liberal democrats!!! It doesn't matter if it's right or wrong or whether or not they really believe in Hillary as a candidate!

..

Don't hold your breath for the FCC to talk about fairness in the licensing airwaves.

Hillary's WAR on WOMEN claims a 12-year old VICTIM.
Hear how she TRASHED a young RAPE victim and actually LAUGHED about it.
Can this be any more SICK?

http://www.tpnn.com/2014/06/17/video...d-rape-victim/

Hillary's Laughing Defense of Child Rapist:
Not a Front-Page WashPost Story Like Romney's Alleged Teen Haircut
By Tim Graham | June 17, 2014 | 09:01

The same Washington Post that suggested it was dramatic front-page news in 2012 that Mitt Romney cut another student’s hair in high school in 1965 didn’t find front-page news in Hillary Clinton laughing about defending a child rapist in the 1970s.

The Post had a front-page story Tuesday on backlogs of rape kits, but the backlog of Hillary’s old tapes on defending a man who raped a 12-year-old girl was consigned to a page 2 column by Melinda Henneberger. The “Hillary Tapes” scoop is the latest from Alana Goodman at the Washington Free Beacon. (Audio below.) The Post liked Richard Nixon’s tapes much more.



Henneberger’s column was titled “Making hay out of Hillary Clinton’s defense of a rape suspect.” The online headline is more specific: “Conservatives are making hay out of Hillary Clinton’s defense of an accused rapist.” When the Post rips into a Republican, it’s not “liberals making hay,” it’s “objective” journalists making history.

But first, here’s what Goodman reported on Hillary representing a 41-year-old rapist as a favor to a prosecutor:

“It was a fascinating case, it was a very interesting case,” Clinton says in the recording. “This guy was accused of raping a 12-year-old. Course he claimed that he didn’t, and all this stuff.”

Describing the events almost a decade after they had occurred, Clinton’s struck a casual and complacent attitude toward her client and the trial for rape of a minor. “I had him take a polygraph, which he passed – which forever destroyed my faith in polygraphs,” she added with a laugh.

Clinton can also be heard laughing at several points when discussing the crime lab’s accidental destruction of DNA evidence that tied Taylor to the crime. “We’re hired guns,” Ronald D. Rotunda, a professor of legal ethics at Chapman University, told the Washington Free Beacon. “We don’t have to believe the client is innocent … our job is to represent the client in the best way we can within the bounds of the law.”

However, Rotunda said, for a lawyer to disclose the results of a client’s polygraph and guilt is a potential violation of attorney-client privilege. “You can’t do that,” he said. “Unless the client says: ‘You’re free to tell people that you really think I’m a scumbag, and the only reason I got a lighter sentence is because you’re a really clever lawyer.’”

Underneath the “conservatives making hay” bluster, Henneberger acknowledged this is not a winning issue for a candidate trying to preserve a carefully polished image of a feminist defender of children. Henneberger also saw parallels to the "narcissistic loony toon" remarks Hillary had for a certain White House intern:

Some are writing off the remarks, as one fellow journalist put it on social media, as “typical gonzo defense lawyer talk.”

It is not, however, typical talk for a lifelong defender of women and children.

Nor was Clinton’s defense plan, mapped out in a court affidavit. In it, she questioned the credibility of the victim and suggested that the sixth-grader, who an ER doctor said showed injuries consistent with rape, had “a tendency to seek out older men.”

“I have been informed that the complainant is emotionally unstable,’’ Clinton wrote in the affidavit, “with a tendency to seek out older men and to engage in fantasizing.” The document, filed with the Washington County, Arkansas court on July 28, 1975, argued for a psychiatric evaluation for the victim.

“I have also been informed that she has in the past made false accusations about persons, claiming they had attacked her body,’’ Clinton wrote. “Also that she exhibits an unusual stubbornness and temper when she does not get her way.”

The “little bit nutty, little bit slutty’’ defense has a long, ugly history. It’s jarring to see it trotted out against a kid by a future feminist icon. The argument also bears an uncomfortable similitary to Clinton White House descriptions of Monica Lewinsky, who without that semen stain on her little blue dress would have been dismissed as a stalker who had fantasized that she had a relationship with President Bill Clinton....

In 2008, reporter Glenn Thrush wrote a long piece for Newsday about the case. After midnight on May 10, 1975, Taylor and his 20-year-old cousin visited a home where the 12-year-old victim was having a sleepover, and invited her to come out for a drive. Later, a 15-year-old boy that the victim apparently had a crush on joined them.

According to the Newsday piece, Taylor fed the victim whiskey and Coke, then drove his red Chevy pickup to a “weedy ravine” where the attack occurred. The 15-year-old told authorities that he had sex with the girl, and believed that Taylor had, too. At one point, the victim reportedly yelled, “You all planned this, didn’t you?”

“I never sought out older men,’’ the adult victim told Newsday in 2008. She said she had never before accused anyone of assault. “I was raped,” she told Thrush, in an attack that she felt had contributed to a suicide attempt about a year later and to decades of depression and other problems.

Clinton’s spokesman declined to comment.

Henneberger put her political analyst’s hat on at the end. “Defending even a child rapist as vigorously as possible might be a plus if she were running to lead the American Bar Association. But wouldn’t her apparent willingness to attack a sixth-grader compromise a presidential run?”

She guessed no, since “reaction to the tape has been so partisan.” She cited “shrugs” from the critics of Todd Akin’s garbled “legitimate rape” comments in 2012, versus fury from “many who were silent or untroubled by Akin’s remarks.” In reality, MRC's Brent Bozell said the remarks were "completely inappropriate" -- and then blasted the overwhelming bias that came with them.

It’s funny. The Post seems to offer “shrugs” today aside from this column tucked inside the paper. But back in 2012, in the midst of more than a hundred stories flooding the Akin zone, they put Akin on the front page under the headline “Republicans look to force Akin out of Senate race.”

What the Post never considers is that its own behavior transparently exposes them as standing among the partisans, not away from them.

NBC, CBS and ABC's evening and morning shows devoted an astonishing 88 minutes (or 40 segments) of coverage to Congressman Akin's "legitimate rape" remark in the first three days. Will anyone on TV notice the latest Free Beacon scoop on Hillary?

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-gra...#ixzz34x7vgaa5

Clinton Bristled at Benghazi Deception
By Edward Klein - June 22, 2014


Klein explains what happened the night of the Benghazi attack — and Hillary's reaction. In his new book, “Blood Feud,” journalist Edward Klein gets inside the dysfunctional, jealous relationship between Bill and Hillary Clinton and Barack and Michelle Obama. Here, he explains what happened the night of the Benghazi attack.

By 10 p.m. on Sept. 11, 2012, when Hillary Clinton received a call from President Obama, she was one of the most thoroughly briefed officials in Washington on the unfolding disaster in Benghazi, Libya.

She knew that Ambassador Christopher Stevens and a communications operator were dead, and that the attackers had launched a well-coordinated mortar assault on the CIA annex, which would cost the lives of two more Americans.

She had no doubt that a terrorist attack had been launched against America on the anniversary of 9/11. However, when Hillary picked up the phone and heard Obama’s voice, she learned the president had other ideas in mind. With less than two months before Election Day, he was still boasting that he had al Qaeda on the run.

If the truth about Benghazi became known, it would blow that argument out of the water.

“Hillary was stunned when she heard the president talk about the Benghazi attack,” one of her top legal advisers said in an interview. “Obama wanted her to say that the attack had been a spontaneous demonstration triggered by an obscure video on the Internet that demeaned the Prophet Mohammed.

This adviser continued: “Hillary told Obama, ‘Mr. President, that story isn’t credible. Among other things, it ignores the fact that the attack occurred on 9/11.’ But the president was adamant. He said, ‘Hillary, I need you to put out a State Department release as soon as possible.’”

After her conversation with the president, Hillary called Bill Clinton, who was at his penthouse apartment in the William J. Clinton Presidential Library in Little Rock, and told him what Obama wanted her to do.

“I’m sick about it,” she said, according to the legal adviser, who was filled in on the conversation.

“That story won’t hold up,” Bill said. “I know,” Hillary said. “I told the president that.” “It’s an impossible story,” Bill said. “I can’t believe the president is claiming it wasn’t terrorism. Then again, maybe I can. It looks like Obama isn’t going to allow anyone to say that terrorism has occurred on his watch.”

Hillary’s legal adviser provided further detail: “During their phone call, Bill started playing with various doomsday scenarios, up to and including the idea that Hillary consider resigning as secretary of state over the issue. But both he and Hillary quickly agreed that resigning wasn’t a realistic option.

If her resignation hurt Obama’s chances of winning re-election, her fellow Democrats would never forgive her. Hillary was already thinking of running for president in 2016, and her political future, as well as Obama’s, hung in the balance.”


Modal Trigger


Obama had put Hillary in a corner, and she and Bill didn’t see a way out. And so, shortly after 10 o’clock on the night of September 11, she released an official statement that blamed the Benghazi attack on an “inflammatory (video) posted on the Internet.”

The Benghazi Deception was in full swing.

“Blood Feud: The Clintons vs. the Obamas” by Edward Klein is out this week from Regnery Publishing.

http://nypost.com/2014/06/22/clinton...eception-book/

:snort: Two years after the fact ... as she is setting up for her next campaign ... this "comes to light". Let me be the first to point a finger and call "BS".

..

Originally Posted by hblueeyes

she played along so i guess she wasn't that sick about it.

Me

exactly. She lied straight to the faces of the families ... including the family of Ambassador Christopher Stevens, whom she 'claims' to have been a close personal friend. With "friends" like that ... who needs enemies ?

Originally Posted by Jolie Rouge

Hillary Clinton: Deport The Illegal Children Back To Central America
Probable Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton broke with President Obama on a key policy issue Tuesday...

Probable Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton broke with President Obama on a key policy issue Tuesday, claiming the unprecedented number of illegal children flooding into the United States must be deported and returned to their families in Central America.

For years, parents in crime-ridden Central American nations have been sending their children up through Mexico alone to cross the American border.

Driven in part by rhetoric emanating from the White House, these parents believe their children will be safe in the United States and won’t be turned away.

But thousands of these young people — many mere toddlers — die while trekking through Central America and Mexico on their own.

The flood recently became too much for the White House to hide, spilling into warehouses run by the Border Patrol, the Department of Homeland Security and a partnership of other public and private agencies. And the deluge shows no signs of abating.

President Obama and Vice President Biden have both shied away from solutions to the problem. But in a CNN town hall broadcast on Tuesday, Hillary Clinton diverged significantly from her former boss.

“Hard choice,” asked CNN’s Christiane Amanpour. “Let them stay in the United States or send them back?”

“Well, two quick points,” the former secretary of state replied. “One, the numbers are increasing dramatically. And the main reason I believe why that’s happening is that the violence in certain of those Central American countries is increasing dramatically.”

“Should they be able to stay here?” Amanpour pressed. “It’s safer.”

“Well, it — it may be safer, but that’s not the answer,” Clinton responded.


http://dailycaller.com/2014/06/17/hi...ntral-america/

See http://www.bigbigforums.com/news-inf...rcement-9.html Hillary prepping for her campaign ...

why did it take him edward klein to come out with this info? was he waiting to use this info for his monetary benefit? wonder whose book will sell better.

Sluggish sales for Hillary’s new book
http://nypost.com/2014/06/17/sluggis...arys-new-book/

i wonder who in washington will write a book about famous falsehoods that politicians want you to believe......