Image 01 Image 03
Sign In or RegisterLogout

Hillary Clinton Tag

Posted by Mike LaChance on March 01, 2015 8 Comments
Ever since the Benghazi attack that killed an American ambassador and three other Americans, Hillary supporting liberals have been calling the incident a non-issue but facts are stubborn things. They'll undoubtedly give the same white wash to the fact that the Clinton Foundation has accepted donations from foreign governments. Yet even MSNBC's Chris Matthews has acknowledged that these issues are serious. Video via the Washington Free Beacon:

Posted by Mike LaChance on February 24, 2015 11 Comments
When it comes to talk of banks and money in America, Elizabeth Warren says the game is rigged. In the case of the Clinton Family Foundation, she may have a point. A new ad from American Crossroads uses Elizabeth Warren's own words to skewer the Clintons and the funds they freely take from foreign governments. The Washington Free Beacon reports:
Ad Featuring Elizabeth Warren Hits Clinton Foundation on Money from Foreign Governments American Crossroads has found the unlikeliest of partners: Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.). In an ad released Monday, the Super PAC headed by Karl Rove attacked Clinton for reports that the Clinton Foundation has accepted millions of dollars from countries barred from making political contributions.
Watch the video. It's short but it makes a powerful point.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on February 22, 2015 33 Comments
If you think the mainstream media is not out to elect Hillary Clinton in 2016 every bit as much as it was for Obama in 2008 and 2012, then you need your head examined. The multi-day and ongoing demand that Scott Walker verify that Obama is Christian and loves America is a good example. Why is it that Republican candidates and politicians are required to verify the bona fides of Democrats? Here are three questions I have yet to hear Obama or any Democrat asked:

1. Should Joe Biden stop touching women without consent?

2. Is Elizabeth Warren Native American?

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on February 21, 2015 21 Comments
The over-vilification of the Democrats' favorite boogeymen may have cost them the Senate last year. Turns out that crying "Koch" is not what voters want to hear. Who knew? Oh that's right, everyone who was not Harry Reid. Who can forget Harry Reid's exceptional case of Koch Derangement Syndrome? Among the many missteps in Democratic strategy, the perpetual whining about the Koch brothers was listed as a contributing factor to the Democrats' subpar performance in last year's midterm elections.

Posted by Mike LaChance on February 20, 2015 27 Comments
According to recent reports, the Clinton Foundation is accepting large donations from foreign governments. Accusations of influence peddling are already being made. James V. Grimaldi and Rebecca Ballhaus of the Wall Street Journal:
Foreign Government Gifts to Clinton Foundation on the Rise The Clinton Foundation has dropped its self-imposed ban on collecting funds from foreign governments and is winning contributions at an accelerating rate, raising ethical questions as Hillary Clinton ramps up her expected bid for the presidency. Recent donors include the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Australia, Germany and a Canadian government agency promoting the Keystone XL pipeline. In 2009, the Clinton Foundation stopped raising money from foreign governments after Mrs. Clinton became secretary of state. Former President Bill Clinton, who ran the foundation while his wife was at the State Department, agreed to the gift ban at the behest of the Obama administration, which worried about a secretary of state’s husband raising millions while she represented U.S. interests abroad. The ban wasn’t absolute; some foreign government donations were permitted for ongoing programs approved by State Department ethics officials.
The panel on Special Report with Bret Baier addressed the issue last night: Considering their prior position on this issue, the Democratic Party's silence is surprising.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on February 17, 2015 33 Comments
I've said it before, and I stand by it: Elizabeth Warren would crush Hillary, and they both know it. If you doubted that Hillary knew it, read this NY Times account of their recent meeting, Hillary Clinton, Privately, Seeks the Favor of Elizabeth Warren:
Hillary Rodham Clinton held a private, one-on-one meeting with Senator Elizabeth Warren in December at Mrs. Clinton’s Washington home, a move by the Democrats’ leading contender in 2016 to cultivate the increasingly influential senator and leader of the party’s economic populist movement. The two met at Whitehaven, the Clintons’ Northwest Washington home, without aides and at Mrs. Clinton’s invitation. Mrs. Clinton solicited policy ideas and suggestions from Ms. Warren, according to a Democrat briefed on the meeting, who called it “cordial and productive.” Mrs. Clinton, who has been seeking advice from a range of scholars, advocates and officials, did not ask Ms. Warren to consider endorsing her likely presidential candidacy. Aides to Mrs. Clinton did not immediately respond to requests for comment, and aides to Ms. Warren could not be reached. The conversation occurred at a moment when Ms. Warren’s clout has become increasingly evident.
It's not quite Bill Maher territory, but Hillary at some point may need to get down on one knee and propose a high level cabinet post in order to keep Liz out of the race, or if she stays out, to get Warren to bless the Hillary campaign. https://youtu.be/uUiehszTswU Warren backers see this as an unequal relationship, as in Hillary is barely worthy of being in the presence of Liz, via Bloomberg:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on February 11, 2015 19 Comments
I'm a believer, a true believer, that Elizabeth Warren would crush Hillary, if she wanted to. Just Run, Elizabeth, Run! Now a poll backs me up, Shock poll: Warren leads Clinton in Iowa, N.H.:
Populist groups cheering "Run Warren Run," today released 2016 election polls from Iowa and New Hampshire showing Sen. Elizabeth Warren ahead of dominant Democrat Hillary Clinton. The YouGov poll of likely Democratic voters for MoveOn.org and Democracy for America also found that 79 percent want Warren and majorities support her anti-Wall Street positions. The poll of 400 conducted Jan. 30 to Feb. 5 put Warren ahead of Clinton in Iowa, 31 percent to 24 percent. In New Hampshire, her lead is 30 percent to 27 percent.
SCIENCE! Why do some people hate SCIENCE?

Posted by Mike LaChance on January 25, 2015 12 Comments
As the race for 2016 shifts into gear, old conflicts are reemerging between Hillary Clinton supporters and Team Obama; this time, it's over access to Obama's massive email lists. Amie Parnes and Niall Stanage of The Hill reported:
Obama, Clinton tensions build over email lists ahead of 2016 New tensions are emerging in the relationship between allies of President Obama and Hillary Clinton. At issue is the fate of the political equivalent of gold dust — the enormous email list, comprised of many millions of supporters and donors, that the Obama team has compiled over the course of his two presidential campaigns. The Clinton camp would dearly love to get its hands on the list, but there is no promise as yet that the president’s aides will comply. There are “large concerns” about the lists among Clinton supporters, one Hillary ally told The Hill. To the Clintons and their friends, it’s near unthinkable that a Democratic president — who has plenty of reasons to want a member of his party to succeed him — would withhold such a valuable commodity. But Team Obama has long believed that the president’s support is built upon the bedrock of his personal qualities rather than mere party identification. His people are loath to be seen as treating the passion of his supporters in a cavalier fashion. “There’s a lot of data — voter data, massive email lists — that Obama built and there are a lot of people who want to make sure that he spreads that wealth,” the Clinton ally said. “They want to make sure he doesn’t take it in a suitcase back to Chicago and move on. No one wants to see it disappear or have it used just to build a library.”
Democrats are probably hoping everyone has forgotten how ugly the conflict between Hillary and Obama became during the 2008 Democratic primary. There's plenty of evidence that the rift never healed.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on January 13, 2015 13 Comments
Until now, it's been purely present tense. "I am not running for President." The tea leaf readers were undeterred, insisting that Warren had not ruled out running in the future. BREAKING: A possible twist. Someone asked Warren if she is "going to run" for President, and she said "No." Granted, the words "going to run" did not come from her mouth, but were built into the question, but she did say "No." TPM reports:
Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) gave a new type of answer about possibly running for president: she's not going to run for president. Warren, a favorite of the liberal wing of the Democratic party, was asked if she was going to run for president in an interview with Sheila Bair for Fortune magazine. "So are you going to run for president?" Bair asked. "No," Warren responded. That response is different from one Warren gave in an interview with NPR where she said she's not running for president but declined to say in the future tense that she wouldn't run for president. Fans of Warren running for president in 2016 said this showed that she had not completely closed the door to the idea.
How significant is this? She didn't say it herself.  It could have been Warren didn't pick up on the nuance between present and future (?) tenses: Elizabeth Warren Not Going To Run The Wall Street Journal reports the progressive groups who want Warren to run are undeterred:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on January 10, 2015 28 Comments
Hillary is the presumptive Democratic Party presidential nominee. She has a large double-digit lead over other potential contenders. The one thing Hillary doesn't have, however, is grassroots enthusiasm. Her support as the presumptive nominee is a mile wide and an inch deep. She's popular because of name recognition and organizational power. No one wants to be on Bill and Hillary's enemies list. But Hillary has an image problem, as reflected in this Jay Leno appearance, via The Daily Caller:
Comedian Jay Leno says he likes presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, but she just seems so old. Speaking of Clinton on HBO’s “Real Time with Bill Maher” Friday, Leno commented, “I don’t see the fire.” “Her and Elizabeth Warren are almost the same age,” Leno said, comparing Hillary to the Massachusetts senator beloved by the left wing of the Democratic Party. “And I see Elizabeth Warren come out — ‘boom’ — throwing punches. ‘Boom, boom, boom, boom.’” “And I like her,” Leno continued, speaking of Hillary. “But she seems to be sort of, she seems very slow and very — I don’t see that fire, you know, that fire that I used to see, that I see in Elizabeth Warren. Because I say to people, ‘how much younger is Elizabeth Warren than Hillary?’ And people go, ‘oh, 15 years.’ No! 18 months.”
Elizabeth Warren, by contrast? She's intriguing:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on December 29, 2014 16 Comments
Ignore the polls showing Hillary up by 50%+ over potential Democratic rivals. Elizabeth Warren "is not" running. Everyone knows (or assumes) Hillary is. The second Warren declares she's seeking the nomination, if she declares, the polls will narrow. The second Warren goes after Hillary as the crony-capitalist, contrived-candidate that she is, the polls would narrow. Defeating the Clinton machine would not be easy or quick, but I stand by my view that if Warren were to run, she would end up crushing Hillary. The massive lead would narrow and then evaporate, just like it did with Obama. But it would end there. As part of my effort to spread the word, I have a column today at The Boston Herald, Will Elizabeth Warren sell ‘outside the bubble’?. Boston Herald Will Elizabeth Warren Sell Outside the Bubble Here is an excerpt, head over to The Herald for the full story:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on December 15, 2014 67 Comments
The internets have exploded with Elizabeth Warren-mentum. Elizabeth Warren is playing hard to get when it comes to running for President. She still "is" not running, which literally is true, but never says that under no circumstances will she ever run:
Sen. Elizabeth Warren is not running for president, but might she in the future? She wouldn’t say when repeatedly pressed on NPR Monday morning. Instead, she just repeated the same present tense denial she’s uttered dozens of times this year: “I’m not running for president.” It’s hardly the first time Warren, who became a progressive hero this week during a high-profile Senate showdown over Wall Street regulation, has dodged a question on 2016. Even as she and her staff insist the senator is not interested in running – and she distances herself from an effort to draft her into the race – Warren appears to be intentionally leaving some doubt hanging in the air. She may not want to run, but she would like voters to think there’s a chance. “She’s never slammed the door shut,” said Ben Wikler of MoveOn.org, who is hopeful she will run and recently launched a campaign to draft Warren. “As senator Warren has said many times, she is not running for president,” Warren spokesperson Lacey Rose told msnbc.
That tease is getting attention.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on December 13, 2014 39 Comments
Forget the polls. Forget. The. Polls. The Democratic nomination for president is Elizabeth Warren's for the asking. If that wasn't the case two weeks ago, it is now after Warren's performance trying to kill CRomnibus because of a rider scaling back a part of the Dodd-Frank financial scheme. It doesn't matter if Warren is right or wrong. She's doing something. She's leading. Where has Hillary been? Seriously, is Hillary any place to be found? The headlines are all Liz Warren, all the time, and she's getting the positive treatment for risking a government shutdown that Ted Cruz and Republicans never will receive. Danny Vinik at The New Republic declares this The Week Elizabeth Warren Decided to Run for President:
We won’t know for a few months whether the Massachusetts senator will challenge Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination, but if she chooses to run, we’re going to look back at this week as a pivotal moment in Warren’s decision-making.... This doesn’t mean that she will run. On Tuesday, her press secretary said, "As Senator Warren has said many times, she is not running for president." But note the present tense—Warren could still run in the future.
Team Obama, or more precisely, Team Obama operatives, are lining up behind Warren:
In an open swipe at Hillary Clinton, more than 300 operatives from President Obama’s 2008 and 2012 campaigns are urging the lefty Massachusetts senator to challenge Clinton for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination. Their “Ready for Warren” site posted a letter Friday signed by the ex-Obama staffers.
Ready For Warren Letter Run

Posted by Mike LaChance on December 12, 2014 11 Comments
Democrats speak out of both sides of their mouths when it comes to campaign finance laws. They say they want big money out of American politics but they'll stop at nothing to raise big money to install Hillary Clinton as America's next president. Alana Goodman of the Washington Free Beacon reports how that goal may have resulted in a violation of law:
Pro-Hillary PAC Accused of Illegal Activity in FEC Lawsuit An anti-Hillary Clinton PAC filed a lawsuit on Thursday to compel the Federal Election Commission to determine whether the pro-Clinton Super PAC Ready for Hillary is violating campaign finance laws. The Stop Hillary PAC originally filed a complaint with the FEC in January, claiming that Ready for Hillary may be illegally conducting authorized campaign activity on behalf of Hillary Clinton. According to the complaint, Ready for Hillary used an email list owned by Hillary Clinton’s Senate committee to send out fundraising letters. Ready for Hillary also allegedly sent out the solicitations using the email address [email protected]—a website that the complaint says is owned by Clinton’s authorized committee. The Ready for Hillary email stated “now is the time to get our support for Hillary organized and ready for 2016,” according to the lawsuit.

Posted by Mike LaChance on December 05, 2014 48 Comments
In her sparsely attended speech at Georgetown University this week, Hillary Clinton gave attendees a glimpse of her views on foreign policy and national defense by saying America should empathize with its enemies. This leads to a natural question: How does one "empathize" with ISIS terrorists who are currently beheading and crucifying their way across the Middle East? Ed Morrissey of Hot Air:
It’s difficult to know where to start with this nonsense from a recent speech given by Hillary Clinton, in which the presumed Democratic front-runner finally defines what she sees as “smart power,” and what she claims is a 21st-century approach to diplomacy. In large part, the former Secretary of State says it means psychoanalyzing enemies to understand them better, which … is exactly what nations have been doing for centuries, if not millenia.
Watch the video: This world view reminds me of another Democrat who's not running in 2016:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on December 04, 2014 30 Comments
One of Hillary's problems is the perception of inauthenticity, someone who will assume whatever persona she needs to assume at any given moment. Like when she assume a southern accent. So what do Hillary supporters at Stand With Hillary do to convince the public Hillary is authentic? Create the most inauthentic video ever created in the history of the human race (h/t @MichelleMalkin / Twitchy):
Accessibility by WAH