Colombia and Bill: The Unanswerable Question for Hillary Clinton
Reporters got an interesting response when Senator Hillary Clinton was asked in Pittsburgh about Sam Stein's bang-up reporting that connected the dots in Bill Clinton's work to promote the Colombia Free Trade deal. Reports Newsweek, "First, Clinton giggled. Then she laughed. She waved her arms in the air. Then came an "Oh my." More laughter. A few eye rolls and head shakes. Then this: "I mean, how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?""
Oh, I know this one. Wait. What?
The uncomfortable laughter and cryptic response is not a surprise. This is not a question that Senator Clinton can answer, especially if the media asks the right question. That question, naturally, is "What did you tell Bill Clinton when he told you that he was going to take $800,000 to help publicly promote the trade deal, and when he told you he was going to accept an award from President Uribe, as part of the PR effort to boost Uribe's image with Congress?"
In politics, you always try to predict questions, your response, and what the retort to that response will be, to ensure you're not check-mated. I ran through this exercise upon reading about the Senator's giggle-fest on trade, and came up with blanks.
To wit:
POSSIBLE ANSWER 1: I told him that was fine. He's his own person and I'm my own. I oppose the trade deal, and he knows that.
RETORT: So, you OK'd him working (and making money) to promote a trade deal that you believe hurts American workers, and stand with a President who you said is "targeting labor leaders?" How can you say you're trying to really kill this trade deal, then?
POSSIBLE ANSWER 2: I told him that I would rather he did not do that, and he knew I didn't like it. But he's his own person and I'm my own person, and we're going to disagree from time to time.
RETORT: So you told him not to do something and he did it anyway? Why can't you control Bill Clinton, especially on a matter so important? And if you couldn't control him now, why should Americans believe you can keep him in check as President? Or, more importantly, how are you going to control your Administration, filled with people who have different agendas and disagreements?
POSSIBLE ANSWER 3: He never asked me, but I told him I was upset when I found out.
RETORT: Bill Clinton is undermining your positions behind your back? Is this what your Presidency is going to look like?
There simply is no good answer to this issue. She loses no matter what she says. Either she admits that she's not really as opposed to the trade deal as a moral issue as she says, or she has no control over Bill Clinton, which of course is a bigger problem, as we'd be facing a "Two-Headed President" under that scenario - with world leaders and the American people not knowing who they should listen to.
It's a dilly of a pickle. I honestly can't blame Senator Clinton for her laughing response to the question. I wouldn't have the foggiest idea how to answer it either.
Then again, I'm not running for President.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Hillary against the trade deal but happy with the $800,000 that Bill got....see
I don't understand some of the people that support Hillary. She is a liar and a cheat. The Clinton Legacy is all about secrets and corruption. Why can't they see through this? Are they not very well educated or don't have enough information? Do they just not give a damn what she does and overlook her multitude of faults.
It's so sad to me that they can't see the wisdom, inspiration, intelligence and excitement of Obama. I pray those who will vote for McCain to spite themselves, our vets, our children and our country as a whole.
You make a great point. Why hasn't her bizarre response made it to television?
They play and comment on Obama's California / PA speech over and over. But on an important issue like CAFTA---Penn's connection, Bill's connection, the likely Hillary machinations behind the scenes that are different from her public view......
Why? Good for whomever asked that question and for this column. But why isn't the tv media covering any Penn / Bill / Colombia / Hillary - related issues in any depth or consistency? Her CAFTA problems are something she needs to explain. And, "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" though admirably zen-like, really doesn't count).
If David Axelrod was an anti-union multi-million dollar lobbyist for tons of big corporations (like Mark Penn)---and made a trip to talk with Colombia---and was on their payroll--and the President of Colombia soon after started to attack his Democratic opponent--AND if Michelle Obama was paid $800,000 by the Colombian government for her public support of CAFTA (like Bill Clinton)..
....Well, not to belabor the point, but if all that was happening in Camp Obama instead of Camp Clinton you can be darn sure we'd be hearing about it all day, every day. Add in the Clintons' private message to the CANADIAN government not to take her public comments about NAFTA seriously.
But most people will never hear about them.
On another site here on Huffpo is an article about CBS and how they're going to get rid of Katie Couric because they're in third place and sinking fast. It's no wonder people aren't watching their news. They're not covering things people like to hear, like this Hillary/Colombian connection and the involvement of the Colombian President in the assassinations of union leaders and peasant activists. It's why Huffpo is so popular, because they DO cover these topics. Ain't the Internet great?
With "only" $100 million in income over the past 7 years, the Clintons have a long way to go to meet their financial goals. From Lincoln bedroom stays to free trade agreements, everything is always for sale.
I don't have a problem with NAFTA, we should trade more with countries that are in our hemisphere and much less with China. China is not our friend and we should not be supporting them. The reason we have so many illegal immigrants from Mexico is all the work our country sends to China instead of Mexico.
Plenty of high-paying American jobs have been sent to Mexico. Now that those jobs are in Mexico, they are low-paying jobs. The disparity in wages is what keeps the Mexicans coming to the U.S.
Sean Hannity, Lou Dobbs and all you talking heads - nothing you say any longer can be taken as fact - you have become second only to Ann Coulter. You are hypocrites that claim to care about America but that is a lie - you pander for MONEY and ratings and lie to the American Public.
The mainstream media took a concerned candidate's words and twisted them and sensationalized the story to Enquirer status - no longer beneath the mainstream media to go there. It is the of job of the media to report the news - not make it.
Clinton belonged to the first administration guilty of selling out the American Workers and John McSame is a party to the repubs who continue to sell our jobs to foreign companies. They are both the rich elitists with millions of dollars and they are calling the community worker who worked for the poor and found jobs for displaced workers an elitist? That's really rich - very deflective of them. Rove tactic - accuse the opponent of that you are guilty of - they are the sellouts of the American worker and unions.
Clinton continues to twist the words to her advantage, because she is really about foreign trade as is evidenced by payoffs to her husband. She cares nothing about the workers of America. She uses people to achieve her goals, and then discards them like toilet paper.
Hi , this is Hillary Clinton. If I am elected, I will create thousands of new jobs for Pennsylvanians. They will be lobbying jobs. I will pretend to oppose the Colombian free trade agreement and you can all get $800,000 apiece from the Colombian government for promising to talk me into it. It's called the shakedown. Hey, it worked for Bill, why shouldn't it work for you. Next, I will pretend to dislike NAFTA and you can all get a lot of money by shaking down Mexico and Canada.
Boonville Indiana, Bill Clinton's inability to keep his mouth shut even in the face of facts has made his wife look even more the liar than she has the ability to do too Herself . It's Time for the Clinton's to step aside, and end this charade . this headline was from hereidreport and i agree, time for hillary to go
Coming soon to the new presidency, Nov. 2008: any criticism will be because of gender or race, or because you are anti-military. And the press will buy into the garbage. Just what we need when we have to solve some real problems.
Thanks Erica for getting the ball rolling.
Hillary said:
"I'll fight for every single job in America – and create millions of new, high paying jobs
that can't be outsourced. President Bush has stood by and watched as we've lost 3
million manufacturing jobs. And he's done nothing about the loopholes in our tax code
that actually encourage companies to ship jobs overseas."
Clinton campaign was supposedly "outraged" by NAFTA... but this wasn't her story when her husband, during his administration, pushed this calamity through. She praised NAFTA saying it was good for New York and America. http://www
While most think the constant patterns of lying is insignificant, it speaks clearly to the candidate's credibility or the lack thereof. Of course we are expected to forget... The lies about Bosnia (sniper fire) that husband Bill brought back. She embellished the hospital story in which both mother and infant dies. She distanced herself from Mark Penn who was actively pushing to expand NAFTA into South America, but she state that she is opposed to it. Now he's demoted, not fired. Clinton is insulting the American's intellegence. Honest? or Dishonest? You make the call!
Is she insulting our intelligence? Or riding a wave of American gullibility and media over-indulgence?
Results in Pennsylvania will tell a lot. I wish I wasn't such a pessimist. I wish I thought most people were really paying attention to her serious problems with trade issues, including anti-union lobbyist (and closest Clinton strategist) Mark Penn. And international corporate lobbyist, hubby Bill Clinton. But, then again, who can blame him?
$800,000 is more than many Americans earn by working full time for 20 years.
Let's see..how would hilliary deal with this if it were the other camp....
SHame on you Barack OBama, Shame on you for allowing your wife to undermine your positions. Just ask yourself, what would you do if the person accused of this was named Clinton...
For MSM not to vicerate her over this, given how they were "shocked and outraged" over the Canadian NAFTA story which was proven to be false is just amazing.
GIve me a break. She is supposed to agree with everything he does? And it's a problem if she doesn't? Do you hear yourself, or have a significant other?
My significant other and I are not a few steps away from the presidency of the United States. There's a world of difference. You give ME a break.
No, she's not supposed to agree with everything he says or every position he takes HOWEVER it seems to me to be a bit problematic to consider having a President who has a spouse out lobbying and actively working against the positions advocated by that President.
Most husbands and wives disagree on things - but, in a successful marriage, they're usually SMALL things - he likes toast, she likes bagels.... he enjoys horror films, she likes sci-fi... We're talking about the US trade policies and the American economy! Don't try to suggest to me that it's not important they be on the same side.
she is a SENATOR and was when Bill did this, not the president. How many sitting senators and members of congress have spouses who actually ARE lobbyists?
Why would you automatically assume that when Hillary became president her husband would continue to be involved in lobbying when instead she has told you before that she woudl use him as a worldwide ambassador.
ac, my point is that disagreements behind closed doors are fine. That IS marriage. I know that. But this is not behind closed doors, nor is this a marriage between the marketing director for Burger King who happened to marry the accounts receivable director for McDonald's.
This is a former leader of the free world, who still carries the title of "President" with someone who is seeking to also be "President
It's not enough to say "I'm opposed to it," when you let the former leader of the free world take money and put it in your bank account, to promote it and help try to usher it through.
Not to mention that your CHIEF STRATEGIST was making deals with Colombia "supposedly" behind your back. We are not gullible and stupid, she keeps treating us as such.
The GOP has done a great job of training a bunch of Democrats to attack the Clintons.
I hope this one goes viral.
Someone should call her at 3 AM and ask her the question again.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
