The Rant: Same Old Clintons

Capitol Hill Blue ^ | September 16, 2003 | DOUG THOMPSON

[arj]

Bill Clinton is back on the campaign trail, stumping for Democratic Presidential candidates in Iowa. Looks like he’s back up to a few of his other tricks too.

Commenting on the Bush tax-cut package, Clinton told a campaign crowd “I never had a nickel until I left the White House.”

Same Bill Clinton. Same pack of lies.

All you have to do is look at the last financial disclosure statement Clinton filed before leaving the White House on January 20, 2001. It shows Bubba left 1600 Pennsylvania a rich man, with a net worth somwhere between $1 million and $5 million (financial disclosures are not precise. They only require a range of values).

During his last year in office, Clinton and his wife accepted $191,027 in gifts and Hillary signed an $8 million book deal while still First Lady. Plus the 200 grand a year that Clinton made as President ain’t exactly small change, especially when he didn’t pay rent for eight years and lived on others people’s money (namely, the taxpayers).

In other words, Clinton lied – another bald-faced, “who gives a damn” lie from the man who once stood in front of the American people and claimed “I did not have sex with that woman – Ms. Lewinsky” when he was getting more nooky than a drunken frat boy on Spring Break.

Maybe he just can’t help. Maybe a lifetime of lying has left Bill Clinton so morally bankrupt that he has lost the ability to separate truth from fiction, fantasy from reality, outright lies from even a modicum of truth.

Such prevarications run in the family. Hillary’s fantasy tome, Living History, belonged in the novels section of bookstores. Her attempt to reinvent history in real time left even the most jaded of Democrats laughing and wondering how she could keep a straight face during her many promotional tours.

But the Clintons have never had much use for truth or cared that their jobs were supposed to be about public service. Politics, to both, has always been about cashing in, about taking advantage of opportunities, about living large off the public dole.

Since leaving office, Clinton rakes in $9.5 million a year in speaking fees while living off a huge federal pension and traveling with taxpayer-funded Secret Service agents who are treated more like servants than professionals protecting an ex-President.

And even though Hillary is now a U.S. Senator who claims to be making it on her own, she insists on keeping her Secret Service detail as well. Agents from both details frequently request reassignment and complain about being treated shabbily by the Clintons.

In October 2001, Senator Clinton, angry over having to wait in line at a security check point at Westchester Airport in New York, ordered the Secret Service Agent driving her limo to drive past the officers checking cars. The car struck a police officer, injuring his shoulder.

During promotional tours for her book, Secret Service agents closed book stores before each of her appearances to conduct security sweeps and then set up screening checkpoints for customers entering the stores. Store employees complained Senator Clinton ordered them around like servants.

Bookstore managers complained the security procedures cost them business and money and many stores cancelled such appearances after word got around about the Senator’s haughty attitude.

“I’d had Pulitzer-prize winning authors here and none demanded such special treatment and deference,” complained the manager of one New York area Barnes & Noble. “I won’t have her here again.”

Perhaps what Bill Clinton should have told those campaign crowds in Iowa was that he left the White House without a nickel “of his own.”

After all, money stolen is not money earned and that stolen money was not really his or his wife’s.

They didn’t earn it or deserve it, but they took it anyway.

Which is what thieves usually do.

© Copyright 2003 by Capitol Hill Blue

[arj]

Wonder how this column will fit with the popular perception at FR that Thompson has crossed over to the Dark Side and become a stooge of DU.

[banjo joe]

complained the manager of one New York area Barnes & Noble. “I won’t have her here again.”

Bold statement... will be interesting to watch this person over the next few years to see what misfortune befalls.

[Ronin]

Bump.

[Diogenesis]

[alnick]

Doug Thompson is not credible. The fact that he dislikes Clinton doesn't change that.

[At _War_With_Liberals]

"“I never had a nickel until I left the White House.”


From Trailer to WH...to multimillionaire.

He proudly said, now that I am so rich I am happy to pay my fair share.

Its alot easier to deal with high taxes when you still have 10 million of wealth in the bank and endless income potential.

[Liz]

During promotional tours for her book, Secret Service agents closed book stores before each of her appearances to conduct security sweeps and then set up screening checkpoints for customers entering the stores. Store employees complained Senator Clinton ordered them around Bookstore managers complained the security procedures cost them business and money and many stores cancelled such appearances after word got around about the Senator’s haughty attitude. “I’d had Pulitzer-prize winning authors here and none demanded such special treatment and deference,” complained the manager of one New York area Barnes & Noble. “I won’t have her here again.”

Isn't that odd (/sarcasm)? No mention of this cropped up while Hilly was basking in adulation during the book tour promotion. Just goes to show what good advance PR can do. Also raises the eternal question about actual sales of the book and whether PR flacks artifically created sales and possibly numbers. Guess we'll know when she fills out her Senate financial statements.

[arj]

"Doug Thompson is not credible. The fact that he dislikes Clinton doesn't change that."

I've been reading Thompson's columns since he wrote for newspapers in Illinois back in the 1970s. The fact that he doesn't play favorites has always been what I've admired most. I don't agree with everything he says, but I like the way he says it.

Yeah, he screwed up on the story about the CIA briefings and he admitted it. He also wrote a column about Bush that he later regretted and he pulled the column and apologized. But when I weigh those two mistakes against the many stories Capitol Hill Blue ran exposing the Clintons and their series on the Congress ("America's Criminal Class"), I realize Thompson is like a turtle. He only makes progress when he sticks his neck out.

I agree with the assessment of Scott Hogenson of CNSNews.com, who called Thompson's retraction of the CIA briefing story "one of the classiest I've ever read."

I respect Hogenson and CNS News. I also trust Joseph Farah and Jon Doughterty at WorldNetDaily and they often cite Thompson and Capitol Hill Blue. If they can trust Thompson, so can I.

[Conspiracy Guy]

I have to get back to work on my book about Buddy, the dog who knew too much. The title is "Living Hell, the diary of Buddy, First Dog."

[Miss Marple]

I don't care what Doug Thompson has to say about anything. He is attempting to restore his credibility with an easily-written critique of the Clintons.

It doesn't fly with me. Saying "The Clintons are icky" doesn't make up for his two deliberate hit pieces on the president, both of which were uncalled for, and the last one was full of lies. I don't believe his source ever existed. The only reason he apologized was because he was caught in the lie.

[alnick]

So you think that the sole source of Thompson's article who turned out to be non-existent is an innocent mistake, regardless of the fact that the source who turned out to be non-existent has been used by Thompson for years. Okay. To each his own.

[Liz]

......oh, oh, Buddy might be ripe for Arkancide.....if he could talk, that is.......

[Gritty]

“I never had a nickel until I left the White House.” - WJ Clinton

The two grifters are still at it.

[Conspiracy Guy]

He couldn't talk but he could type (poorly) Here is the forward and first few diary entries.

Forward by the human member of the writing team.

This is a work of fiction, it is intended as satire. Though it is purely a fabrication by me, the story does bear a striking resemblence to real life. This is puely coincidental. People tell me that if you really like the Clintons, you shouldn't read this book! I repeat DO NOT READ THIS BOOK! It will make you angry. Just not as angry as they made me. I have a strong dislike for the Clintons and find them to be an embarassment to America. As far as I know none of this happened except in the fertile mine of your's truly, a dog lover. If this book makes Bill or Hillary mad, GREAT.

Technical note. My dog assisted me in translating Buddy's diary. Knowing that a Lab types by aiming their second toe on rightfront paw at the desired letter and then they press space bar with front paw after each right paw press, she and I were able to bring this to you. Example ghjk, is the letter h. This and the space after each letter made the text 5 times longer than the end product. Buddy spoke only a little English (from lack of daily human contact), so LulaBelle had to interpret a lot of his native language.

Email from Ruth (her dog name not her human name)

Dear Flurry, I am forwarding the attached to you in the hope that you and your dog Lula Belle can translate the diary of my son Leopold (better know as Buddy) into human language for the world to see. I received his email and the diary the night before he was reported killed. He knew he was in danger and wanted me to have his diary. I wasn't going to do anything about it until the demon Hillary released her crappy book "Living History" which she didn't even write. The money she got is ridiculus so I am going to get back at her and the Doofus Bill for abusing my little baby. Please do your best to get the truth out. Send me no money. Thanks Ruth

Email from Buddy to Ruth

Mom, I am sending you a copy of my diary, attached. I overheard Doofus on the phone this afternoon telling someone "this dog has to go he knows too much". I don't know what the plan is so I'll have to be wary. If I get a chance I'll make a run for freedom. If I don't make it please know that I love you. Leopold

Note from Lula Belle

Reading Leopold's diary has been very difficult because it is so sad. Lab's are happy dogs and I have cried a river over this, Flurry had to put plastic over the keyboard. I have done my best to translate this but Buddy's lack of human attention caused him to babble a little. Where ever possible I have expressed his thoughts as he expressed them. The early days were easy but increasing isolation and depression took there toll on poor Buddy's writing skills. Flurry and I wish he had told Ruth the truth earlier, maybe we could have saved him. I hope you enjoy this little book. It is a story that had to be told. Lu



Day 1 Arrived at big house. Peed and sniffed around. Met humanoid couple, doofus looking male with fake smile and demon looking female. Both smell like rats even from a distance, I'm not going to sniff them up close. They must work here. Note to self, keep an eye on these two they seem very suspicious. Doofus picks me up and turns me toward his face. He says "Buddy (whoever that is), leaving your mommy and not knowing who your daddy is, is something I can relate to, I feel your pain". I bit him on the nose to show him my pain. Sunglasses guy takes me away from the creep and walks me a bit. Took a crap near roses. Hope I meet new master soon. Mailed note to mom, Ruth, telling her trip went fine new home is huge. Ate some chow and peed again. Went to sleep.

Day 2 Woke up early and checked the place out. I have come to the shocking conclusion that the creeps I met yesterday live here.
Found male doofus male face down drunk in bathroom and the female was passed out drunk in living room with Martha Stewart. Mom said Martha was a party girl, but I never figured she would stoop to this. Note to self, sell all Martha Stewart stock. I peed on drunk guy's head and left the room. Took a crap in funny room that has no corners. Get banished to small cage. Man this place sux. I hate these people. Sunglasses guy takes me out in yard. I sniffed around a lot. Dig whole near roses. Poop and Pee. Go back to dungeon.

Day 3 I had to go out on the lawn with the humanoid couple. Lots of cameras around. The doofus keeps saying "Here Buddy" (whoever that is). I sit and stare hold tail still. A couple of guys in sunglasses wave a pork chop under my nose and put it in doofus's right front pants pocket. I try to fight it but I cave in. They take 10,000 pictures of me sniffing his dang pocket. Hope mom never sees this. I watched the doofus eat a big sandwich over an hour ago. He eats like a pig, doesn't close his mouth, and has bread all between his teeth still. It looks like he has one big tooth on top and one big tooth on the bottom. He makes me want to barf. I want to bite him but I'm afraid I'd taste him again. Peed and crapped near roses, didn't touch my food. Went to sleep.

[Maria S]

"No mention of this cropped up while Hilly was basking in adulation during the book tour promotion."

You obviously missed the articles in the NYT about this! I believe they came out at the same time as that huge flock of piglets flew over the Artic Circle. Better start paying more attention...you're missing all sorts of strange events. :^)

[arj]

It doesn't fly with me. Saying "The Clintons are icky" doesn't make up for his two deliberate hit pieces on the president, both of which were uncalled for, and the last one was full of lies.

Got news for you. He's written more than two columns critical of President Bush. He's also written several columns critical of John Ashcroft, and Janet Reno, and the Clintons, and Republicans, and Democrats, and Libertarians.

As I said, he doesn't play favorites, which is what I like most about him. I don't agree with what he writes about President Bush, but I'm a Republican. I don't agree with his conclusions when it comes to the President. But the fact that you and I may not agree with what he says about the President doesn't make him right and us wrong or us right and him wrong. It simply means we have different opinions. He writes an opinion column. I recognize the fact that Capitol Hill Blue is not a Republican web site or a Democratic web site. When Hillary's book was released, he wrote about it and he wasn't kind:

Reinventing history in real time

He hasn't had a nice thing to say about any of the Democratic Presidential contenders either:

There's a signpost up ahead

Or the Dems plan for money:

Democrats' first priority is money, not morality

In the past few weeks, he's taken on the NFL for the commercial extravanza on the National Mall in Washington, the selling of Jessica Lynch and just about everything else in sight.

He wrote the Clinton column to "make up for his two deliberate hit pieces on the President"? Somehow, I doubt that. It's not the man's style.

[oyez]

“I never had a nickel......"

In other words.

"I didn't waste time with pocket change."

[Miss Marple]

The only two pieces I am familiar with are the ones posted here. If he has written even more hit pieces on the folks you mentioned, and you think he is great, that pretty much tells me all I need to know.

Doug Thompson made up his source, and he made up the accusations against the President, and those accusations were picked up by major media.

As I said, I have no interest in reading him.

[arj]

"So you think that the sole source of Thompson's article who turned out to be non-existent is an innocent mistake, regardless of the fact that the source who turned out to be non-existent has been used by Thompson for years. Okay. To each his own."

A conservative journalist I trust, Scott Hogenson at CNSNews.com, believed Thompson. He knows better than you or I what pitfalls any journalist may face when it comes to trusting a source. I'll trust his judgment on it.

[Jack00]

A Clinton win in 2004 is unthinkable!

[Fred Mertz]

As I said, I have no interest in reading him.

Then, you know the drill...

[johnny7]

“I’d had Pulitzer-prize winning authors here and none demanded such special treatment and deference,” complained the manager of one New York area Barnes & Noble. “I won’t have her here again.”

Good thing the guy didn't give his name. The “Wunder Frau” Hillary considers this as “hate speach”. Under the new ”Clinton Reich”, mis-speak like this will be dealt with 2-in-the-hat.

[Miss Marple]

How do you know this guy even said this? How many managers of Barnes and Noble are there in New York who had Hillary at a book-signing. Answer: one.

I would be interested if this was even said. Sounds like another tall tale to me.

[arj]

The only two pieces I am familiar with are the ones posted here. If he has written even more hit pieces on the folks you mentioned, and you think he is great, that pretty much tells me all I need to know.

I often find it interesting that people base an opinion of someone from a very limited exposure or point of view. You've read two columns by Thompson. I've read hundreds.

You believe he made up a source. Journalists familiar with Thompson's work (including conservative ones) believed he was conned by an unscrupulous source. When Tony Snow commented about the situation on Fox News Sunday, he praised Capitol Hill Blue's previous work and said many journalists have been taken for a ride by sources with a hidden agenda. The AP series on a Vietnam massacre that never happened is a good example and was cited by Hume.

Look, I think Thompson is dead wrong about President Bush. I've said so here many times. But I also think he is right about many other things, including the Clintons and the Democratic agenda for using unpatriotic means to undermine President Bush on Iraq. But what he writes is his opinion and is clearly labeled as "Commentary from the founder and publisher of Capitol Hill Blue."

I have a neice who is in Washington and she tells me Thompson is one of the featured speakers of the Washington Center for Politics and Journalism, the sponsor of her internship. Again, I find it telling that those who know their business -- both politics and journalism -- trust Thompson, even if some here do not.

I doubt we are ever going to agree on this. Those who dislike Thompson for what he's written about President Bush have made up their minds. I happen to think he's been a greater friend to the conservative cause than many here at FR are willing to admit, especially when you consider his many stories about the wrongdoing of the Clintons.

But that is just one man's opinion, just as the feeling of some here that he is not credible and can't be trusted is the opinion of each who share it. I'll keep reading him because sometimes he makes me mad and other times he makes me happy. But he always makes me think.

[alfa6]

Miss Marple, I have read many of Doug Thompson's articles here on FR over the years as well as at his previous website. The man state his opinion as he see's it.

Now regarding the article that you find so distatefull it is my opinion that Mr. Thompson was the victim of the journalistc version of the "False Flag" ploy".

Doug Thompson went into great detail as I recall about how the article you despise came to pass and I, for one, will give the man his due for being forthcoming and explainiing how he got suckered. It speaks more for some of the other press outlets that they ran with the CIA article and not with the explanation of the hoax.

You, of course, are entitled to your opinion of Mr. Thompson but I would humbly suggest that you take the time to read some of his other works.

Regards

alfa6 ;>}

[GrandMoM]

....Doug Thompson is an IDIOT!

[Miss Marple]

Until how he can explain using a false flag source for several years who suddenly disappeared when he was questioned about it, and who had no phone number and a phony e-mail address, I remain suspicious.

Lots of people wrote stories about the Clintons. At one time, Chris Matthews and David Brock were thought to be on our side.

Conservatives need to understand that people find it very easy to ingratiate themselves with our side by trashing the Clintons. I remain suspicious of Mr. Thompson and will require more than a few pieces on the Clintons to change my mind.

[Liz]

You obviously missed the articles in the NYT about this! I believe they came out at the same time as that huge flock of piglets flew over the Artic Circle. Better start paying more attention...you're missing all sorts of strange events.

Gosh, you are soo-o-o-o astute. Thank God you caught the NYT stories detailing this. None of us would have known were it not for your brilliant reading of "all the news that's fit to print."

[Liz]

This is great.....should be poublished. Simon & Schuster, are you listening?

[Conspiracy Guy]

It still has a long way to go and spelling and grammar and etc. But it is fun to work on.

[Liz]

A Clinton win in 2004 is unthinkable!

"What are you kidding? I'd make a better president than my idiot husband."

[Liz]

Cute, really cute. You oughta try to get it published.

[Conspiracy Guy]

I'd be on the Arkansas hit list again. But thanks for the kind words.

[arj]

Lots of people wrote stories about the Clintons. At one time, Chris Matthews and David Brock were thought to be on our side. Conservatives need to understand that people find it very easy to ingratiate themselves with our side by trashing the Clintons. I remain suspicious of Mr. Thompson and will require more than a few pieces on the Clintons to change my mind.

Interesting that you should cite Chris Matthews as an example. He worked on Capitol Hill as press secretary to Tip O'Neill -- hardly conservative credentials.

Thompson, on the other hand, served first as press secretary and later as chief of staff to three Republican congressman -- including New Mexico conservative Manuel Lujan, who later served as Secretary of the Interior -- and spent eight years with The Eddie Mahe Company, a well-known Republican conservative political consulting firm. Before coming to Washington, he wrote columns for one of the most conservative newspapers in Southern Illinois -- The Alton Telegraph, currently owned by Freedom Newspapers. Chris Matthews worked for the San Francisco Examiner, hardly a bastion of conservatism.

I dare say Thompson has paid more dues to the Republican cause than Chris Matthews or David Brock. The fact that he now disagrees with some of the actions of the Bush administration makes me stop and wonder what he may know that I don't. I still don't agree with what he writes about Bush, but I have stepped back and taken a second look at the USA Patriot Act because of what he wrote.

[Miss Marple]

You may have some interest in this thread and the effort to rehabilitate Thompson's reputation.

[Registered]

I don't think he's crossed into the Dark Side..I believe he is a shoddy reporter that feels he has to make up sources in order to write articles.

[martin_fierro]

You beat me to it.