If Richard Nixon had run for president after Watergate, he would have been a more credible candidate than Hillary Rodham Clinton is in 2016.
If Vice President Aaron Burr ran for president after shooting Alexander Hamilton, he would have had far fewer notches on his belt than Hillary does in 2016.
If Warren G. Harding had survived his first term and run for re-election in 1924, he would have seemed positively Lincolnesque compared to Hillary.
Yes, she is that bad. Hard as it is to be a Republican today, if I were a Democrat, I would be seriously depressed.
On Jan. 26, 1992, America writ large first met Hillary Clinton. Earlier that month, Arkansas state employee Gennifer – with a “G” – Flowers confessed to a tabloid that Bill Clinton had been dallying with her for some 12 years.
In a desperate attempt to save Bill’s candidacy for president, the Clintons agreed to be interviewed by Steve Kroft on CBS’ “60 Minutes.”
To his credit, Kroft forcefully stuck it to the Clintons. In the not so distant past news people expected the truth from public officials, even Democratic frontrunners for the presidency. Starting with this interview, the Clintons would dramatically lower that expectation.
When Kroft asked Bill if he had an affair with Flowers, he answered, “That allegation is false.” Hillary, her hands lovingly intertwined with Bill’s, nodded in affirmation.
“We reached out to them,” said Hillary of Bill’s accusers. “I felt terrible about what was happening to them.” Hillary had reason to feel terrible. Her private investigators were, in the memorable words of one woman, threatening to break their “pretty little legs.”
Later in the “60 Minutes” interview, Bill swore, “I have absolutely leveled with the American people.” He had done no such thing, and Kroft knew it.
The Clinton era was a turning point in the history of journalism. Although liberals had been on a long march through America’s newsrooms for years, never before had they collectively championed a scoundrel, let alone two.
Throughout Clinton’s presidency, Bill and Hillary lied as necessary to protect the Clinton brand. Appalled by Hillary’s performance in particular, the usually restrained William Safire famously designated her “a congenital liar” in a 1996 New York Times op-ed titled “Blizzard of Lies.”
In the piece, Safire made no reference to Clinton’s sexual misadventures. He referred instead to Hillary’s commodity-trading scandal, her obstruction of justice in the aftermath of White House counsel Vince Foster’s death, her role in the Whitewater affair and her machinations in a grubby in-house scandal known as “Travelgate.”
In each case, wrote Safire, “She lied for good reason.” Lying preserved Bill Clinton’s shot at re-election and spared Hillary a pants suit of prison orange.
Speaking of re-election, when Bill handed Hillary responsibility for health-care reform, she managed it so sneakily, illicitly and badly it cost the Democrats the House for the first time in 40 years.
After the 1994 electoral implosion, it was Hillary who called in Dick Morris. To fund Morris’ TV campaigns, Hillary helped orchestrate what Sen. Fred Thompson called “the most corrupt political campaign in modern history.”
According to the Thompson committee, “The president and his aides demeaned the offices of the president and vice president, took advantage of minority groups, pulled down all the barriers that would normally be in place to keep out illegal contributions, pressured policy makers, and left themselves open to strong suspicion that they were selling not only access to high-ranking officials, but policy as well.”
Concluded the committee, “Millions of dollars were raised in illegal contributions, much of it from foreign sources.” Sound familiar? Of course it does. The Clintons would repeat the pattern with their foundations.
But it was sex that riveted the American people, and that scandal was the only scandal that really stuck – to Bill, but not to Hillary, the indispensable enabler of the predator-in-chief.
Six years and a day after she lied on “60 Minutes” to protect Bill’s candidacy, Hillary lied on the “Today” show to protect his presidency.
“There isn’t any fire,” she told Matt Lauer about the “smoke” surrounding her husband’s involvement with intern Monica Lewinsky.
Unlike Steve Kroft in 1992, Lauer did not challenge her. He shifted his inquiry from the perjury and obstruction of justice charges facing the president to the unfairness of independent counsel Ken Starr’s “30 million dollar” investigation.
This was all the license Hillary needed to introduce a new and memorable sub-plot. ”The great story here,” she said ominously, “is this vast right-wing conspiracy that has been conspiring against my husband since the day he announced for president.”
The late Christopher Hitchens easily saw through the subterfuge. Said he of the Clintons in his indispensable book, “No One Left to Lie To,” “Like him, she is not just a liar but a lie; a phoney construct of shreds and patches and hysterical, self-pitying demagogic improvisations.”
Jack Cahill’s brand new book illustrates how the neo-Puritan progressive movement came to mimic a religion in its structure but not at all in its spirit — order “Scarlet Letters: The Ever-Increasing Intolerance of the Cult of Liberalism
The proudly left-of-center Hitchens took his title from a quote by Democrat David Schippers, the chief investigative counsel for the House Judiciary Committee.
Said Schippers for the ages: “The president, then, has lied under oath in a civil deposition, lied under oath in a criminal grand jury. He lied to the people, he lied to his cabinet, he lied to his top aides, and now he’s lied under oath to the Congress of the United States. There’s no one left to lie to.”
That was 16 years ago. Since then Democrats have created a brand new, rainbow flag-flying generation of airheads, potheads and people who don’t speak English.
In short, there are people left to lie to. They are better known as the Democratic base.
Media wishing to interview Jack Cashill, please contact [email protected].