Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Hillary: Bill won't sit in on NSC meetings
CNN politicalticker ^ | 12/30/07 | Alexander Mooney

Posted on 12/30/2007 5:29:28 PM PST by melt

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-95 next last
To: melt

He won’t remove the tags from mattresses and he won’t break the tax seals on liquor bottles.


41 posted on 12/30/2007 6:51:58 PM PST by jimfree (Freep and Ye shall find.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: umgud
Well, at least we don’t have to worry about pillow talk........

Except between Hillary and Huma...

42 posted on 12/30/2007 6:55:51 PM PST by okie01 (THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance on Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Bahbah
"And people seriously consider voting for his wife for PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES."

Just another sign that we are well on our way to turning into a Banana Republic and 3rd world country that about half the population would find her an acceptable candidate IMO. We don't have a monarchy YET, but we may be close to getting one like other 3rd world countries where the elite wives and children inherit "the throne."

43 posted on 12/30/2007 6:58:35 PM PST by penowa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: melt

If she gets elected she won’t get access to a lot of old deep dark buried secrets.

She will effectively be neutered.


44 posted on 12/30/2007 6:59:17 PM PST by Eye of Unk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: melt

She’s right, He’ll probably be too busy mentoring young interns.


45 posted on 12/30/2007 7:00:05 PM PST by RetSignman (DEMSM: "If you tell a big enough lie, frequently enough, it becomes the truth")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: melt

“Hillary: Bill won’t sit in on NSC meetings,” ....he’ll be too busy fondling the NSC secretarial pool.


46 posted on 12/30/2007 7:00:39 PM PST by zerosix (native sunflower)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: scrabblehack
There are no constitutional requirements — however it would soon become a political issue....President nominates disbarred husband to the SCOTUS....
Please. Impeachment didn't stop the Clintons and the Democrats. Nothing will. The Democrats don't care, period. And they will be the ones who have complete power to confirm. The GOP are too spineless to filibuster a liberal SCOTUS nominee, especially one who happens to be a popular former president. Hell, the GOP couldn't all even stick together on voting guilty on the articles of impeachment.
47 posted on 12/30/2007 7:03:01 PM PST by counterpunch (ABH - Anybody But Huckabee)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: counterpunch
I would hope appointment hearings would go bad for him. It might make the term getting Borked tame next to getting Lewenskied.
48 posted on 12/30/2007 7:03:18 PM PST by mountainlyons (Hard core conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Leo Carpathian
Dat’s Hillaryous!

Why Bill Really Wants Hillary to Lose

49 posted on 12/30/2007 7:05:02 PM PST by They'reGone2000 (And I DON'T want to have to change my name to They'reBack2008!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: mountainlyons

Appointment hearings go bad for Bill Clinton?
Are you kidding me?
Senators from both sides of the aisle would be lining up to kiss his ass and get a photo with him.
If Hillary is elected, mark my words, Bill Clinton will sit on the Supreme Court. The Democrats may even impeach John Roberts just so Bill could be Chief Justice.


50 posted on 12/30/2007 7:06:47 PM PST by counterpunch (ABH - Anybody But Huckabee)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: mountainlyons
His license has already been restored or can be anytime he wants, he already has done whatever punishment they gave him.
Also it isn't in the Constitution that you have to be a lawyer to be on the court.
Now this guy is way too lazy and undisciplined to be even want to be on the court, Would interfere with his traveling and whatnot around the world and this guy will not be a second banana to anyone on the court.
51 posted on 12/30/2007 7:07:46 PM PST by Captain Peter Blood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: melt
The National Security Council has members assigned by Law - that is by the National Security Act of 1947.

The President, Vice President, Secretary of State, and Secretary of Defense are statutory members.

Traditionally, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the CIA Director, and others served as non-statutory members and were advisors.

Guess what?

When Billy Jeff was President, he circumvented this law by signing an Executive Order that allowed basically anyone to serve as non-statutory members of teh NSC.

These included basically anyone in the White House - so Hillary could get Janet Reno (and also herself if she wanted) in on the act.

On January 21, 1993, in PDD 2, President Clinton approved an NSC decision-making system that enlarged the membership of the National Security Council and included a much greater emphasis on economic issues in the formulation of national security policy. The President, Vice President, Secretary of State, and Secretary of Defense were members of the NSC as prescribed by statute. The Director of Central Intelligence and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as statutory advisers to the NSC, attended its meetings. The new membership of the National Security Council included the following officials: the Secretary of the Treasury, the U.S. Representative to the United Nations, the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy, and the Chief of Staff to the President. Although not a member, the Attorney General would be invited to attend meetings pertaining to his jurisdiction. The heads of other Executive departments and agencies, the special statutory advisers to the NSC, and other senior officials would be invited to attend meetings of the NSC where appropriate.

The last sentence gave his leeway to deem anyone he wanted to sit on the Council.

52 posted on 12/30/2007 7:11:58 PM PST by SkyPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: melt

Oh the HUMAnity.


53 posted on 12/30/2007 7:17:39 PM PST by omega4179 (Fred)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: potlatch; PhilDragoo; ntnychik; MeekOneGOP; Alamo-Girl; FARS; Seadog Bytes; Grampa Dave

54 posted on 12/30/2007 7:34:46 PM PST by devolve (---- - Hey Boone! - My bonus check is late again! -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Bahbah

I heard the “power” was the size of a cocktail weanie, LOL No wonder he had to go for political power to entice women...he couldn’t have gotten what he wanted just with his original equipment.


55 posted on 12/30/2007 7:37:00 PM PST by Aria (NO RAPIST ENABLER FOR PRESIDENT!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: counterpunch

cant he was disbarred from the supreme court. And btw, Bill clinton didnt sit for many of his own NSC briefings.


56 posted on 12/30/2007 7:37:34 PM PST by Walkingfeather (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: potlatch

.

LOL!

Very good potlatch!


57 posted on 12/30/2007 7:38:32 PM PST by devolve (---- - Hey Boone! - My bonus check is late again! -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: devolve

Good post devolve. Lol, I think I saved that pict too. It is one of those that looks sooo dark to me for some reason!


58 posted on 12/30/2007 7:39:50 PM PST by potlatch ("Life may not be the party we hoped for, but while we're here we might as well dance!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: FARS

Thanks for the ping!


59 posted on 12/30/2007 7:40:42 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: devolve

You are confusing me, I thought that was what you had just posted to, lol.


60 posted on 12/30/2007 7:41:46 PM PST by potlatch ("Life may not be the party we hoped for, but while we're here we might as well dance!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-95 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson