Clinton Camp Pounces On Vanity Fair Article: "Tawdry," "Attack Piece"

Politico.com:

The Clinton camp responded today to Vanity Fair's long article on Bill with its own 2,244-word memo, which includes attacks on the magazine's "penchant for libel," on editor Graydon Carter, and on writer Todd Purdum and his wife, former Clinton aide Dee Dee Myers.

The memo (after the jump) calls the piece "journalism of personal destruction at its worst" and singles out, among other things, Purdum's suggestion that Clinton's heart surgery changed his personality.

Purdum "is not an MD" the memo points.

The memo, provided by Clinton aide Jay Carson, also singles out Myers for this unexplained criticism:

Purdum's disclosure of [his marriage] in the piece does not, as Vanity Fair apparently concluded, remove the obvious conflict of interest. It's a conflict that would likely not be contemplated at more reputable publications, especially considering that, as a result of this relationship, at least one source's anonymity was revealed to others.

The memo also lists Bill Clinton's post-presidential accomplishments.

"Most revealing is one simple fact: President Clinton has helped save the lives of 1,300,000 people in his post-presidency, and Vanity Fair couldn't find time to talk to even one of them for comment," it says.

Full memo after the jump.

Read the whole story: Politico.com

Comments

[mairs]

I didn't get the impression that he is scum, foul and loathsome, as one poster put it. The piece showed both the good and the bad, like the real person he is. We've always known he's been both brilliant and effective, while carrying a darker side, a narcissistic side, ever since he first ran for president. I remember there were serious misgivings about him back then before he first was running for the presidency. Brilliant but flawed, and now seemingly past his game in many ways, losing his emotional bearings, his mental acuity and social instincts. I thought the piece showed him as a human being.

[suzukimom]

I agree with your comments and earlier ones that defended DeeDee Meyers. I feel very sad for all of Clinton's supporters, because I know how I would feel if Obama were in Clinton's position.

Also, I think some honesty about the effects of former Pres. Clinton's heart surgery would be very beneficial for the American people. The truth is that the medical establishment knows that there are real detrimental effects from the type of surgery Bill Clinton had, including personality changes, and intellectual deficits. (They call it "Pumphead"). If he and his people would embrace the reality, they could become a powerful voice encouraging people to work toward a more healthful lifestyle. Patients could be better informed if they are facing the surgery, and I believe that alternatives such as rigorous dietary and lifestyle improvements have been found to be effective alternatives (Dr. Dean Ornish's work).

Not only that, it would allow us to be more generous towards Bill Clinton when he makes statements that offend. I know that I have felt more compassionate towards him after reading an article by Dr. John McDougall on the subject as it relates to Clinton. It doesn't change the fact that I now know more about the impact of the Clinton Presidency, for good and ill, but it does allow me to not feel such anger towards him when he says stupid things.

[ddempesy]

Thank you Vanity Fair and Ben Smith for reminding us why we don't need another Clinton in the White House. We cannot afford to spend precious time on scandals when there are so many issues that need attention in this country.

Obama 08

[dadw5boys]

The guy who wrote the article was on the Today Show said " There is no proof any of it is true", then "I wrote the story to let the Clintons know what people in Washiington are talking about".

So he wrote LIES !!!!!
Admitted it on T.V.
JOURNALIST ETHICS AT WORK!!!!!!!

[amber09]

I doubt that this will recieve any coverage by the media. I'm really up-set that they attack Obama almost daily about something.­If not Pastors thenthey talk about who he can't win over! Obama fought hard and fair and will win against all odds! Someone out there give the guy some praise! I don't believe that Hillary has the grace to bow out with any class! Nothing about Bill and women would surprise me, and why should we believe his deniel when he lied under oath about Monica! Trust in his word would be ill-placed!Both the Clinton's have been caught in bold faced lies! I will also never forgive her for the shamefull RFK comments!

[likeicare]

Sounds like the VF piece was dead-on target, judging by the Clintons' response.

[Melizzy]

I was thinking the same thing. Why did he even bother to address it? It only validates the piece and invites more people to read it. I think Bill has gone off the deep end.

[americanwomaninpa]

I think anyone would want to go on the defence it they thought they were being smeared. I'm tired of all the gotcha crap. The MSM is only interested in their "bottom line," they don't care how many lives they ruin. Clinton, Obama and McCain have all been targets of these low life media jerks.

[thecanadian]

The Vanity Fair article was rather mild compared to what they could have
written about. They let Hillary off completely. They could have
included all the baggage couldn't they!
The Clintons both think they are going to get a pass from their
past. I don't think so. Vanity Fair is the first of what will likely
be written about the Clintons from 1980 onwards. No that
would really tell the story.
Best for you Mr. & Mrs. Clinton would perhaps be to reconsider
your present actions lest the whole truth emerge

[Furby]

"They could have included all the baggage couldn't they!"

Please enlighten me, what baggage? Lot's of reference everywhere to the past and the baggage but can't find any sources. All sounds very Graydon Carterish.

[Trollstakeyourmeds]

I would be interested to know how many of these folks that keep bringing up the subject of "baggage" have never made mistakes in their past. And if they have, I wonder how gracious they would be if they had them thrown up in their faces at every conceivable moment. Sure seem to be a lot of judgemental folks on this site these days. Notice how not even ONE commenter made reference to the many, many people who have benefited from his foundation. I hope both he and his wife spit in the face of the Democratic party, and devote themselves to making a difference to people who actually will be thankful for what has been done for them. Some folks have short, short memories..­...or maybe not. Maybe they are just nasty, miserable, and unable to find positive in anything.

[nectanebus]

SD's, do you want to see these kind of headlines from now till November? If you do, ROB OBAMA and give it to Billary, and take your party into the sewer that is Bill's mind.

[rpence]

Just read the article. I thought it was most notable for the absence of Hillary Clinton. On the basis of what I read, I'm inclined to believe that pretty much the only time Bill and HRC are in the same physical space is when she's onstage declaring victory. Bill hangs with lots of rich, interesting, influential people, but his own spouse doesn't seem to be among them.

Also, if even a fraction of the article's true, and I suspect it's much more than that, it makes Bill and HRC's posturing as representatives of the common people even more ludicrous.

[likeicare]

Maybe that's why they're savaging the author (and his wife) so ruthlessly.

[Trollstakeyourmeds]

My ex- and I didn't have any mutual friends either. He was into golf and Duke basketball, I was into horses and dressage. Had absolutely nothing to do with why we split. Many, many couples have different interests, friends, past times, etc. and many find that it works for them. Look after your own marriage before you go judging other peoples'.

[dadw5boys]

The guy who wrote the article was on the Today Show said " There is no proof any of it is true", then "I wrote the story to let the Clintons know what people in Washiington are talking about".

So he wrote LIES !!!!!
Admitted it on T.V.
JOURNALIST ETHICS AT WORK!!!!!!!

[rleroygordon]

Stupid, stupid, stupid! Clinton just doesn't get it. It's not a good idea to insult possible media supporters. Let's just grit our teeth for few moments and visualize the ghastly, worst possible scenario--Clinton is actually selected to be the Democratic candidate. She's gonna need every possible spinmeister she can hook her shriveled little talons into. If she insults the hell out of Vanity Fair right now, when her popularity is in the septic tank, take a guess how much chance there is that they'll give her any sympathetic press during the campaign.

Oh, but of COURSE we know that she's the one best able to win in November, and can do it without ANY help at all. And after all, who really cares about a few thousand "elite" Vanity Fair readers?

[JohnTalbutt]

The Clintons have destroyed their credibility by adopting the same tactics the Republicans used against them. Senator Clinton has no chance of winning a general election now.

[John51]

Possibly not her senatorial re-election either!

[Chavez08]

Ask Hillary if she believes Neoliberalism is working.

[Scarllatti]

The magazine is not here to trumpet what Bill regards as his "achievements. Dog bites man, NO NEWS. Man bites dog, PLENTY OF NEWS. You get me?

[amazinggrace]

What would be an amazing week? One where neither Clinton is mentioned in ANY article.

Time to turn the page and maybe throw out the entire Clinton book of drama.

[John51]

Those were the Good O Days!!

[MizLiz]

To get an idea of what the Clintons are really like, just download a copy of their 2006 Federal income tax return, with all schedules attached, yet.

Adjusted Gross Income: $15,858,42­2.00

Charitable donation from Schedule A: $1,580,503­.00 (10% of AGI) Nice, right? WRONG!!!

The entire thing went to "The Clinton Family Foundation". Every last damn dime of it. And from what I've read, there have been precious little amounts going out. So there it sits, gathering interest TAX-FREE (because it's charitable, don'tcha know) plus they get a tax deduction. This tells me everything I need to know about them.

[JeanPaulSatire]

A post that appeared above stated:

"WRITE IN HILLARY CLINTON -- if we need four more years of McBush to get the party straight, then fine."

The short-sightedness of this is breathtaking. The only goal that matters is "to get the party straight' (i.e., secure the nomination for Clinton so she can finally be anointed president).

Never mind that Obama has received more votes, more delegates, won more states, raised more money, brought more new voters to the party, etc.

Never mind the fact that the longer she stays in the race, the more likely it is that her actions hurt the party. Moreover, for her to even wink and nod at the idea of -- but officially not condone -- a write-in campaign for her in the general election makes inevitable unflattering comparisons to Nader's politically masturbatory campaign in 2000.

Never mind the fact that the next president likely will be appointing replacements for Justices Stevens and Ginsburg, and that if McBush somehow wins his replacements surely will overturn Roe v. Wade and otherwise will continue the Court's assault on the rest of our rights, too and that the rulings of the current Court *already* will take decades to undo.

Yes, completely disregard those things and focus on the fact that it's her turn, dammit! America needs to realize that it owes her this for standing by her horn-dog.

[ReasonIsMyReligion]

Well writ, as befits your moniker. However...

There are a lot of pragmatic anti-Republicans who simply see Hillary as the stronger match-up against McCain.

[JohnTalbutt]

Imagination not pragmatism is the key. Take a few minuts to think how you would craft McCains campaign to defeat her.

[Melizzy]

That's only because Obama didn't stoop to her level and bring out the big guns. Isn't it amazing how none of her past has really been brought up in this process? It would be in the general. And even dedicated Dems wouldn't want to support the horrible person she really is. Glad the SD's know what's up!

[Trollstakeyourmeds]

Most of her supporters that I have spoken to have every intention of writing in her name. Better than threatening riots and mayhem in the streets like the Obama supporters did when they were pitching their little hissy fits.

[allyiniowa]

I don't recall ever threatening riots.. And I've been with his campaign since day 1...?

[JeanPaulSatire]

Back here, on planet Earth, no such threats were made by Obama supporters (or if there were any, they were on the fringes and neither organized nor in numbers).

I commenced volunteering for Obama's campaign in NH, my home state, last summer. I've watched the ups and downs of his campaign since well before the first word was spoken at an Iowa caucus or the first vote was cast in Dixville Notch in this year's NH primary.

Unsubstantiated accusations of Obama supporters' making threats of riot and mayhem smells faintly of racism.

[mick3]

No, it's not better. It's utterly mindless. Are you saying that all those women are mindless? Oops, they appear to telling us that themselves. I am a lifelong, and I do mean a long life, feminist, and had so hoped to see a women in the presidency before I go. I won't be around in eight years, so this is it. But Hillary definitely isn't it. She has shown herself to be unprincipled, a liar, and a cheat. Repeatedly. Guess what? We have that now. Let's see, how did that turn out?

I haven't seen riots and mayhem being committed by Obama supporters, but then I don't hallucinate. But since Obama has so inspired the young, I'm sure there has been a lot of youthful excess. Goes with the territory. Beats those soul-dead supporters on the right, with their plastic hair and empty eyes...and that stick up their ass. And at least their candidate hasn't lied, cheated, and insinuated his way through this campaign.

I have important differences with Obama, but at least he uses his brilliance responsibly. I see him as principled, steady, and capable of dealing with other heads of state in a dignified and intelligent manner. As a constitutional scholar, he will bring the knowledge required to bring the nation back smoothly from crime and lawlessness. He has perspective, rather than his eye on career. He is not a battler, prefers diplomacy. He won't "obliterate" another sovereign nation and its citizens. Sigh of relief.

[Beachrunner]

Every word of the Vanity Fair article is true and just goes to prove what a disgusting human being Bill Clinton was, is, and will be.

What scum, what a foul and loathsome creature he is.

[MizLiz]

and if Obama feels he has to put HRC on the ticket, Bill will be squatting right on top, churning out yet more fodder for the gossip mags. Makes me sick to think of it.

[CommittedDem]

How do you know its all true? Were you there?

[americanwomaninpa]

Good question.

[Trollstakeyourmeds]

So you have personal knowledge of all of the facts and can support with experience from your vast research into Bill Clinton that it is all true? Man....you must have a lot of time on your hands.

[SouthpawSass]

Another Vanity Fair article not favorable to the Clintons was this back in 2007:

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/10/gore200710


Only problem for the Clintons is that it's all true...