Posted on 02/04/2016 10:33:13 AM PST by Kaslin
In the many decades I have had the pleasure of covering the Clintons, I have developed several themes about them that have, over the years, been validated by fact. One theme is that there is a Clinton curse. It afflicts many who come into contact with the fabulous couple. In the early days, the curse brought down the McDougals, Webb Hubbell, Vince Foster and former Governor Jim Guy Tucker, all of whom by now are figures known only to history. More recently it was Jeffrey Epstein, sex offender and Bill Clinton's pal and fellow epicure. Now, quite possibly, Josh Earnest, press secretary to President Barack Obama, will be added to the list along with Hillary Clinton's aides: Huma Abedin, Cheryl Mills, Bryan Pagliano and Jake Sullivan. Perhaps even David Brock will suffer the Clinton curse. The Clintons are a couple to be avoided. Even the Democratic Party might not be spared come Election Day 2016.
Of course, the Clintons often turn to their favor circumstances that might spell doom to others. Consider the present imbroglio involving Hillary Clinton, her mysterious personal server, the FBI and the aforementioned Clintonistas: Abedin, Mills, Pagliano and Sullivan. Many people who I talk to tell me that the FBI's interest in that personal server is ominous for Clinton -- a matter I wrote about in this column three weeks ago. Yet this imbroglio, when viewed from the Clintons' perspective, might actually be helping them in their quest for the presidency.
The FBI is finding so much additional evidence of wrongdoing by the Clintons and their Clintonistas that it is possible this copious evidence is actually impeding the Bureau from recommending indictments. No sooner does the Bureau think it has wrapped up one set of indictments than it trips across another category of malfeasance. For instance, it seems that the FBI has now found the Clintons to have commingled their foundation's interests with Hillary Clinton's State Department work. And then there is her campaign fundraising, Bill's exorbitant lecture fees, and -- who knows -- the needs of the Clinton Library. If the Clintons are lucky, the FBI investigations will be mired in new evidence for months to come.
She will plod along, fighting off the sallies of a 74-year-old 1960s retread spewing Marxist hooey. And, as of Monday, she'll be without the comic benefits of Martin O'Malley, whom radio host Chris Plante calls the "Naked Cowboy." If she eventually gets the Democratic nomination, the FBI will be faced with the dilemma of recommending the indictment of the Democratic Party's convention-certified presidential nominee. Has America ever sat through a presidential nomination in which one of the candidates was under indictment?
For the low-information voters, I shall answer the question: The answer is that every major party nominee has been as clean as a hound's tooth, at least until elected. Even the late and lamented Richard M. Nixon had yet to be indicted when elected president. Actually, he never was indicted, as strange as that may seem.
So my guess is that Clinton is hoping to brazen it out and keep the FBI busy with the droppings from her server: the shocking intelligence breeches, the incriminating Foundation solicitations, and -- forget not -- her tantalizing hints about yoga -- her yoga! She will hope to cop the nomination at the Democratic National Convention and try for victory in November, though that now appears unlikely. She had a chance against former Republican Governor George Pataki, but when he bowed out of the race I think her chances for the presidency went away.
Meanwhile, I see the Clinton curse still preparing to take down others around the Clintons, such as Abedin, Mills, Pagliano and Sullivan. One really does not have to venture too close to the Clintons for the curse to strike. One can merely be trying to sidestep, say, Hillary Clinton's emails, and whammo.
Think of poor Josh Earnest at his press briefing Friday. An inquisitive journalist asked him if he could say "with certainty and confidence that Secretary Clinton will not be indicted because of this email scandal?" Instead of saying that he could not comment on an ongoing investigation, Earnest implied that he had been in communication with the Justice Department and prosecutors. He spoke of "what we know from the Department of Justice," and authoritatively added that "it does not seem to be headed in that direction." Whom did he speak with? What did they tell him? Who authorized the president's press secretary to call the Department of Justice? Was Earnest's comment a direction to the FBI to subside?
It is all very irregular. When will Earnest get his day before a Congressional hearing?
Thanks Kaslin!
This is a good article. I recommend visiting Townhall.com to read it... I always think it is a kind gesture to “send clicks over” to the people who create or pay for the actual content.
I agree, unfortunately they are some in here, who just read the title and notice the author and find it necessary to call the author an idiot as one freeper did earlier from an article by Cal Thomas
I think Tyrell, when he uses “fabulous “ in this context means “fabulist “ of a teller of exaggerated lies.
“Perhaps even David Brock will suffer the Clinton curse.”
If only....!!!!
Emmett Tyrrell wrote the best biographies on both Bill and Hill. And I know because I read all of them in the 90s.
She's in trouble in Iowa
Editorial: Something smells in the Democratic Party
The Register's editorial February 3, 2016
Once again the world is laughing at Iowa. Late-night comedians and social media mavens are having a field day with jokes about missing caucusgoers and coin flips.
That’s fine. We can take ribbing over our quirky process. But what we can't stomach is even the whiff of impropriety or error.
What happened Monday night at the Democratic caucuses was a debacle, period. Democracy, particularly at the local party level, can be slow, messy and obscure. But the refusal to undergo scrutiny or allow for an appeal reeks of autocracy.
The Iowa Democratic Party must act quickly to assure the accuracy of the caucus results, beyond a shadow of a doubt.
First of all, the results were too close not to do a complete audit of results. Two-tenths of 1 percent separated Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton. A caucus should not be confused with an election, but it's worth noting that much larger margins trigger automatic recounts in other states.
More in the link
You never know
Rice and Powell did not have personal servers. It was reported that they had either passed or received classified emails on their personal email accounts. That’s the big difference with Hillary. She had her own server for the likely purpose of concealing her nefarious activities.
Yess....but, the flip side of the coin is the Clinton luck as noted and she will not be caught by testimony to the FBI nor will her accomplices, Mills, Abedin, and Sullivan.
Hillary perfected a very legal and lawyerly method to combat any investigation which relied on testimony under oath. Does anyone remember the over 200 times she said in the Congressional testimony on Whitewater matters: “i have no specific recollection of that [conversation, document, email, etc.] Of course there were some variants (ie. I don’t remember that “) to prevent the sameness from revealing to the public just how unresponsive she was/is.
Democrats have used this unresponsive response in many investigations since Hillary first pioneered it to avoid the specter of perjury or of taking the 5th. [See Eric Holder]. They make any investigation virtually useless when based on testimony. After all, you can’t force a girl to testify on something she doesn’t remember, can ya.
Mills,Abedin and Sullivan will all give that same “Don’t remember” response when talking to the FBI as will Hillary and unless there is physical evidence about who cut and pasted the classified emails to put them on her emails, then it will give Lynch a reason to not indict for lack of evidence.
Which same Marxist hooey she will happily embrace once she is safely ensconced in office.
Rush used to play a parody song about her, to the tune of "Try to Remember"...part of it went something like this:
"I can't remember, my brain's in a blender
It's Jello." (Jello Jello Jello)
That is Tyrell's style. Very subtle sarcasm aimed at the gullible public as much as the named target. Really. He does not think the Clintons are fabulous.
It is simply a national disgrace this woman is not in prison.
It is simply a national disgrace this woman is not in prison.
____________________________
She should be in prison, along with her sleazebag husband. If cell phones could video record in the 90’s, Bill would be in jail.
Obama has a strong claim to that most dishonest title.
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.