Posted on 05/07/2014 12:25:14 PM PDT by nickcarraway
Lynn Cheney has a theory about why Monica Lewinsky wrote a long Vanity Fair essay about her experience with Bill Clinton: It’s because the Clintons wanted it. Cheney explains her suspicions. “I really wonder if this isn’t an effort on the Clintons’ part to get that story out of the way,” Cheney, announced on an interview on Fox News. “Would Vanity Fair publish anything about Monica Lewinsky that Hillary Clinton didn’t want in Vanity Fair?”
There may be a couple of holes in this theory. The first is that, while it does account for the Clinton’s motivations, it fails to explain the participation of Lewinsky herself, who is the author of the article in question, and may not be in the mind-set of “I really owe Bill Clinton a favor.”
The second hole is Cheney’s assumption that Vanity Fair would never publish anything that Hillary Clinton didn’t want. Unless she thinks Hillary Clinton wanted Vanity Fair to publish a long, dishy 2008 exposé portraying her husband as a still-adulterous sleazebag up to his neck in questionable business practices:
And it is true that there is a real downside to being governed by a man with an uncontrollable libido, as the United States was from 1993 until 2001. On the other hand, it definitely beats being governed by an ideologically delirious paranoid, as it was from 2001 until 2009.
An effort to elicit sympathy.
“When are THEY going to stop picking on poor Bill”.
Except THEY is the democrat press.
If Chait really believes this, he's crazy. There is no bigger Clintoon lapdog than VF.
a man with an uncontrollable libido——nice way of saying RAPIST!
She moved President Madison into the pro-gay marriage column, and lied about Liz, Liz is also pro-gay marriage, like all of the Cheneys.
You know, ugh!
I watched Fox yesterday from the five to oreilley
No one said a word about this.
There was Dana perino, Greg and Kim listening intently to Juan Williams, nodding, “Oh DUH, Why is monica doing this?”
Laura Ingraham was interviewing Lynn Cheney who said Vanity Fair doesn’t get anything in there that the Clintons don’t approve.
Then megan Kelly jumped on that .
As if they can’t speak or think.
If anyone doesn’t think monica is on Clintons payroll or whatever controlling motivator the Clintons do, they’re stupid.
Monica claims that she was not paid hush money by the Clintons yet she was offered a six figure salary at Revlon to lie under oath for Billy Jeff Clinton.
Which publisher gave Monica $12,000,000 for her book?
was Monica paid for the Vanity Fair piece? that could be HER motivation. as for the Clintons, I wouldn’t put anything past them.. LC’s theory could very well be correct.
Are there legs to the rumors about Hillary and her own 1990s intern (Huma)?
To not imagine that Monica and the Clintons are forever bound is ignorant of all we know.
No?
This is a person who seduced the president of the US.
She is purchasable.
Duh
I’m just so amazed that the entire Fox News team waited until Lynn Cheney came out at well ater 9 PM some reasonable explanation and a brush off of this stupid non story.
Vapid
The Vanity Fair piece is to promote the new book.
Hillary’s favorite tactic is to claim that something is “Old News” and then quickly dismiss it. A variation on the theme was her “What difference does it make” tantrum during her testimony about Benghazi. Again she dismisses a subject as “being in the past”.
Dude, that was like 2 years ago!
I didn’t know until a few months ago that Monica and Huma were fellow WH interns.
It’s quite likely in my view that the Clintons were doing the “daily double”.
The difference is that Monica is a disgraced chump and Huma will be the WH Chief of Staff in Jan 2017.
In 1992, Clinton Conceded Marital ‘Wrongdoing’
Jan. 26, 1992
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/flowers012792.htm
Following are excerpts from the interview of Clinton and his wife, Hillary, by Steve Kroft of CBS’s “60 Minutes.”
Kroft: Who is Gennifer Flowers? You know her.
...Hillary Clinton: You know, I’m not sitting here – some little woman standing by my man like Tammy Wynette. I’m sitting here because I love him, and I respect him, and I honor what he’s been through and what we’ve been through together. And you know, if that’s not enough for people, then heck, don’t vote for him.
And it is true that there is a real downside to being governed by a man with an uncontrollable libido, as the United States was from 1993 until 2001. On the other hand, it definitely beats being governed by an ideologically delirious paranoid, as it was from 2001 until 2009.
Jonathan Chait submits indisputable evidence that there is no common ground between conservatives and the radical Left.
As far as Lewinsky isn’t she getting paid for the article? That’s why she might do it.
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.