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

[Manx]

It isn't a matter of "holding a grudge." It's a matter of holding Lieberman accountable for his shameful behavior. Are Democrats willing to sell their souls to the devil in exchange for Lieberman's votes? If Obama really wants change, he will invoke principles over political expediency. Yes he can.

[exit116]

Joe Lieberman is a rat and deserves to be punished, but I think kicking him out of the caucus would be a mistake. Reid would tell you that he is a reliable vote on most issues. BO should extend his hand in the spirit of forgiveness and reconciliation. Strip him of his chairmanship of the important committee and offer him a lesser committee to keep him voting Democrat. Kicking him out of the caucus would just make the Dems look vindictive, there are too many large problems to fix right now to embroil ourselves in stuff like that.

[radiclib]

.
.
Judas Lieberman.
.
.

[LemonMeringue]

The Dems must take Joe Lieberman down. We voted for change. He's part of the Bush cabal that we voted to get away from. Nothing will change if the Dems wimp out on us.

[LisaJeanM]

...continu­ed from previous post...

Please contact your own Senator or call Harry's Reid's office and make your opinions known.

Harry Reids office number is: 202-224-3542

At the very least, Lieberman should be stripped of his chairmanship. The integrity of our government is at stake and change must begin with us. We can't expect the president-elect to take this issue on his shoulders right now. This is a moment where WE should weigh in. And don't wait for your Senators to do the right thing on their own because they won't--they've been in D.C. too long and, sadly, they're too jaded to realize what's really at stake here.

[eden4barack08]

It's going on vote next week. We must call all the Senators, not just Reid.

Here's a tool for that:

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

[eden4barack08]

Also new from Brave New Films. Help this go viral.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfJunZu22VU

[LisaJeanM]

For those of you in California (like me) please also call Senator Boxer and leave a message for her expressing your opinion of Joe Lieberman:

Sen. Boxer: 202-224-3553

Please help restore integrity back into our government.

[who38]

Both Boxer and Fineslime will support Joe.

[ebanks84]

I have no doubt believing it's true.

[LisaJeanM]

If the Democratic party allows Lieberman to stay on as chairman of Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs the Democratic party is saying NO to a very important and necessary change in the integrity of our government. And the party will be saying the usual YES to politicians who put their financial backers first and the welfare of the country LAST.

Lieberman must not be in a position where he can continue to do the country harm by promoting the harmful agenda of his particular special interest groups. Allowing him to maintain his chairmanship is saying YES to all of the dishonesty and corruption that got us into the Iraq war -- and saying YES to those who took us straight into our huge financial mess. It is setting the stage for MORE of what this man and those like him have to offer.

If you are aware of Joe Lieberman's actions, going back to his moral posturing 10 years ago about ethics in the government you know that he is a smoothly calculating hypocrite and a perfect example of the very worst in our government. That is precisely why he generates disgust from all of us. *Trust your gut feelings on this man.* There is no one in Washington D.C. who is more morally vacuous. From my own point of view he is worse than George W. Bush and even Dick Cheney because he's shown himself to be even more of a calculating political posturer.

[GregorZap]

Well said!

[who38]

Thank you.

[ajax2]

The WSJ appears to be on a massive disinformation campaign. Articles on Clinton supporting Lieberman, and Obama maintaining Bush's intelligence practices are un-sourced or poorly sourced. HuffPost should not promote or highlight this dubious reporting. Perhaps they belong on the entertainment page.

[eden4barack08]

Yup, the WSJ is the paper version of Faux News.

[GregorZap]

WSJ is a Murdoch enterprise. Could anyone expect them to retain their integrity?!?

[LisaJeanM]

Excellent point. Sadly the media can't be trusted much at all anymore. Don't trust any report until its been well verified.

[Axlotl]

Man, if this isn't Frodo telling Sam to spare Gollum's life, because "He still has a part to play yet" I don't know what is. I'd like to see Joe go, but I bow to Obama &/or Bill's judgment on the matter.

[MajorChode]

Judas Joe voted guilty on Clinton's kangaroo court impeachment trial in the Senate. Do you truly believe Bill is going to go to bat for him now? Both Bill and Hillary endorsed Lieberman's opponent in the 2006 Connecticut US Senate primary. This is just another Washington rumor that has no merit. It wouldn't surprise me if someone like Matt Drudge were behind it.

[ebanks84]

They are long time friends. Yes, Clinton would.

[wanked]

The endorsment was nothing to speak of...a few thousand dollars...­. period. Ned Lamont had to drive up to New York to get it!

Our Govt is up to its neck in hypocracy.­..Look how bush treated McSame in 2000, who then went crawling before him.

Change? We'll see....

[Beninn]

The truth is bad enough. There's no need to make things up. No, Lieberman did not vote guilty on impeachment. Lieberman lobbied to have Clinton censured.

The Clintons' endorsed Lieberman during the primary in the 2006 election, but once Lamont became the Democratic nominee, Hillary publicly endorsed Lamont. It's been suggested that both Clintons worked below the radar to help Lieberman win, and there is enough evidence for me to believe it. Hillary donated the maximum to Lieberman during the primary campaign, but on the night of the primary election after Lamont won, she gave Lamont 50% of that amount and never contributed again. She lent Howard Wolfson to Lamont's campaign and promised to throw a fundraiser for him. The fundraiser turned out to be a mass affair for all Democratic candidates running in New England, and she neglected to include Lamont's name in her speech to the guests about supporting all of the candidates.

[SCG]

( Both Bill and Hillary endorsed Lieberman's opponent in the 2006 Connecticut US Senate primary. )

Not true, Bill Clinton supported Lieberman. He made television and radio ads, including recorded robo calls.

He did drop his support, once Lieberman lost the democratic primary.

[edwarvir]

why would Joe Lieberman want to stay in the Dem party?.
He worked his A off to help John Mccain to get elected.
Why does he get to have the best of both worlds.
He's not faithful to this party he did not think Senator O
should be POTUS he will not be loyal to President O.
KICK HIM OUT! i DON'T TRUST THE CLINTONS EITHER.

[LemonMeringue]

You can be sure that if McCain had won, Lieberman would already be a Republican.

He's trying to make nice because the Democrats are in power now. That's all.

[who38]

If McCain had won, Lieberman would be Secretary of State elect.

[ebanks84]

I agree with that.

[Shieldmaiden]

Joe LIEberman should watch himself. I bet anyone claiming to help him is secretly plotting his political demise. Trust no one Joe, because no one trusts you. MUHAHAHAHA.

[LarBear]

Seems to me this is NOT about getting even, or punishment­... Simply holding him responsible for his behavior, belief, LIES, Spin, Republican talking points and words... A CHANGE the USA Needs...

[Lupin77]

This man should be locked out of politics. He talks out of both sides of his mouth. Unreliable and unpredicable.

[lechatnoir]

All the enablers who went along with the Decider and the neocon men need to go, including those responsible for laying out the ground work.
Of course, it's reasonable to expect that they will all be scurrying towards the exits right about now.

[Mattatat]

Anyone else sick of Sam Stein's pathological hatred of the Clintons?

What's your damage, dude?

Go see a therapist already.