Prosecute the torture.

March 26, 2008

Senator Clinton's Visit To The Trib

Do you see who Senator Clinton is sitting next to? I'll quote from the appropriate (and you'll understand why the minute you read it) paragraph from the article:
Clinton made the comments during a 90-minute interview with Trib reporters and editors. Also in attendance was Tribune-Review owner Richard M. Scaife, who sat directly to Clinton's right during the meeting. The Tribune-Review was a frequent critic of former President Bill Clinton's administration. [emphasis added]
I know, I know. It's an easy joke. Sorry.

While the writers of the article, Mike Wereschagin, David M. Brown and Salena Zito, are careful to point out that the Trib was a frequent critic of the Clinton Administration, they didn't point out Richard Mellon Scaife's connection to the so-called "Arkansas Project."

Let's review. The Arkansas Project was, in Joe Conason's words, a "dirty tricks operation" designed to do as much damage to the Clinton Administration as possible. Scaife also paid Christopher Ruddy for his many articles and investigations into the Clintons' supposed shenanigans. The most famous of Ruddy's allegations involved the death of Vince Foster, in which Ruddy (nudge-nudge wink-wink) says Foster didn't commit suicide - it was murder!

Ruddy is now the editor-in-chief of Newsmax.com, another Scaife funded conservative news source. Small world, huh?

No wonder why Senator Clinton called the visit, "counter intuitive."

13 comments:

Burgher Jon said...

I read Bill Clinton's book recently and the only mention of our dear city is in a solid page worth of hatred for Mr. Scaife.

I wonder if one of her staffers dropped the ball in realizing that the trib is his paper and that he might/would be there.

Anonymous said...

Note that Scaife is only slightly to the right of the Senator.

Anonymous said...

America's sources for information is rapidly tearing us apart. Too much information. Nothing is filtered, allegations can be made without accountability. What Human can survive unscathed the type of scrutiny we have placed politicians under. We have seen great leaders, but I cannot believe that any of them NEVER said or acted in a way that they would have wished to take back. What blogger would want his every written statement to become a permanant record of judgement. I'm not excusing anyone here, or taking a political stand. I just want us to think. Do we go too far? are our expectations achievable? Gotta ask?

Anonymous said...

From the Insider: Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., pastor emeritus of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago where Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) has been a member for two decades, slurred Italians in a piece published in the most recent issue of Trumpet Newsmagazine.
"(Jesus') enemies had their opinion about Him," Wright wrote in a eulogy of the late scholar Asa Hilliard in the November/December 2007 issue. "The Italians for the most part looked down their garlic noses at the Galileans.
I demand an apology from him and immediate fireing of anyone who approved this publication. This is hateful stereotyping at it's worse. We eat a lot of Garlic, sure, but so what? We like Fried Chicken too and don't make fun of others who do. This Stinks!!!

"Fair and Balanced" Dave said...

Not only is Hillary sitting down with Richard Mellon Scaife, her campaign is distributing a hit piece from Scaife's other hate rag The American Spectator.

In the immortal words of Popeye the Sailor, "That's all I can stands. I cain't stands no more". I am now officially a Barack Obama supporter.

Maria said...

F&B Dave,

I'm on the Barack Obama campaign's media distribution list. Since the Wright controversy I've received 32 emails from them. Eighteen of those contained slams against Clinton. At one point (shortly after his Wright speech), I got some dozen emails in the space of about 24 hours -- one was sent at 3:00 AM! It was so bad that AOL decided that they were spam and I had to rescue them from my spam folder.

Please don't act like this isn't going on from both sides. It's a race for god's sake. They are competing against each other and BOTH sides are playing to win.

Anonymous said...

Senator Clinton knew she would be sitting down with Richard Mellon Scaiffe. The question I have is why in the world would she do it?
Slate Magazine has some ideas:

http://www.slate.com/id/2187473/

Who knows? Why would anyone sit down with the man who tried to destroy you and your family? I fear it is to use his hate to try and destroy someone else, Senator Obama. I hope I am wrong, but Senator Clinton's strange reference to Reverend Wright at that meeting raises even more questions. The Clintons did not have to pick Reverend Wright to come to the White House and participate in a round of cleansing with the President. What is up with this? I support Senator Obama, because he is the better candidate, not because I dislike Senator Clinton. But this meeting with Richard Scaiffe is so bizarre that I don't know what to think. -- Kim

Maria said...

Shit! I dunno...ya think maybe she sat down with the Trib because she needs to reach Reagan Democrats??? (As does Obama.)

Where's a better place to reach them?

Anonymous said...

Maybe Scaife and Clinton discussed open marriages off the record.

Anonymous said...

Clinton will sit down with the Devil himself to get the nomination. The only thing she brings up about herself turns out to be outright lies..Bosnia, NAFTA.The Clinton's have NO MORALS left. To sit down with Scaife after what he spent millions to destroy you is just amazing. To reach out to Reagan democrats, give me a break.Get your head out of your a..

infinonymous said...

Sen. Clinton appears to be taking a "whatever it takes" approach to dismantling Sen. Obama -- although I didn't expect even that standard to generate a chat with Richard Scaife.

This "scorched earth" campaigning is striking, from a candidate whose political warts are the size of cantaloupes. She appears to be daring Sen. Obama to resort to reminding the public of the scandals that turned the Clinton administration's promise into a distasteful heap of disappointment.

Fortunately, it appears that Sen. Obama will earn the nomination without stooping to her remarkably low current level. That's the advantage of being the better (with an edge that has increased daily of late) candidate.

I still hope Sen. Clinton salvages enough standing to be a powerhouse in the Senate. But if she continues along her current course and the Democratic Party responds by classifying her with Lieberman during an Obama administration, she will have only herself to blame.

Anonymous said...

Why is the DNC supporting a Candidate that the GOP is salivating to run against??? They WANT TO RUN AGAINST SEN CLINTON!!! HERE'S WHY:

The Clinton’s are named defendants in a Civil Fraud Case connected to Campaign Finance irregularities and have not disclosed the appeal of the case. There will be a trial date set at a hearing on April 25th, just 3 days after the key Pennsylvania Primary for the Fraud Case Paul v. Clinton in the Los Angeles Superior Court. Plaintiff says he will call Gov Rendell will be a witness in the case. From what I understand, this case began when prior to Sen. Clinton’s 2000 New York Senate campaign and also raised donations for Pres. Clinton’s Library. Plaintiff says he has videotaped evidence that contradicts her "Mis-Spoken" statements given under oath.

We don’t know the Clinton’s side of the story because they have not disclosed this. But Peter Paul tells his side of the story on Video.

Just Google: “Hillary Uncensored”
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7007109937779036019

Los Angeles Superior Court of Appeals: http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org
Then click on Civil Case Summaries and enter case number to see case history.
Case Number: BC304174
Los Angeles Superior Court Public Information Office at (213) 974-5227.

The GOP has utilized the services of a 527 Citizen’s United to produce a 90 Minute Movie they are already showing to defeat her in the Fall if she wins the nomination. The GOP uses her Fraud Case in their movie as one of many reasons she should not be President.

This is the Movie that the Citizens United has created for the GOP to for the fall.


1) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_PEHskBuQg

2) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5_SfPvtY-s

3) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rog6WBL7jog

4) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqlYlTxnUdE

5) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9hXf5yckbY

6) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKftVPA85jI

7) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCQOgTKtNhA

8) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRHPrjf4h6g

9) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lm-5MrOrqPE

Call the DNC at 202-863-8000 to lodge a complaint.

"Fair and Balanced" Dave said...

I'm on the Barack Obama campaign's media distribution list. Since the Wright controversy I've received 32 emails from them. Eighteen of those contained slams against Clinton.

Maria I have deep respect for you and I know your support for Hillary is both strong and sincere and, therefore, you are entitled to a more detailed explanation.

Yes both campaigns have made some pretty low blows.

What particularly galls me is that Hillary chose the Tribune-Review as the platform to further flog the already overblown Rev. Wright story. IMO, this is as bad as if she'd made the statement while appearing on Fox News.

I don't know if you've read Gene Lyons book "Fools for Scandal" or Joe Conason's book "The Hunting of the President" (if not, I highly recommend both of them). Money from Richard Mellon Scaife's deep pockets financed some of the most slanderous accusations against Bill and Hillary Clinton during the 8 years of Bill's Presidency. Scaife's money financed the infamous "Arkansas Project" and the Tribune-Review was the central dissemination point for the conspiracy theories about the Clintons "murdering" Vince Foster.

IMO, there is only one reason that Hillary should ever have met with Richard Mellon Scaife and that would be to accept a public apology from him for all he has done to her and her family.

Please don't act like this isn't going on from both sides.

As I think I've made fairly clear, it's not the statement, it's the particular media outlet Hillary used to make it.

On a positive note: Bravo to Chelsea Clinton for the way she handled that stupid question about Monica.