Hillary's Damage Controllers Spin Blumenthal Contradiction

NewsMax.com ^ | 6/05/03 | Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff

[kattracks]

Supporters of Hillary Clinton are trying to put the best face possible on a major factual contradiction that undermines the credibility of the biggest news in her book "Living History" - the claim that she was so angry after her husband confessed the truth about Monica Lewinsky that she could "barely speak" to him for weeks.

As first reported Wednesday morning by NewsMax.com, Mrs. Clinton's chief defender Sidney Blumenthal says that on Aug, 17, 1998, just two days after the silent treatment supposedly started, he heard the Clintons "bantering" back and forth when they telephoned him in Italy.

The banter was so friendly it was obvious they "were still working as a team," says the senior Clinton aide in his own book, "The Clinton Wars."

But on Thursday, NBC News chief foreign affairs correspondent Andrea Mitchell attacked Blumenthal as an unreliable source during the following exchange with radio host Don Imus:

IMUS: He said they were obviously still working as a team.

MITCHELL: But Blumenthal is not the greatest source on this. Not only is he a . . .

IMUS: No, he's a skunk.

MITCHELL: [Unintelligible] . . . -ocrit, but he was in Italy. And it's not impossible to believe that she was working with [Bill] on his defense against all of their common enemies, which she certainly believed, while at the same time being furious with him for giving ammunition to their enemies. [End of Excerpt]

Mitchell did not address the Blumenthal tidbit that had the first couple engaged in friendly "bantering" at a time when Hillary says she was "barely speaking" to Bill.

Meanwhile, Sen. Clinton's spokesman Philippe Reines was desperately trying to spin away the Hillary-Sid contradiction.

"This is a ridiculous attack," he told a liberal Washington, D.C. newspaper that covered the NewsMax exclusive on Thursday without attribution. "When people have the opportunity to read the full book, they will understand how she felt and what she experienced."

Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:

2004 Elections

[Calpernia]

bump!

[Dr. Frank fan]

Sometimes I think it must be tough to be such a fake and yet ambitious person as Hillary. I mean, just think, even stupid little details such as Whether She Talked To Her Husband At Such And Such Time, she has to think about very deeply in order to construct the most politically-advantageous lie. (And then she has to think about who will know that it is a lie, and contradict her, so as to be able to think of convincing counter-spins about why her lie is not a lie, and her contradictor is lying, etc.)

Here the rest of us go through our lives basically just telling the truth, if not most of the time, at least a majority of the time, without even really thinking about it. Who cares whether we talked to our husband on such and such date? But not her. Because she's so fake and ambitious, she has to think through every last little sentence she issues to the public sphere, no matter what it's about, no matter how trivial, from every angle, from every possible spin, to every last possible response and ramification.

I mean, it's gotta be really, really tiring to be so fake and ambitious. Easier just to be human, I would think.

[Calpernia]

I think you have yourself a tagline there.

[kattracks]

This is exactly why hillary! will never agree to an interview without first knowing all of the questions. She has to line up all the right answers in advance.

[mombonn]

Speaking of *snort*, are you going to run a live thread during "the interview"?

[Howlin]

If everybody wants one........I'll give you a preveiw...

That's a damn lie!!!

about 3000 times!

[mombonn]

I'm not sure I can take an hour of listening to two of the most annoying voices on the planet, but it's rather visiting the reptile house - you can't help but look, even while being repulsed.

[lowbridge]

Hillary's Damage Controllers Spin Blumenthal Contradiction

Hmmmmmmmm...who to believe. Who to believe. This one is a real toughie.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

It would appear Hillary's people did not vet the Blumenthal manuscript. If that's the case, it's very surprising.

It is more likely that Hillary didn't know what her ghost writers were saying and they, the writers, were doing the best fiction they could about that episode. Did Hillary read her own book before it was published? Maybe not. Maybe she just depended on the writers to do a good job with the info she gave them.

[COBOL2Java]

I mean, it's gotta be really, really tiring to be so fake and ambitious.

And it's showing on her face. I don't know how much vaseline they had to put on the camera lens for that cover photo, but I'm sure the thickness challenges the basic laws of optics...

[Dr. Frank fan]

This is exactly why hillary! will never agree to an interview without first knowing all of the questions. She has to line up all the right answers in advance.

Tell me about it. I mean just think what a pain all that research and cross-checking must be. I don't envy the jobs of anyone on her spin staff.

[Dr. Frank fan]

And it's showing on her face. I don't know how much vaseline they had to put on the camera lens for that cover photo, but I'm sure the thickness challenges the basic laws of optics...

Hmm. I guess I just assumed that Hillary's staff has a Toy Story-like CGI mockup of Hillary's face (with "electable" features) on disk somewhere, that they can pull up when needed for photo shoots, magazine and book covers, etc. ;-)

[John Lenin]

How about this lie.

[chimera]

Its obvious to anyone who recalls those dreary days that Hillary's version is just pap for consumption by the sucker moms and the "abused woman" apparatchiks. Of course they were still working together as a team, no matter what Bill did or didn't do. Remember Clinton's non-apology "apology"? Hillary's slimey hands are all over that one. Instead of just coming out and saying he was wrong and sorry for what he did, he just made a perfunctory mention of his wrongdoing and then went on to attack, attack, attack Ken Starr and Republicans. That's classic Hillary! if I ever saw it. She's a dedicated Marxist and one thing that characterizes Marxist-Stalinist types is that they never, ever show weakness by doing things like (seriously) apologizing or admitting error or wrongdoing, because in their minds they are never wrong and anything and therefore have nothing to apologize for.

[PogySailor]

"What you must realize is, there is no spoon"

[Rummyfan]

First liar says second liar is lying. Second liar contradicts first liar. Gosh, whom to believe?

[Rummyfan]

Who is Julian Epstein and where does he fit in? An FOB or?

[breakem]

How do you expect chronic liars to keep their stories straight. Definitly unrealistic on our part.

[MeekOneGOP]

[aristeides]

So Blumenthal's work and the ghost writers" were not coordinated? Sloppy, sloppy!