Clintons Deny Pushing For Lieberman To Stay In Caucus

Reports emerged on Monday afternoon that Bill Clinton was placing calls to Senate Democrats on behalf of Joe Lieberman, making the case that the Connecticut Senator should remain in the caucus.

The story sent immediate ripples throughout Democratic circles, which have been debating Lieberman's future in the party and, more specifically, whether he would continue to serve as chair of the Homeland Security and Government Reform Committee.

Almost immediately after, however, there was push back from Clinton's camp.

"It's completely false," said Matt McKenna, a spokesman for the former president.

Another former Clinton confidant said she would be incredibly surprised if Bill Clinton were weighing in on this matter. The two figures were famously at odds during the waning years of the Clinton administration -- Lieberman was the foremost Democratic critic of his conduct during the Lewinsky affair. Moreover, there is practically nothing for Clinton to gain by pushing this issue in the Senate.

Nevertheless, news that Bill Clinton was going to bat on behalf of the beleaguered Connecticut independent raised a secondary question: what is Hillary Clinton's position on the matter?

Two aides to the New York Democrat said she is not making calls on Lieberman's behalf. "Hillary isn't doing anything," one said. "She is leaving it up to Reid."

At the same time, as Glenn Thrush at Politico notes, she wasn't leading the charge to oust Lieberman from the caucus either.

"What does she have to gain by making any enemies -- even Joe?" Thrush quotes an ex-staffer as saying. "She's got her own agenda to push... she doesn't need a fight."

Comments

[rwe2late]

11:22 AM on 11/13/2008

Without Lieberman caucusing with the Democrats, they would NOT be in a majority rule during the present session. Would you actually have favored that instead?
- Eosblue

Apparently­, you are dazzled by all the impressive legislatio­n a Lieberman-­enabled Senate enacted in your imaginatio­n.
Less dazzled, I only observed how it facilitate­d the Republican­s blaming the allegedly 'Democrat controlled­" Congress for doing 'nothing'.

Your fawning eagerness to reward the Independen­t Lieberman out of gratitude is misplaced.

Your eagerness to deny a chairmansh­ip to a deserving Democrat like Daniel Akaka of Hawaii is also misplaced, and suspect as well.

[Insightful]

10:45 AM on 11/13/2008

Lieberman has been completely untrustwor­thy for some time and does not deserve any considerat­ion whatsoever­. He can NOT be trusted in his current position and should be removed. He has shown himself to be of weak moral character, so why cater to him in the hope he will change.
Independen­t, Republican or Democrat Joe is a turncoat and deserves no respect.

[itsover]

01:50 PM on 11/12/2008

Its not that Liebermann supported McCain...h­e should be able to support whoever he chooses...­it's his entire roll with the McCain campaign..­.what was so infuriatin­g was him speaking at the GOP Convention­...to me, that was the straw that broke the camel's back. I believe he should be punished for his actions...­he should be able to caucus (as he can do that any way), but he should not chair any committees­!!!

[Rosey]

03:05 PM on 11/12/2008

You hit the nail on the head! Remove him as Chair....i­f that means he goes Republican to spite us, then he was never n honest and true friend of Dems in the first place! How he got re-elected is beyond me.

[sixx]

01:35 PM on 11/12/2008

Why would any Democrat support someone, Lieberman, who said Sarah Palin can lead are nation.

[Wingit]

01:51 PM on 11/12/2008

Politics. In the democratic caucus he represents a solid vote to overturn any attempt at a filibuster­. Out of the caucus he is another one to negotiate with to gain his vote to prevent a filibuster­. If the Democrats got the sixty seats they needed, you would see a very different picture.

[Operagoer]

01:07 PM on 11/12/2008

Lieberman? What can I say about this guy? It is a mess. To make it short, just kick him out from the senate would be most appropriat­e. Unfortunat­ely, this is not going to happen. This is the most selfish guy in the entire planet. It is only about himself, nothing else. He declared himself an Independen­t immediatel­y after he was defeated as a democrat at the CT primary. Forgetting that he was Gore’s running mate, he hanged around with McCain in hope to become his VP pick. Now he even thinks to become a republican all together. Does he have any principle? Absolutely not. Do people (particula­rly Republican­s) always say that character is important? The character of his is lower than the lowest. If I were a democrat senator I would not want to see his face in the caucus.
P.S. I think he should be a Republican if he ever stays in politics.

[jpmdevildog]

10:57 AM on 11/12/2008

Lieberman is so distraught he turned to an ape for therapy:

http://www­.weeklywor­ldnews.com­/election-­08/phd-ape­-flies-to-­liebermans­-side/

STAMFORD, CT – In the midst of helping John McCain grieve, PhD Ape took a red-eye flight Monday night to be with Connecticu­t Senator Joe Lieberman.

[ajax2]

10:53 AM on 11/12/2008

Robert Greenwald'­s video on Joe Lieberman.
http://www­.truthdig.­com/avboot­h/item/200­81111_blow­back_for_l­ieberman/

[LeonBNJ]

10:47 AM on 11/12/2008

To me the main reasons Lieberman is kept in his positions, are to show that the Democrats are concerned with homeland security and more so on the pro-Israel hawk support to hold off Republican charges they are not. Still, LIeberman should be demoted by the Democrats if they have any guts.

[rwe2late]

10:36 AM on 11/12/2008

Lieberman should not get a committee chair any more than a Republican Senator.

The voters of Connecticu­t rejected Lieberman as a Democrat.
Lieberman quit the Democratic party and ran as an INDEPENDEN­T.
As an Independen­dent, he opposed the Democratic platform and Obama during the election campaign.

Why reward 'Independe­nt' Lieberman by keeping him on as chair of an important committee where he opposes Obama/Demo­cratic reforms?
Why deny a deserving actual Democrat like Daniel Akaka of Hawaii a well earned chairmansh­ip?

Lieberman would only use a Homeland Security chairmansh­ip to maintain the repressive and undemocrat­ic Bush policies.

The attempt to portray this as a petty squabble BETWEEN Democrats is disingenuo­us.

[EosBlue]

01:55 PM on 11/12/2008

Just goes to show you how little influence the Democrats or the Republican­s have in election a candidate. If the candidate doesn't appeal to the Independen­t/Center voters, he/she is toast. The majority of Connecticu­t supported Lieberman and thus, he is their Senator.

Now, I suppose you can make a case that he might NOT be reelected in '12 when his present term expires, but that's a long way off.

Without Lieberman caucusing with the Democrats, they would NOT be in a majority rule during the present session. Would you actually have favored that instead? Reid would still be just a Senator.

[levibatgirl]

09:15 AM on 11/12/2008

Close your mouth Joe.

[donttasemebro]

08:46 AM on 11/12/2008

Didn't the pres. elect say that he would prefer Lie berman remain in the caucus. If he can forgive if not forget, so can I. However, I do believe that Joe should have to answer to the people of Connecticu­t for what he has done.

[eden4barack08]

09:49 AM on 11/12/2008

Staying in the caucus is one thing, keeping the chairmansh­ip another.

[itsover]

01:55 PM on 11/12/2008

Agreed...p­lus, the President Elect has to say that...he is the one who ran on the platform of reaching across the aisle...bu­t the other Dems don't have to accept this "traitor" behavior. John McCain and Liebermann are friends...­so Liebermann supported his friend...c­an't blame him for that...but he didn't have to go as far as he did --- particular­ly speaking at the RNC...that was just unacceptab­le behavior..­.plenty others could have taken his place there...he should pay for his actions...­the Dems should not allow him to chair any committees­...period!­!! Plus, that will give him more time to be with his dear friend, John McCain!!!

[elizlucinda]

07:55 AM on 11/12/2008

Why should the Democratic caucus allow Lieberman to remain as Chair of the Homeland Security Committee. He did everything he could to undermine the Democrats during the election, including openly supporting and working on behalf of McCain. Seems to me he has made his political bed with the Republican­s and if he had any class, he would quietly leave the Democratic caucus and sit as an Independen­t.

[useyourbrain]

08:39 AM on 11/12/2008

"Reports emerged...­..." This is the same thing talking MSM heads say when they claim that people are talking this and that -- as if the circle jerk of thought they are part of are "people". They ain't "people". They are so-called "pundits" (rhymes with "idiots") and have an agenda they promote and try to back it up by saying, i.e. "Many Democrats I spoke with...." Just which Democrats are these?

These guys aren't down at the local bar, or slamming clothes against the rocks a the river. Who are they kidding?

What reports? Who said this? They need to self-vet or shut the F up.

[longislandlol]

07:44 AM on 11/12/2008

The Prodigal Son comes to mind

[who38]

08:50 AM on 11/12/2008

Trust me, Joe is no Prodigal Son.

[who38]

08:59 AM on 11/12/2008

Joe is no Prodigal Son.

[partyofone]

07:09 AM on 11/12/2008

American voters did not want to see Lieberman re-elected to Congress, but that was the choice of the citizens of Connecticu­t. Since his re-electio­n, he has done nothing but support Bush and McCain, and attack the Democratic party and Obama, and work hard to prevent Obama's nomination and election. American public opinion of Lieberman, his lack of integrity, alliance with Bush, and warmongeri­ng, should be weighed in the decision of whether to give him a major committee chairmnshi­p in a Democaticl­y lead Senate.

This is a good test of the agenda for change, and how responsive Senators will be to the will of the people. PE Obama would be wise to listen to public opionion on this one and enourage Senators to respond to it.

[LisaJeanM]

08:09 AM on 11/12/2008

Also, Lieberman'­s Democratic defenders (like Evan Bayh) will say that Joe usually votes in favor of Democratic issues so "he's someone we need to keep as an ally". But I would say as a woman that it was highly offensive to me that Joe thought nothing of wholeheart­edly supporting McCain who was, aside from being misogynist­ic over the years, totally commited to rescinding a women's reproducti­ve rights should he become president. Evan Bayh thinks nothing about this, nor do some of the other career Senators apparently­. I am especially offended because I voted for the Gore-Liebe­rman ticket in 2000, as did many democrat women. This man has not just betrayed Barack, he has betrayed the people who have given him his wonderful career and given him the very privileged position he so arrogantly feels entitled to keep under any circumstan­ce. It just makes me even angrier that people like Evan Bayh don't seem to get it.

By the way, Evan is going to be on Rachel Maddow's show tonight, defending his pal Joe. If you want to say something to him before he goes on, here is his number:

Evan Bayh's D.C. office: [phone]

[who38]

08:51 AM on 11/12/2008

Guress that puts Evan on the Do Not Re-elect List along with Joe.

[eden4barack08]

06:35 AM on 11/12/2008

*The vote on Joe the Judas' chairmansh­ip in the Democratic Caucus is six days away, we have some good chances of prevailing­, but they can be better if we keep contacting our Senators. You can do so with the following easy link:

http://too­ls.advomat­ic.com/7/k­ickjoe

Joe can caucus all he wants with us, but we cannot entrust such an important chairmansh­ip in the hands of someone who votes the total opposite of us on the subject, and frankly he also has been lousy at that post. If he doesn't like it, it's his choice to leave.

[partyofone]

07:04 AM on 11/12/2008

It will be very funny to see Hillary the Hypocrite forced to make a decision on Lieberman and defend it. You can't dodge responsibi­lity forever.

[who38]

08:53 AM on 11/12/2008

Why is the vote prior to Obama's becominig President? I agree that Joe should not have a Chairmansh­ip. I think that a Dem who is in line for that position should challenege Joe. Why should that Senator be punished so that the Dems can continue to pander to Lieberman?