- BIG NEWS:
- Barack Obama
- |
- Joe Lieberman
- |
- Sarah Palin
- |
- GOP
- |
Bill Clinton: Purdum a "Sleazy" "Slimy" "Scumbag"
Read More:
Bill Clinton, Clinton Purdum Attack, Clinton Purdum Insult, Purdum Clinton, Todd Purdum, Todd Purdum Vanity Fair, Vanity Fair, Vanity Fair Purdum, Video,
Home News
Click below to listen to audio of Bill Clinton on a ropeline discussing "The Comeback Id," Todd Purdum's controversial Vanity Fair article.
MILBANK, S.D. -- Former President Bill Clinton today unleashed a salty stream of epithets to describe former New York Times reporter and current Vanity Fair writer Todd Purdum, calling him "sleazy," "dishonest," "slimy" and a "scumbag."
The former president made the comment at a local campaign event after I asked him if Purdum's much-commented upon Vanity Fair story was weighing on his mind.
Tightly gripping this reporter's hand and refusing to let go, Clinton heatedly denounced the writer, who is currently married to former Clinton White House Press Secretary, Dee Dee Myers.
"[He's] sleazy," he said referring to Purdum. "He's a really dishonest reporter. And one of our guys talked to him . . . And I haven't read [the article]. But he told me there's five or six just blatant lies in there. But he's a real slimy guy," the former president said.
When I reminded him that Purdum was married to his former press spokesperson Myers, Clinton was undeterred.
"That's all right-- he's still a scumbag," Clinton said. " Let me tell ya-- he's one of the guys -- he's one of the guys that propagated all those lies about Whitewater to Kenneth Starr. He's just a dishonest guy-- can't help it."
Purdum's piece, featured in this month's edition of Vanity Fair, included former advisers criticizing former President Clinton for bringing negative attention to Hillary Clinton's candidacy and for surrounding himself with friends who might discredit her campaign.
The former president's tirade continued:
"The editor of Esquire-- he sent us an email yesterday and said it was the single sleaziest piece of journalism he'd seen in decades. He said it made him want to go take a shower and he was embarrassed to be a journalist when he read it."
"You know he didn't use a single name, cite a single source in all those things he said. It's just slimy. It's part of the national media's attempt to nail Hillary for Obama. It's just the most biased press coverage in history. It's another way of helping Obama. They had all these people standing up in this church cheering, calling Hillary a white racist, and he didn't do anything about it. The first day he said 'Ah, ah, ah well.' Because that's what they do-- he gets other people to slime her. So then they saw the movie they thought this is a great ad for John McCain-- maybe I better quit the church. It's all politics. It's all about the bias of the media for Obama. Don't think anything about it."
"But I'm telling ya, all it's doing is driving her supporters further and further away-- because they know exactly what it is-- this has been the most rigged press coverage in modern history-- and the guy ought to be ashamed of himself. But he has no shame. It isn't the first dishonest piece he's written about me or her."
"Anytime you read a story that slimes a public figure with anonymous quotes, it oughta make the bells go off in your head. Because anytime somebody uses those things-- he wrote the story in his head in advance, and he just goes around and tries to find some coward to say whatever they want to say, hoping to get some benefit out of it. It didn't bother me. It shouldn't bother you."
"Thank you, Mr. President," I said attempting to end the conversation.
But Clinton continued. "He can't help it," he said. "He still hasn't apologized to me for Whitewater."
Update: President Clinton's spokesman Jay Carson issued a statement in response to this article: "President Clinton was understandably upset about an outrageously unfair article, but the language today was inappropriate and he wishes he had not used it."
Update: Esquire spokesperson sent the following statement. "David Granger did not send an e-mail to Bill Clinton about the Vanity Fair article. One of the editors on staff sent a personal note about the piece to Doug Band, who was written about in the article. That was a private e-mail, and Band has since apologized to Esquire that it became public."
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
This is THE MOST important election in a long time. Drop the name calling, mudslinging etc. UNITY! Do you want Bush to stay?...I hope Dems are smart enough to unify and drop the bad blood and start supporting Obama. He will win if Hillary supporters help. PLEASE WE NEED YOUR HELP!!!!!!!!!
I voted for Hillary in the Florida Primary - my wife voted for Edwards - we'll both vote for Obama in the General.
Thank you! Repubs begone!
Thanks for your support. And rumor is afoot that both Hillary and Edwards will be offered positions in the Obama Cabinet, so a vote for Obama may in fact be a vote for all three of them...
Meanwhile McCain's camp foments dissent
http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0608/McCain_lavishes_praise_on_Hillary_says_shes_inspired_American_women.html
It's part of their strategy to bring up the purity and sanctity of the Clinton campaign while dissing the Obama campaign hoping to keep this argument going all summer. I would hope it ends tonight, but it won't. The Republicans will be picking the scab off this wound right up to the general election. Count on it.
We have to get over this.
Clinton and McCain are both Washington Insiders.
Even worse than that is what his minion trolls are doing:
"Wikileaks has a leaked memo which appears to be an internal memo from the McCain campaign to team members targeting Internet-based campaigning. The strategy? Take advantage of Clinton supporters of a specific demographic, target and inflame their anger to the point that they vote for McCain out of spite and fearmongering."
http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/6/2/162355/0928
You sure are helpful BGandE.
I read the whole Purdham article and didn't think it was THAT bad. But I can see why Bill is p'oed about it. It does make him look irresonsible and like a bit of a dilettante. But I wonder how much of Clinton's behavior in the current campaign colored my reading of the article. Two or three years ago - when I still had some respect and admiration for him - I might have read something like this and shrugged off a lot of the stuff Purdham wrote as just Bill being Bill. Of course, the cumulative effect of the article seems to be saying that Bill just being Bill is the problem.
Oh, Bill.
Perhaps tVanity Fair had no bad intentions?
Perhaps Purdham simply wrote one of those 'Jesse Jackson won South Carolina in '84 and '88' kinda stories?
Thank heavens Hillary has lost.... Bill Clinton is not JUST a loose cannon.... he's out of control.... what is so interesting is that the article in question was about just that - Bill's rant seems to vindicate Purdum's conclusion that Bill is ONE ANGRY MAN...... enough with the medias "explanations" that Bill's out of control temper is because it's so hard to heard others be critical of his spouse - Hello - you don't see Cindy McCain or Michelle Obama go "postal" ..... He needs to go away.... it is unseemly for an ex-President to behave the way he is..... (and I won't even get in to the "bimbo" aspect of this)..... enough ...... first the Clinton's disgustingly attacked Bill Richardson for the Obama endorsement, now Bill is "sliming" DeeDee's husband..... let's hope that both Barack and McCain will uplift the dialog - again, thank heavens we "hopefully" won't have Bill's mouth firing off again.... Was is so sad is that every time he fires off his mouth, he shrinks......
Bill and Hillary Clinton ---
Exit screaming.
To get someone to smash your opponents knee is the tonya harding option. Should the Clintons not deliver or work extreemly hard to deliver those that voted for her , to lose a primary and then still do your best to bring down your opponent will be known as the Clinton option from now on , and if this is the result in november then she can forget being a senator or govenor or even dogcatcher in a democratic town or city . The choice is hers but I for one will NEVER FORGET what she does over the next few months and i am not alone
Well said.....
That's why 2012 is a no go for her either way. Either she helps Obama win (and he runs again in 2012) or she causes Obama's loss (and she is shut out in 2012).
At this point, just based upon what's already transpired...if Obama loses, she will get much of the blame.
The Clinton Option - phrase thus be coined.
I think it is highly disingenuine to not identify yourself as a reporter wth a tape recorder.
We are talking about the same person who taped Obama during the fundraiser where he made the bitter statement. She was at a fundraiser not a campaign rally and she never asked Obama a question, she just sat in the crowd and recorded away. How did you feel about that. Even though I am an Obama supporter I think everything is fair game and we should know what they are saying at fundraisers, etc. and campaign rallies.
The correct word usage in your sentence should be "disingenuous".
It is, and it is not using good judgment to say things that you don't want repeated, if you are campaigning.
define "inappropriate"
At some point, Mr. Clinton, you will have to come to terms with your own behavior and antics during this primary election. You contributed more to your wife's defeat than any one or any thing else.
In my view, Hillary Clinton's decision to have you stump for her was the biggest reason she lost the nomination. And I say that as someone who walked precincts for your in California and should have been compelled to work that hard for your wife's nomination.
hey now, HRC wouldn't have had a shot without Bill and although he may be imperfect, he was still a good president.. I do disagree with much of the trash talk that has gone on from the Clintons, and sorry but I do not see that Obama has contributed to it. he had a preacher with some controversial views that he does not share...is this all they have to criticize?? Obama is not responsible for the views (nutty or not) of others and all those views cannot be imputed to him just because he occasionally attended services. it seems wrong that this aspect of a candidates life should be intruded upon and politically scrutinized--this is not a cult it is an established Christian church. it is unfortunate that we allow our press to persecute candidate's personal lives..that is part of the problem that is never acknowledged...if we demand paper cutouts for leaders that is what we will get...newscasters with shiny exteriors who will contribute intelligent change or shake up the status quo as is so desperately needeed
I agree. The tide turned for Hillary in SC. The many things Bill said in NH and then in SC changed the dynamics of this race. Obama would have won in SC, but probably not by the margins he did if Bill hadn't said many of the things he did leading up to SC.
Given that Hillary was running on Bill's record when you get right down to it, any attempt to exclude him from the campaign was highly problematic.
Just to be speculative - what would have happened if Fl. and Mich. had been allowed to hold normal priamries even if they defied the Almighty DNC??? Would have been a different outcome and Hillary would likely have won. I'm not mad about things tho and I'll certainly vote for Obama.
And of course Sen. Obama had absolutely nothing to do with the comments. We should all take him at his word on why he left Trinity. He should not be asked about evreything that happens at Trinity UCC. Trinity UCC should be free to execise their mission without being tied to a President or Presidential candidate and the corresponding constant press attention.
Or, if the press does insist on covering Trinity and assigning blame to Obama (or guilt by association); then one must ask for the same standard to be applied to Hillary. She is equally at fault for Bill's actions and more importantly, for Coe's statements - - talk about "elitist" and terrifying.
I think it is time for the Clintons to take a deep breath and reassess their position, the harm they have done to the party, and the damage they have done to Democrats' chances of winning in November. I still think we will win in November, but the division the Clintons have created will haunt the Obama administration and continue the backbiting and snarling we have endured for many years now.
It is their fault.
They have legitimized racism and even encouraged it. They have provided McCain with endless ammunition to use against Obama. I am not a vindictive person, but I am finding it very hard to evoke any compassion for the Clintons -- I am beginning to feel like they are the Democratic version of Bush&Co.
Here's what REALLY disgusts me...
1.) Bill Clinton says all this crap...
2.) Bill Clinton unfairly accuses Obama of getting other people to smear Hillary on his behalf (Obama had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the article Todd Purdam wrote)...
3.) Clinton then decides he should "apologize"... but wait a minute - instead....
4.) He decides NOT to apologize - instead, he has his spokesperson issue a statement...
5.) The statement says his "language was inappropriate", but Bill Clinton himself never actually APOLOGIZES or says "I'm sorry - I was wrong"...
And here's the best part of all...
6.) Bill Clinton never ONCE apologized to Barack Obama for all the crap he just accused him of!!!
With ALL due respect to female voters - and I mean this sincerely - I would vote for a woman IN A MINUTE if she were the best candidate. But I could never vote for anyone, male or female, who does these kinds of things over and over and over again.
The Clintons need to realize the reason so many people dislike them is NOT because Hillary is a woman - but rather because Hillary and Bill CONTINUALLY behave in this fashion.
And unfortunately, you DO have some idiots who are stupid enough to not vote for a woman - that's the sad truth. But a MUCH GREATER NUMBER of people do not support Hillary Clinton because of the saturated negativity which consistently spews forth from the mouths of both Hillary and Bill.
But, let's not overlook that without an Obama, the DLC was more than willing to choose Hillary and Bill as their candidates, in spite of their thorns. Here the DLC proved to be just as corrupt as they stood by and watched these two weasels use 'right-wing tactics' to undermine what now appears to be their nominee. I wouldn't blame John McCain one bit, if he gathered all of the information used by the Clintons and produced ad after ad, in his run against Obama. While, I personally wish Obama to win this thing, the DLC along with Pelosi, Reid and Clyburn (although he was the first to pivot) ultimately will be responsible for the many negative themes the Clintons infused about Obama and his problem with whites and Hispanics.
Now it is unclear how the DLC and party leaders will go about fixing the mess left by the Clintons, and while the media pretends its Obama fault, Democratic leadership understands they condoned it and share a responsibility for the endgame.
The self-serving Clinton's are now a huge blight on the reputation of the Democratic Party. They both have destroyed any respect I had for them over the years. I even voted for the “Big Dog” twice. I am disgusted by their behavior now. Very narcissistic.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
