By David Kraemer – ConservativeAmerican.org – Leading the way Right.
HUNDREDS OF LIES. ONE LIST.
“She has fooled, and made fools of, many, many people over the years. Those who think she would be a good president are worse than fools.” – Patricia McCarthy, the American Thinker.
Here is the truth about Hillary Clinton. We correct the record. This is the Hillary Archive. The only Official Hillary Clinton List. This list contains the Hillary Clinton lies, flip-flops, scandals, hypocrisy, gaffes and more that “Ready for Hillary” & “Correct [and by that, they mean ‘Lie About’] the Record” doesn’t want you to remember.
THE OFFICIAL HILLARY CLINTON LIES LIST – PAGE TEN
MOST RECENT ITEMS ARE ON HIGHEST PAGE NUMBER!
25 Lies per page!!
- Clinton Used to Care About the Veterans Affairs Scandal
- Clinton Compares Inequality to Cancer?!
- Is Hillary Clinton Herself Behind the Monica Lewinsky Vanity Fair Article?!
- Hillary Clinton Lies About Being Tough on Iran!
- Hillary’s Benghazi Lies – # 38: Caught in Lie to Congress!
- Hillary Clinton Dereliction of Duty: Ignored Terrorist Group that Kidnapped hundreds of girls
- Hillary’s Benghazi Lies – # 37: Obnoxious Hillary Says There isn’t “Any reason” to investigate her Benghazi Lies!!
- Hillary Clinton Allowing White House to Edit her Book?!
- Hillary Clinton, The Architect of the real War on Women.
- Hillary Clinton Doesn’t Believe in the 2nd Amendment – So, how can she be President?!
- Hillary’s Benghazi Lies – # 36: White House Email Proves (Again) Hillary Lied to the Faces of Family Members of those Killed in Benghazi!
- Hillary’s Benghazi Lies – # 35: Hillary Lied About Not Seeing the Requests for More Security in Benghazi From the Capitalism Institute: “former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and other high-ranking officials of the State Department were directly responsible for reducing security levels at the Libyan consulate despite a high threat environment. This contradicts Clinton’s testimony, given before Congress, during which she said, “The requests didn’t come to me, I didn’t deny them.” …requests for additional security were denied at the highest levels of the State Department. The report lays direct blame on Clinton, who personally gave approval to the systematic withdrawal of help from Benghazi as far back as April 2012… State Department cables boasting then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s signature acknowledged a plea for additional help from then-Ambassador Cretz. The cable was a formal request for tightened security at the consulate. Her signature on these documents clearly contradicts Clinton’s previous testimony claiming that the requests were handled by other professionals in the department and not by her.”
- Hillary’s Benghazi Lies – # 34: General Confirms Obama and Hillary were Lying from Day One about Benghazi!
- Hillary Clinton Gets Cozy with Islamist Known to Inspire Terrorists!
- Hillary Clinton is a Cafeteria Methodist, Picking & Choosing What to Believe and Not Believe
- Hillary Clinton’s Outrageous Attack on the Free Press!
- Candidate Hillary Makes Fraudulent Claim About Spying Debate
- Candidate Hillary Gets Whistleblower law Wrong
- Secretary Hillary “borrows” the Title for her new book?!
- Secretary Hillary Sent U.S. aid to corrupt Afghan ministries!
- Third Hillary Clinton Fundraiser off to Jail?! 4/17/14 From NBC Channel 4 TV in New York: “A hotel executive who has supported Hillary Clinton… pleaded guilty in federal court Thursday to witness tampering and conspiracy to evade campaign finance laws. Sant Singh Chatwal, the CEO of Hampshire Hotels and Resorts and founder of the Bombay Palace restaurants, entered the plea in federal court in Brooklyn as part of a deal he reached with federal prosecutors. Prosecutors said Chatwal used employees, business associates and contractors who worked for him to solicit campaign donations from straw donors… Loretta Lynch, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District, said Chatwal “sought to buy access to power through unlimited and illegal campaign contributions, funneling money from the shadows through straw donors.” Chatwal has raised at least $100,000 for Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign…” — ConservativeAmerican.org points out two other Clinton fundraisers have already gone to jail. If Chatwal gets any prison time, he will be the third. Hassan Nemazee was the second fundraiser for Hillary that went to jail. He got 12 years. The first was Norman Hsu.
- Hillary Praises Illegal Immigrant for “Bravery!”
- Would Hillary Clinton Make Chelsea Have a Baby to help her own Presidential Aspirations?! Oh C’mon?
- Even Vice President Joey Biden and Secretary of State John Kerry are Against Hillary’s So-Called Leadership!
- Corrupt Hillary Enjoys Pay for Play Scandal with Boeing!
5/29/14 = From BuzzFeed.com, “Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is so far silent on allegations that hospital officials doctored paperwork to cover long wait times for veterans seeking care, but as a 2008 presidential candidate she harshly criticized the care of veterans under President Bush. “As a President, President Bush has not done what we needed to do for our veterans,” Clinton said at an El Paso, Texas campaign event in February of 2008. “We haven’t funded the VA…” – If she cares so darn much, why is she silent now that a democrat has messed things up?! And why is the liberal answer to everything always spending more money on it? We have a much better idea to fix the VA Scandal.
5/29/14 – In Hillary Clinto’s Socialist Utopia, everyone will be equal. She wants wealth (except hers, of course) to be distributed equally to everyone (except those socialists in power, of course, who will have much, much more). From the Washington Postal: “In a video released Wednesday to promote her upcoming book, Hillary Rodham Clinton warned that the nation must “deal with the cancer of inequality.” Days earlier, she said the country is facing another “Gilded Age of the robber barons” and rattled off statistics about the financial gap between rich and poor. The comments mark a new populist emphasis for Clinton, who is seeking to tamp down growing criticism from the left about her husband’s economic policies in the 1990s…”
5/15/14 –Kevin Doyle at Independent.ie reports, “Lynne Cheney, wife for former vice-president Dick, went on Fox News to question the timing of Lewinsky’s re-emergence. “I really wonder if this isn’t an effort on the Clintons’ part to get that story out of the way,” Cheney, asked. “Would Vanity Fair publish anything about Monica Lewinsky that Hillary Clinton didn’t want in Vanity Fair?” If the onslaught of recent stories is part of an elaborate election plan then it’s a move that only the Clintons and maybe the Kennedys could pull off… Cynics suggest that the Clintons are happy to have all the dirty issues thrown into the public debate now so that they describe them as ‘old news’ if Hillary makes a presidential bid in 2016…”
5/15/14 – Josh Rogin at the lefty Daily Beast adds another one to our list: “The former Secretary of State claimed Wednesday she was responsible for tough sanctions on Iran. But while they were being crafted, her State Department opposed them again and again.
Hillary Clinton is now claiming to be the architect of crippling sanctions on the Iranian economy. But during her tenure as Secretary of State, her department repeatedly opposed or tried to water down an array of measures that were pushed into law by Democrats and Republicans in Congress…”
5/12/14 –Communities Digital News has the story, “The House committees on Armed Services, Foreign Affairs, Intelligence, Judiciary, and Oversight & Government Reform issued an interim progress report, based on the paper trail they had to pry from the Obama administration with a crowbar. One of the findings – “Reductions of security levels prior to the attacks in Benghazi were approved at the highest levels of the State Department, up to and including [former] Secretary [of State Hillary] Clinton. This fact contradicts her testimony before the House Foreign Affairs Committee on January 23, 2013.”
5-9-14 –While she talks about the War on Women, when it comes to action, Hillary Clinton could care less. As the democrat Daily Beast website and Conservative American Rush Limbaugh pointed out yesterday, Secretary Clinton refused to label the Nigerian Islamist Terror group, Boko Haram, as a terrorist organization. Investors.com calls that a dereliction of duty: “This group has murdered thousands as it wages a real war on women. Sometimes Hollywood celebrities get it right, as Jay Leno, Ellen DeGeneres and others did in a protest outside the Beverly Hills Hotel. That property is one of the Dorchester Collection of hotels owned by the Sultan of Brunei, Hassanal Bolkiah, who has announced his country’s embrace of Shariah law. The protesters recognize that Shariah law is a brutal criminal code employed by Islamists that prescribes amputations and floggings, plus the stoning to death of those who violate its rules or simply for the crime of being too Western. Case in point: the Nigerian terrorist group Boko Haram, which means “Western education is a sin.” The world’s attention is now focused on the kidnapping of some 300 girls from the Chibok Government Girls Secondary School in Lagos, Nigeria…” The website says Hillary has supposedly “joined the campaign” to free the girls. She has?! What the hell has she done for them?! She sent out one tweet! As Joey Buttafuoco Bidey might say, ‘Big F***ing Deal!’ And suddenly Mrs. Clinton is able to use the word “terrorism” to describe this act. Must be she forgot in her old age that democrats don’t use that word. From Investors.com again, “Yet for two years, the State Department refused to acknowledge the growing threat and barbarism of Boko Haram. As Josh Rogin at The Daily Beast reports, the Clinton State Department “refused to place Boko Haram on the list of foreign terrorist organizations in 2011” after the group bombed the United Nations headquarters in Abuja, Nigeria. “The one thing she could have done, the one tool she had at her disposal, she didn’t use. And nobody can say she wasn’t urged to do it. It’s gross hypocrisy,” wrote Rogin, quoting a former senior U.S. official who was involved in the debate.” — So Hillary continues her faux concern for women and girls and the lamestream media continues to pass on her BS as if it is real. Hats off to the Daily Beast for their honest coverage.
5-7-14 – From the Washington Go Postal comes the Hillarynious quote: “I mean, of course there are a lot of reasons why, despite all of the hearings, all of the information that’s been provided, some choose not to be satisfied and choose to continue to move forward. That’s their choice and I do not believe there is any reason for it to continue in this way, but they get to call the shots in Congress.” — Yes, Madame Hllary, they do. That’s called checks and balances. While she may not think there is any reason she should explain why she lied to the Benghazi victim’s families, the rest of us feel there is a very good reason to continue… to keep lying liars like her out of the White House! Perhaps Mrs. Clinton, in her old age, is getting confused. She seems to believe that all of the questions about the Benghazi attack have already been answered. Clearly this is a bizarre delusion.
5/7/14 – Julie Pace at the Chicago Sun Times has a report out today that seems to be saying Hillary Rodham Clinton is letting the White House edit her book before it comes out to make sure there is no “discord” with the legacy of Barack Obama. Unlike Robert Gates and Tim Geithner, Hillary has shared advanced copies of her oddly-named “Hard Choices” book with the White House. The so-called “hard” choices she made cost four Americans their lives in Benghazi, Libya. From Pace’s report, “drafts of Clinton’s book, “Hard Choices,” have been circulating for months among a small number of officials in Obama’s National Security Council. Clinton’s book will be combed for any sign of discord with Obama, the man who defeated her in the 2008 Democratic presidential primary campaign and whom she could run to replace in 2016.” Why on earth would she allow this? What is she getting in return? Hillary Clinton is not the kind of woman who normally lets other people tell her what she can and can’t do (or write). Something is odd about this.
5/7/14 –Hillary Clinton actively tries to destroy anyone and everyone who gets in the way of her ambitions for power. She was in charge of destroying the reputations of women who claimed consensual and non-consensual sexual relationships with her husband. Democrats called them “Bimbo eruptions.” She was in charge of destroying Monica Lewinsky. These wars on women who have been the victim of her husband’s power continue to this day. Dylan Byers at the Politico reports Clinton attack-puppy David Brock is conducting Hillary’s War on Lara Logan, former CBS News reporter. “Brock’s chief complaint: CBS’ internal review claimed Logan had reached out to the FBI and the State Department regarding her discredited source, Dylan Davies. As POLITICO reported in November, Logan did not reach out to the FBI. New York’s Joe Hagan reported this week that she also did not reach out to the State Department. Brock also faults CBS for failing to note Logan’s conversations with Sen. Lindsey Graham, a fierce critic of the Obama administration’s handling of the attack.” –ConservativeAmerican.org notes this is all nonsense. For a reporter to say they have reached out to a source, does NOT necessarily mean they called up the spokesperson and asked for a comment. Logan no doubt had sources within the FBI and State Department (either on the record or anonymous) that she did reach out to. So along with David Brock, Hillary has Politico and Joe Hagan helping her to attack Logan as well. What was Logan’s big offense against Madame Hillary? She dared to try to get some answers about the Benghazi attack from people on the ground. Somehow Hillary manages to ruin women and yet still claim to be a champion for them. Against the advice of feminists, she stood by her cheating husband. Yet feminists love her? Hillary Clinton is a house of cards and Trey Gowdy could be the one to huff and puff and blow her house down. Bowing down to the former President, Couric-BS news fired Logan. That’s not enough for HIllary though. Stay tuned.
5/6/14 – Hey, last time I checked, the President of the United States swears to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States. Well, Hillary Clinton today seemed instead to swear she is against the 2nd Amendment. From Katie Glueck at Politico comes the Hillary gun control quote: “[emphasis added] We have to rein in what has become [an] almost article of faith, that anybody can own a gun anywhere, anytime. And I don’t believe that,” she said, as applause drowned her out. Clinton, who argued it was possible to hold her position and still support the right to gun ownership, warned that unfettered access to guns could have dangerous consequences. She called the country’s approach to guns “way out of balance,” and referred to cases in which gun violence has erupted over minor issues. She painted a dark picture, warning that, “At the rate we’re going, we’re going to have so many people with guns everywhere, fully licensed, fully validated, in settings where [one] could be in a movie theater…” –ConservativeAmerican.org notes Clinton has a point about the movie theaters. Maybe if someone had pocketed a gun at that movie theater in Aurora, Colorado in 2012 a lot of lives could have been saved. That probably was not the best example for her to use to support her case! This also is a good time to remind readers that Hillary also was part of the Obama plan to trick people in the USA into believing USA guns were responsible for violence in Mexico and therefore, they would suggest, more gun control is needed. That was her role in the Administration’s Fast & Furious Scandal.
5/2/14 –What kind of low-life human being could knowingly lie to a grieving mother’s face about the cause of her son’s death? Hillary Clinton. More proof today of her numerous Benghazi lies from a White House email. From Judicial Watch comes this: “On April 18, 2014, JW obtained 41 new Benghazi-related State Department documents. They include a newly declassified email showing then-White House Deputy Strategic Communications Adviser Ben Rhodes and other Obama administration public relations officials attempting to orchestrate a campaign to “reinforce” President Obama and to portray the Benghazi consulate terrorist attack as being “rooted in an Internet video, and not a failure of policy.” Other documents show that State Department officials initially described the incident as an “attack” and a possible kidnap attempt.” — From Bob Taylor at Communities Digital News; “The documents which have revitalized interest in Benghazi were obtained by the conservative watchdog group known as Judicial Watch. A Freedom of Information Act lawsuit has uncovered a September 14, 2012 e-mail from Ben Rhodes, a White House aide, to former U.N. ambassador Susan Rice just prior to her appearances on five Sunday morning news programs in the aftermath of the Benghazi attacks… Said [Senator Lindsey] Graham, “If this is not a smoking gun, proving beyond any doubt, the story told by the administration about Benghazi was politically motivated and fabricated, nothing will ever prove that.” …Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA) wrote, “It is now abundantly clear that senior White House staff were directly involved in coordinating the messaging in response to the Benghazi attacks and were actively working to tie the reason to the infamous Internet video.” Actually, it has always been abundantly clear, but, until now, there has been no direct proof. This new evidence, however, has prompted Wolf to call for a select committee investigation which House Majority Leader John Boehner has long resisted.” [NOTE: Boehner finally appointed a select committee after news of this email surfaced. He named Conservative American U.S. Representative Trey Gowdy to lead the panel.
5/1/14 –Oren Dorell at USA Today writes, “U.S. military personnel knew early on that the Benghazi attack was a “hostile action” and not a protest gone awry, according to a retired general who served at U.S. Africa Command’s headquarters in Germany during the attack. While the exact nature of the attack was not clear from the start, “what we did know early on was that this was a hostile action,” retired Air Force brigadier general Robert Lovell said in his prepared statement Thursday morning to members of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. “This was no demonstration gone terribly awry…” …While people on the ground were fighting for their lives, discussions among U.S. leaders outside Libya “churned on about what we should do,” but the military waited for a request for assistance from the State Department, Lovell said. There were questions about whether the U.S. military could have responded to Benghazi in time, but “we should have tried,” Lovell said…” – ConservativeAmerican.org added the emphasis. Also note that the general was waiting for a request for help from the Hillary Clinton State Department. Asleep at the phone when the call came at “3 in the morning,” Hillary never issued such a request. We still don’t know what her boss, President Obama, was doing while all of this was happening.
5/2/14 From Bob Taylor at Communities Digital News; “…another written document has surfaced, this one from the Clinton Library, that highlights the close association between the Clintons and Bassam Estwani, the former chairman of the notorious Dar al-Hijrah mosque. As Walid Shoebat points out in his blog “Estwani is a major mole. He has curried favor with powerful politicians; the mosque he led for years incubated and bred terrorists who were released into American streets.” It is the Estwani letter to the Clintons which is most damning because it alludes to the fact that the mosque is “one of the most active and largest Islamic centers in the United States”. Estwani goes on to write, “I have been repeatedly honored by your invitations and warm receptions at the white house, especially at the Breakfast Prayers since September 1995. You and the first lady have graciously hosted the Muslim community on several occasions and we are eternally grateful for your and her gracious hospitality and reception.” So what?, you ask. It goes with the territory of being the president. True, but as Shoebat further adds, the letter clearly shows that the Clintons were involved with Estwani in 1995. That was the same year he hired an imam who had been implicated in the first attack on the World Trade Center two years before.” FreedomOutpost.com has pictures of her Hillaryness with Estwani.
4/30/14 First of all, how about a public “Shame on you!” to the leaders of the Methodist Church who invited pro abortion candidate Hillary Clinton to speak in front of 7,000 of the faithful. Democrats always slam republicans for talking about faith, clinging to God and letting Chrisianity influence how they govern. They also slam republicans and churches that support them saying churches are not supposed to be involved in politics. How soon they flip-flop! Now suddenly it’s okay for Hillary to embrace faith and cling to her God?! Well, that’s not quite accurate. She only embraces the parts of her Methodist faith that are convenient for her White House run. Cal Thomas writes at the Sun Herald, “Mrs. Clinton said that while she was secretary of state her faith prompted her to begin initiatives to combat human trafficking, promote maternal health care in developing countries and fight for women’s rights. That’s nice, but a person of no faith could be in favor of the same initiatives. What about abortion and same-sex marriage? The same Scripture she uses as marching orders for her worldly initiatives speaks to when human life begins and to traditional marriage, but she ignores those. Mrs. Clinton said her faith in God was shaped as a young woman by her grandmother’s hymn singing and her grandfather’s bedtime prayers. She said she struggled between her father’s insistence on self-reliance and her mother’s compassion for the needy. Clinton said she reconciled these in the Bible story about Jesus feeding the 5,000. She added she believes in the “social gospel,” which in reality is more social than gospel. Evangelical theologians believe the feeding of the 5,000 was not an early food bank, or a forerunner of food stamps, but one of many demonstrations by Jesus of Nazareth to authenticate His Divinity. His next miraculous act, as recorded by Matthew, was walking on water (Matthew 14:22-33). Under the social gospel of Mrs. Clinton does it follow the government should buy water skis for the “needy”?” The Washington Exmaniner Headline reads, “Newfound faith among liberal Democrats like Hillary Clinton is still mostly for show.”– ConservativeAmerican.org also notes it was a controversial youth leader at her Church who convinced Hillary Rodham to stay from her father’s Conservative American beliefs. — This isn’t the first time Hillary has played the Methodist card trying to win an election.
4/26/14 – Perhaps the most amazing thing about this story is that the only place you will read about it is here. The so-called “Free Press” is so busy kissing Hillary 2016’s backside, it doesn’t even bother to report when a major presidential candidate attacks… them!! As reported by the democrat-run National Public Radio (NPR) Hillary said that with climate change, for example, it’s okay to only report her side of the story! And it’s okay not to cover the side of those who don’t buy the hoax of man-made global warming BS. “But [it’s] not [okay] to have people who just basically roll their eyes, and say it’s not happening” Yep. She said it. “It’s not okay.” That’s what she said. It’s not okay to interview anyone who agrees with her that there is no such thing as man-made global warming! So, your opinion that the earth has always had natural cycles of warming and cooling is simply “Not okay” and the public should not be told about it. Unbelievable. She wants to get rid of freedom of the press and set herself as the decision-maker on what is “okay” to report and what isn’t.
4/26/14 – Firedoglake.com reports Hillary said: “…when [Snowden] became a public figure the president had actually given a speech and many of us were beginning the process of trying to figure out more than ten years after 9/11 what we needed to do to get our liberty/security balance right….” The Firedoglake article continues: “Both Obama and now Clinton want the public to overlook the administration’s history of support for spying, as presented by The New York Times, prior to the disclosures. Obama aides anonymously told the Times that the president had been “surprised to learn after the leaks…just how far the surveillance had gone.” The administration fought groups like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) in the courts as they tried to convince judges to release documents that would at minimum confirm the secret legal interpretations of surveillance authorities under the law. So, it is fraudulent for Obama, Clinton or any other politician to claim to Americans that the White House was about to bring transparency and promote debate on government surveillance.” – Ah, but Peter Beinart at The Atlantic says Hillary’s response displayed “authenticity.” Really? Autentic but not accurate?!
4/26/14 – Firedoglake.com reports Hillary said: “…When he emerged and when he absconded with all that material, I was puzzled, because we have all these protections for whistleblowers. I mean, if he were concerned and wanted to be part of the American debate, he could have been…” The presidential directive that Obama issued in October 2012 for “protecting whistleblowers with access to classified information” does not explicitly offer protection for contractors like Snowden. It continued the practice in government of not granting statutory protections to intelligence agency employees who decide to blow the whistle on waste, abuse, fraud and illegality… No intelligence employee can “take” whistleblower protection. Talk like that demonstrates how ignorant Clinton is about the cobweb of inadequate and oft-times undermined protections available to whistleblowers.”
4/21/14 – The John Louglin Show on 630 WPRO: “…Clinton’s memoir of her four years as secretary of state will be titled Hard Choices, her publisher announced Friday. She’s not the first one to use the title. In fact, she’s not even the first former Secretary of State to do it. Cyrus Vance, who served as Secretary of State from 1977 to 1980 under President Jimmy Carter, chose the same title for his 1983 memoir…”
4/21/14 – Click for the video from Town Hall & the Washington Times. We would have put it here but it has an annoying auto-play that annoys you each time you visit this page.
4/18/14 – Hillary Clinton praised a young woman from Croatia for her bravery as the woman admitted she is here in the country illegally! The New York Post: “Clinton… offered her sympathy — praising the girl for her bravery and pledging her support for immigration reform… “I believe strongly that we are missing a great opportunity by not welcoming people like you. I’m a huge supporter of immigration reform and a path to citizenship and we’ll continue to advocate for that,” Clinton told Nova… Chelsea Clinton, who revealed Thursday at the event that she was pregnant, also chimed with support for the teen. “We can’t ignore any longer what should be a continued effort of the United States, which is ever marching towards a more perfect union. Our status as a nation of immigrants is an existential part of that,” the former first daughter said…”
4/18/14 – That’s not us at ConservativeAmerican.org suggesting that! We get the story of who is “not” making that assertion from Robin Abcarian at the LA Times: “New York Times financial columnist Andrew Ross Sorkin put it out there Friday on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.” In a segment about Clinton’s approval ratings… Sorkin abruptly changed the subject: “Can we talk about the human drama that is Grandma Clinton?… I don’t want to be cynical–I am not suggesting anyone’s having a baby for election purposes, but I think this—no, no–I’m just saying.” …”Morning Joe” panelist and political reporter John Heilemann mocked Sorkin: “I’m not suggesting that, but I will say it on the air.” Sorkin, in a defensive crouch that only got crouchier as the segment went on, protested: “What I will say on the air is, it’s going to change the dynamic of the campaign… The point is,” Sorkin persisted, “an entire country is going to watch a family have a child…. I mean, this is a human drama. People are gonna get behind this, it’s gonna change the way people look at Hillary Clinton.” — Others are also hinting at the politics of Hillary’s grandchild. This from Keli Goff at the Daily Beast: “The event where Chelsea Clinton announced her pregnancy this week was billed as “Girls: A No Ceilings Conversation.” But many saw it as much more than a “conversation” about the future of girls and women around the world. Instead, it looked like the first unofficial campaign event of a 2016 Hillary Clinton presidential run… Risa Heller, a communications consultant who has worked with Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), among other politicians, said Clinton winning the White House would be a “watershed moment for women.” Calling the “Girls” conversation “brilliant,” Heller said: “She as a female candidate for president should be able to captivate women. I think the idea behind what they are doing right now is allowing her to talk to all kinds of women. Theoretically, they should be her base.” — ConservativeAmerican.org says that sure sounds like Heller thinks Clinton carefully staged the girls conversation for political gain, calling using her own future grandchild for personal political gain “brilliant.” *Gag* Goff points out, “Clinton has a notoriously complex history with women. In some circles, she has been a feminist icon forever. In others, she’s seen as the woman who stayed with Bill Clinton when plenty were rooting for her to leave him, and the woman who pointedly did not stay home and bake cookies, and who seemed to question the choices of women who did.” — ConservativeAmerican.org points out now Hillary is pandering to women having babies instead of abortions. Hey, speaking of that, why didn’t Chelsea choose abortion?! Is Chelsea Clinton pro life?! And another question, doesn’t this make Hillary too old to be President? That’s what the left said about Reagan! More from the LA Times here. UPDATE 4/22/14: Salon has Erick Erickson’s quote about the age issue: ““She’s going to be old!” Erickson noted. “I don’t know how far back they can pull her face!” he added. “Can I say that on the air? I don’t know. Maybe I shouldn’t,” Erickson continued. “You know what I mean, though!” he added.”
4/18/14 – From Bloomberg’s BusinessWeek: “Hillary Clinton wrote and circled the word “no” next to future Vice President Joe Biden’s name on a list of lawmakers who supported or opposed her health-care plan in 1993, according to newly released documents from the Clinton presidential library. Her eventual successor as secretary of state, John Kerry, was marked as “probably not” with a rectangle sketched around the two words…”
4/13/14 – It seems Mrs. Clinton has a good deal set up with the corporate-jet-flying CEO ‘fat cat’ at Boeing (you know, those evil CEO’s people like Hillary hate). The Washington post says the Boeing and Hillary have been “coz” for years. Rosalind Helderman reports, “Clinton played the role of international saleswoman, pressing Russian government officials to sign a multibillion-dollar deal to buy dozens of aircraft from Boeing [in 2009]. A month later, Clinton was in China, where she jubilantly announced that the aerospace giant would be writing a generous check to help resuscitate floundering U.S. efforts to host a pavilion at the upcoming World’s Fair… Clinton did not point out that, to secure the donation, the State Department had set aside ethics guidelines that first prohibited solicitations of Boeing and then later permitted only a $1 million gift from the company. Boeing had been included on a list of firms to be avoided because of its frequent reliance on the government for help negotiating overseas business and concern that a donation could be seen as an attempt to curry favor with U.S. officials.” — Ya think?! Corruption is the Hillary game though. Back to the Post: “In 2010, two months after Boeing won its $3.7 billion Russia deal, the company announced a $900,000 contribution to the William J. Clinton Foundation intended to rebuild schools in earthquake-ravaged Haiti. The foundation, which Hillary Clinton now helps lead with her husband and daughter, has become a popular charity for major corporations.” — Wait, you mean those evil , rich, white, greedy, environment-destroying corporate CEO’s support Hillary? What about that line the socialists always sell to those less informed that ‘republicans are the party of the rich?’ BS. And its been BS for decades. Hillary Clinton probably just loves Boeing because of all the frequent liar miles she has racked up on their planes! More from the Post: “The company’s ties came into play again this month when its in-house lobbyist, former Bill Clinton aide Tim Keating, co-hosted a fundraiser for Ready for Hillary, the super PAC backing her potential presidential run.” Isn’t that cozy? This is a classic case of paying a politician for the right to “play” the game. Clinton scratches Boeing’s back and Boeing sells us out by dumping hundreds of thousands of dollars into Hillary 2016 corruption. VoltaireNet.org calls this “Corruption as Usual.” And Ralph Nader says with Hillary, ““It’s Wall Street and the military-industrial complex that Eisenhower warned us about — the worst possible combination.”