American voters want a presidential candidate who isn’t afraid to let it all hang out, and that’s exactly why Joe Biden is the presumptive frontrunner in 2016. Ronald Kessler’s new book, “The First Family Detail,” includes some revealing tidbits, the New York Observer reports:
It’s been an eventful week in world affairs, as civilization’s dramatic descent into chaos continues at a rapid clip. Here’s a recap:
Political journalists are going to love the Hillary Clinton presidency. Judging by the way Team Clinton has responded to a series of books that are critical of the elderly homeowner and her philandering husband, it will be a real treat to cover them in the White House (again).
According to Politico, for example, public relations representatives for the Clinton family have issued a joint statement condemning the recent publication of “trashy” books by Ed Klein, Daniel Halper, and Ronald Kessler, all of which reflect less than favorably on the Clintons. The spokesmen condemned the “despicable” authors, arguing that “their behavior should neither be allowed nor enabled,” and called on “legitimate media outlets” to promptly censor them.
As world-renowned data scientist Nate Silver explains: “Democrats Are Way More Obsessed With Impeachment Than Republicans.” For example, nearly every time the word “impeachment” has been entered into the Congressional record this month, a Democrat said it.
Surely the wingnuts at Fox News have been using the I-word more often than the intellectual pundits at MSNBC, right?
Democratic Senate candidate Alison Lundergan Grimes showed off her impressive foreign policy knowledge this week, telling the Lexington Herald Leader that Israel’s Iron Dome system “has been a big reason why Israel has been able to withstand the terrorists that have tried to tunnel their way in.”
It was not immediately clear whether Grimes had any idea what she was talking about, but a Free Beacon graphical analytics team has sought to recreate her thought process.
This is what a global political empire looks like.
The Washington Examiner reports that Bill Clinton earned $48 million—from speeches and consulting deals—during his wife’s tenure as Secretary of State. A number of those speeches were funded by powerful business and political entities with a clear interest in influencing U.S. policy, yet the State Department did not object to any of them, despite policies intended to prevent ”potential or actual conflicts of interest.”
For example, the Examiner investigation found that Clinton made more than $2 million for a total of eight speeches in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the United Arab Emirates. Much of the funding for the speeches came from wealthy investors with close ties to the governments in those countries.
Hillary Clinton doesn’t know exactly how wealthy she is, apparently. In an interview with Fusion’s Jorge Ramos, here’s what the elderly public speaker said when asked if she knew her net worth: “Uh, you know, within a range, yeah. I mean, we have two very nice houses, which we’re very proud, and not selling any time soon.”
Clinton eventually conceded that her net worth was in the “millions.” She has earned at least $12 million since quitting her job as Secretary of State. Financing the purchase of those two houses was one of the reasons the Clintons “struggled” to make ends meet after leaving the White House, according to Hillary.
Salon has published an important piece urging our nation’s Thought Leaders to stop pretending Senator Ted Cruz is an intelligent person. Read all 1,200 words of it if you insist, but the upshot, essentially, is that being smart and holding conservative political views are mutually exclusive.
On the other hand, it wouldn’t require much editing to rewrite the piece in a way that would condemn the intellect of another alleged genius, Barack Obama, and pretty much every Democrat who might run for president in 2016.
Hillary Clinton is finally toeing the Democratic Party line with respect to the immigration crisis on the southern border. In an interview with Fusion’s Jorge Ramos on Thursday, Clinton sided with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.), who opposes any changes to a 2008 anti-trafficking law that would make it easier to process—and, if necessary, deport—the tens of thousands of unaccompanied migrant children who have crossed the border in recent months.
“No, I don’t agree that we should change the law,” Clinton said. “That’s why I’m advocating an appropriate procedure, well-funded by the Congress, which they are resisting doing, so that we can make individual decisions.”
In fact, Congress has tried to take action. One proposal from Senator John Cornyn (R., Texas) and Representative Henry Cuellar (D., Texas) has attracted bipartisan support, but Reid and other Democrats oppose it because it would make changes to the 2008 law. And apparently, Clinton shares this position. The American people, on the other hand, overwhelmingly favor reforms to the 2008 law in order to address the border crisis and facilitate the deportation process.