In this week’s debate, Hillary Clinton said all of her “baggage” has been “rummaged through” for years. But important features of her close relationship with known terrorist sympathizers and Hamas supporters are still opaque to the public view.
Her relationship with terrorists began in the mid-1980s when she served on the Board of the New World Foundation, which gave funds to the Palestine Liberation Organization, at a time when the PLO was officially recognized by the US government as a terrorist organization.
In 1996, the First Lady initiated an outreach program to bring Muslim leaders to the White House. But, as terrorism expert Steve Emerson noted in the Wall Street Journal “Curiously, nearly all of the leaders with whom Mrs. Clinton elected to meet came from Islamic fundamentalist organizations. A review of the statements, publications, and conferences of the groups Mrs. Clinton embraced shows unambiguously that they have long advocated or justified violence. By meeting with these groups, the first lady lent them legitimacy as ‘mainstream’ and ‘moderate.’”
Among these radical groups was the American Muslim Alliance (AMA) and the Council on American-Islamic Relations, both groups that support Hamas, who attended a White House reception hosted by Hillary in February, 1996. Emerson says that its leaders “have sanctioned terrorism, published anti-Semitic statements, and repeatedly hosted conferences that were forums for denunciations of Jews and exhortations to wage jihad.”
The American Muslim Alliance was headed in the 90s by Abdulrahman Alamoudi who met with Clinton and Gore in 1995. Emerson notes that “Mrs. Clinton [allowed] the American Muslim Alliance to draw up the Muslim guest list for the first lady’s…White House reception.”
Alamoudi, Emerson says was “the primary defender of Musa Abu Marzug, the Hamas political bureau chief responsible for creating the group’s death squads.” Marzug took “credit” when Hamas brigades sprayed machine gun fire into a crowded Jerusalem mall. But less than three days after Marzug was arrested by the FBI in July of 1995, Alamoudi said that Marzug “had never been involved in terrorism” and called his arrest “an insult to the Muslim community. Emerson reports that he “elicited contributions fro Marzug’s defense fund” and called him a “political prisoner.”
Then, Hillary ran for Senate on her own and suddenly it was payback time. On June 13, 2000, the American Muslim Alliance’s Massachusetts Chapter held a very successful fundraiser for her candidacy. Tahir Ali, the chairman of the chapter, said “we must support all who have [Muslim] interests at heart.”
Perhaps conscious of how controversial the contribution would be, Hillary or someone on her staff, tried to pull a fast one, recording the donation on federal filing forms as being from the “American Museum Alliance.” But alert observers weren’t fooled and Senate candidate Clinton was forced to acknowledge who the real donor was and, four months after getting the money, she returned it.
Hillary’s history of lying goes back a long way. It was documented in the national media as far back as this 1996 article by William Safire, Essay: Blizzard of Lies
Americans of all political persuasions are coming to the sad realization that our First Lady — a woman of undoubted talents who was a role model for many in her generation — is a congenital liar.
Drip by drip, like Whitewater torture, the case is being made that she is compelled to mislead, and to ensnare her subordinates and friends in a web of deceit.
1. Remember the story she told about studying The Wall Street Journal to explain her 10,000 percent profit in 1979 commodity trading? We now know that was a lie told to turn aside accusations that as the Governor’s wife she profited corruptly, her account being run by a lawyer for state poultry interests through a disreputable broker.
She lied for good reason: To admit otherwise would be to confess taking, and paying taxes on, what some think amounted to a $100,000 bribe.
2. The abuse of Presidential power known as Travelgate elicited another series of lies. She induced a White House lawyer to assert flatly to investigators that Mrs. Clinton did not order the firing of White House travel aides, who were then harassed by the F.B.I. and Justice Department to justify patronage replacement by Mrs. Clinton’s cronies.
Now we know, from a memo long concealed from investigators, that there would be “hell to pay” if the furious First Lady’s desires were scorned. The career of the lawyer who transmitted Hillary’s lie to authorities is now in jeopardy. Again, she lied with good reason: to avoid being identified as a vindictive political power player who used the F.B.I. to ruin the lives of people standing in the way of juicy patronage.
3. In the aftermath of the apparent suicide of her former partner and closest confidant, White House Deputy Counsel Vincent Foster, she ordered the overturn of an agreement to allow the Justice Department to examine the files in the dead man’s office. Her closest friends and aides, under oath, have been blatantly disremembering this likely obstruction of justice, and may have to pay for supporting Hillary’s lie with jail terms.
Again, the lying was not irrational. Investigators believe that damning records from the Rose Law Firm, wrongfully kept in Vincent Foster’s White House office, were spirited out in the dead of night and hidden from the law for two years — in Hillary’s closet, in Web Hubbell’s basement before his felony conviction, in the President’s secretary’s personal files — before some were forced out last week.
Why the White House concealment? For good reason: The records show Hillary Clinton was lying when she denied actively representing a criminal enterprise known as the Madison S.& L., and indicate she may have conspired with Web Hubbell’s father-in-law to make a sham land deal that cost taxpayers $3 million.
Why the belated release of some of the incriminating evidence? Not because it mysteriously turned up in offices previously searched. Certainly not because Hillary Clinton and her new hang-tough White House counsel want to respond fully to lawful subpoenas.
One reason for the Friday-night dribble of evidence from the White House is the discovery by the F.B.I. of copies of some of those records elsewhere. When Clinton witnesses are asked about specific items in “lost” records — which investigators have — the White House “finds” its copy and releases it. By concealing the Madison billing records two days beyond the statute of limitations, Hillary evaded a civil suit by bamboozled bank regulators.
Another reason for recent revelations is the imminent turning of former aides and partners of Hillary against her; they were willing to cover her lying when it advanced their careers, but are inclined to listen to their own lawyers when faced with perjury indictments.
Therefore, ask not “Why didn’t she just come clean at the beginning?” She had good reasons to lie; she is in the longtime habit of lying; and she has never been called to account for lying herself or in suborning lying in her aides and friends.
No wonder the President is fearful of holding a prime-time press conference. Having been separately deposed by the independent counsel at least twice, the President and First Lady would be well advised to retain separate defense counsel.
At a campaign stop in Philadelphia, PA, Hillary Clinton furthered her identification with Rocky, recalling how she once stepped into the ring against Muhammed Ali.
Clinton said that she was sent to fight Ali when no one else would. “They used to say in the White House, if the ring were too small, or the venue too unimportant, or the opponent too fast, send Hillary.”
Recounting the championship bout against Ali, Senator Clinton recalled how she “ducked under a flurry of fists, crouched down and sought refuge on the ropes.” Asked about how difficult it was to staunch the bleeding between rounds, cutman Chelsea Clinton said, “none of your business.”
Responding to a question as to who won the heavyweight championship bout, Clinton called Ali “inept and irrelevant.”
“If he’s a heavyweight, he should have stood there and punched. If he dances and jabs, then he’s a lightweight…..and, he’s also a Muslim, so far as I know.”
Clinton, campaigning for the critical Pennsylvania vote, was criticized for not fighting Joe Frazier, the local hero. “I’m dedicated to health care reform,” said Clinton, “so I was not going to fight a guy called smokin’ Joe.” Asked, then, why she hired Mark Penn, who has done work for the tobacco industry, Clinton said, “ask Chelsea.”
Neal Boortz summarizes how Hillary was fired from a committee that investigated a president who was indicted for lying under oath. The reason… obstructing justice and potentially committing perjury.
* Hillary Rodham gets a spot on the legal staff of the House Judiciary Committee upon the recommendation of a lawyer pal of Ted Kennedy.
* The man who hires Hillary is Jerry Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat.
* The House Judiciary Committee is investigating Richard Nixon with an eye on impeachment.
* A question arises as to whether or not Nixon is legally entitled to counsel during the investigation. If so, his council would be allowed to cross examine witnesses appearing before the panel.
* The concern about having counsel for Nixon cross examine witnesses centered on E. Howard Hunt. Democrats on the committee feared that Nixon’s counsel would elicit information from Hunt that would be very damaging to the Kennedys.
* Zeifman tells Hillary that Nixon is entitled to counsel. He cites documents in the committee’s public file referencing the fact that Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas had representation four years earlier while he was being investigated.
* Hillary removes the documents from the committees public file and places them under lock and key in her office where they are not available for media or public scrutiny.
* Hillary then prepares a brief for filing with a federal judge which falsely states that there is no precedent for an official being investigated by the committee to have legal representation during that investigation.
* Nixon resigns before Hillary has a chance to submit the brief in which she makes knowingly false claims.
* Zeifman then fires Hillary. Hillary asks for a letter of recommendation. Zeifman says no. This was only the third time in Zeifman’s 17 years with the committee that he had refused a letter of recommendation.
Zeifman told Dan Calabrese that if Hillary had actually submitted the brief she most likely would have been disbarred.
Why exactly was she fired? In the words of the man who fired her…
“Because she was a liar,” Zeifman said in an interview last week. “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”
Hillary loves to talk about her ‘experience’ in the Oval Office. Well, here are a couple examples from some very noteworthy days during the Clinton administration.
When the World Trade Center was attacked in February 1993, President Bill Clinton flew to New York to be briefed on the attack and the response by city, state and federal authorities. According to newly released White House calendars of Hillary Clinton”s time as first lady, she remained in Washington to attend a photo shoot with Parade magazine and a performance of “Jesus Christ Superstar.”
Seven years later, in October 2000, the Clintons were enjoying a quiet weekend at their new home in Chappaqua, N.Y., when word came that the Cole, a U.S. destroyer, had been attacked in a Yemen port. Bill Clinton rushed back to the White House to deal with the crisis. Hillary Clinton returned to the campaign trail in her run for the Senate.