Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Clinton Defender David Brock Loses Morning Joe

Clinton Defender David Brock Loses Morning Joe

“Are we gonna do this again?”

David Brock of Media Matters appeared on MSNBC’s Morning Joe program yesterday and attempted to defend Hillary Clinton from claims made in the new book Clinton Cash.

Even the reliably liberal Mika Brzezinski wasn’t buying Brock’s hollow defense.

Alyssa Canobbio of the Washington Free Beacon:

Mika Brzezinski Corrects the Record on David Brock’s Laughable Defense of Hillary Clinton

Brock defended Clinton’s comments that when a person runs for president that they come under scrutiny and Brock asked people to look at Clinton’s record.

Host Mika Brzezinski said no one could look at Clinton’s record because Clinton scrubbed the personal server she used during her time as secretary of state. Brock continued, arguing that the 55,000 pages of email that Clinton has turned over was enough to show her record.

Brock said that the actions Clinton took after leaving the State Department all fell under regulations.

“No, actually, David, you don’t have to give me a lesson on the regulations of the State Department,” Brzezinski said. “She scrubbed emails because she felt like it and that went against regulations.”

Watch the video:

When Hillary has lost MSNBC…

David Brock has been trying his best to discredit the new book and its author.

Nick Gass of Politico:

David Brock goes on the warpath against anti-Clinton book

David Brock on Tuesday slammed media coverage of a forthcoming book detailing foreign donations made to the Clinton Foundation, calling into question how major news outlets are covering the May 5 release of “Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich.”

“I think this is a political put-up job, and I can smell it from a mile away,” Brock said during an interview on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”

“Yesterday it came out that The New York Times and Fox News were both chasing promotional deals with the author. The Times hyped the story yesterday, praised it, they withheld publicly available information about the author,” Brock said. “They noted that he runs something called the Government Accountability Initiative, but they don’t say that that’s funded by a prime funder of Ted Cruz’s super PAC, by Donor Trust, which is a Koch brothers passthrough, so it’s subsidized by Hillary Clinton’s enemies.”

Yes, we all know how many enemies Hillary Clinton has at the New York Times. (rolls eyes)

Follow Aleister on Twitter.

Featured image via YouTube.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Humphrey's Executor | April 22, 2015 at 9:16 am

If your best argument is “Koch Bros” then you don’t bring much to the table.

Midwest Rhino | April 22, 2015 at 9:23 am

Does Morning Joe have a favored replacement? O’Malley has picked up some of Hillary’s old support it seems, or maybe Joe himself is considering a run, as has been teased on his own show. Warren maybe, but her run would likely be a trail of tears, as she’d have to face her stolen Cherokee valor.

    NC Mountain Girl in reply to Midwest Rhino. | April 22, 2015 at 10:15 am

    I don’t know about Morning Joe in particular, but after reading some recent news accounts I almost feel sorry for O”Malley, Webb and even Hillary. I’ve seen several stories about campaign appearances in Iowa where mush of the copy compares those actually out campaigning with Warren and what would happen (breathless media sigh) should she enter the race.

    It has to be like courting a lass who can’t stop mooning over the latest issue of Tiger Beat magazine long enough to thank you for the Valentine’s Day flowers and candy.

    It would have to be Warren.

    First, Warren’s record as Senator is short enough to fit comfortably on a postage stamp. which fits well with the MSM/DNC axis’ hopes of portraying the Democrat candidate in 2016 as an “outsider”. By contrast, Hillary! seems to have been around since the Jurassic, and is no longer a blank Obama-like candidate the MSM/DNC axis can easily repackage to a gullible public.

    Second, the MSM/DNC axis desperately wants all Presidential elections from now to be like 2008: an Affirmative Action election when “making history” and “righting the wrongs of the past” take precedence over honesty, intelligence and ability. Our self-anointed moral and intellectual betters in the MSM/DNC axis have been saying since 2012 that the country must elect a woman as President in order to gain absolution for past crimes against humanity (it worked for Obama in 2008 and 2012). If not Hillary!, then whom?

This book must be really really deal the dirt on the Hildabeast. When people start slamming it, before it has been officially released, it has to be factual. Then again, even one little critical piece on the Hildabeast is considered blasphemy by the left.

Henry Hawkins | April 22, 2015 at 9:52 am

The Dems will not abandon Hillary on mere scandals and evidence of malfeasance – she’s been providing those for thirty years and remains on top of their mountain.

My hope is that they cling to Hillary too long and haven’t the time for a replacement if/when she implodes. We’d face either a pack mule Hillary overburdened with baggage or some drafted, ‘what the hell, I’ll do it’ replacement.

    On the contrary, Dems will abandon anybody given enough time.

    “… when a person runs for president that they come under scrutiny …’

    Hillary has been running for President for about 8 years now. She should have known that her email was going to be part of the record, which is probably why she didn’t use a state.gov email account.

    My point, if she doesn’t know by now what it is like to be a “top of the ticket” candidate”, then she has lost already.

legacyrepublican | April 22, 2015 at 9:58 am

Keep in mind that emails aren’t necessary to make the point.

A quick comparison of George W. Bush makes the point even better.

According to CNN, from 2009 to 2012, George W. Bush earned $15 million in speeches. That is about $4 million a year.

During that same time period, Bill Clinton earned about $47 million in speeches while his wife was Secretary of State. And most of that $47 million was from foreign speeches.

That is about $12 million a year for Bill.

From 2001 to 2009, Bill earned about $6 million a year in speeches while she was a Senator, or $2 million more than Bush.

In other words, the Clintons suddenly got $24 million more, or $6 million more a year, as soon as Hillary became Secretary of State, than they did the previous eight year cycle.

And they argue there is no influence peddaling.

    Sammy Finkelman in reply to legacyrepublican. | April 22, 2015 at 2:03 pm

    In other words, the Clintons suddenly got $24 million more, or $6 million more a year, as soon as Hillary became Secretary of State, than they did the previous eight year cycle.

    And they argue there is no influence peddaling

    But neither Bill nor Hillary Clinton took money from the Koch brothers!

    Although they did take money from some entity interested in the Keystone pipeline:

    http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/21/opinions/louis-hillary-clinton-book/

    According to The Wall Street Journal, in 2014 the Clinton Foundation “received money from the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Oman, among others. The donors included Canada’s foreign affairs department, which is promoting the Keystone XL pipeline.”

    Bill Clinton helped Hillary come up with her latest slogan:

    A CIGAR IN EVERY BOX!!

    … maybe it wasn’t Hillary who was helped

“…so it’s subsidized by Hillary Clinton’s enemies.”

Note that this is classic Collectivist smash-mouth tactics. Brock hasn’t read the book, doesn’t know what it says, but he’s out in full howl doing the ad hominem boggie.

Ol’ Walleyes DOES have enemies, and they are aptly called the “Government Accountability Initiative”, or the “Friends Of Law”, or “The Defenders Of Women Ball-less Bill Clinton Has Victimized”, whatever…

and I proudly count myself a Clinton enemy, and always will.

That never makes what I say about them untrue. My enmity derives from what they’ve done, and are doing.

Is Brock’s hair prehensile?

In front of the flag-draped coffins on the tarmac, Hillary clasped the hands of the parents, looked into their eyes, and with careful cadence and solemn words lied through her teeth.
Integrity and the tears of grieving parents are an easy price to pay, given a chance to exploit “Feeling Their Pain” in front of the cameras.
She’s a poster grandma for depraved indifference.

    Henry Hawkins in reply to Icepilot. | April 22, 2015 at 12:15 pm

    Won’t be long before we start seeing anti-Hillary ads with that very video. Good. That was as ugly as it gets.

Sammy Finkelman | April 22, 2015 at 2:10 pm

Only people like David Brock are allowed to draw conclusions from donations, and only against non-Democrats.

If you use the same kind of reasoning against a Clinton, it’s negative campiagning, it’s a political attack, it’s a distraction from the issues, it’s negative campaigning, they don’t like either Clinton anyway for a long time. and besides which somebody gave the attacker money, and that always means a great deal.

Brock is an admitted liar who whores himself out to Soros now. Why anyone gives him the time of day is a mystery to me.

Not that I would waste the energy to press the button on my remote to see “Morning Joe,” either – in fact, I don’t even have MSNBC programmed, although it is part of my service. Why clog up the guide with channels I will never, ever watch?

Poor David, if you have ever read any of his writings or listened carefully to him during interviews, it should be immediately obvious that this man should have been locked up for his own safety years ago.

I work in government. Brock is full of it. You don’t just “decide what to scrub,” especially when it’s official and/or sensitive stuff.

The sad thing is, too many people will buy what he is selling.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend