Posted on 05/30/2007 5:19:04 PM PDT by don-o
LAS VEGAS - Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton said Wednesday that she followed all Senate rules when she accepted rides on a private jet from a longtime benefactor.
"Whatever I've done, I complied with Senate rules at the time. That's the way every senator operates," the Democratic presidential contender said in an interview with The Associated Press during a campaign stop in Las Vegas.
The travel and consulting fees paid to Clinton's husband have come to light recently in a lawsuit against Vinod Gupta, a Clinton contributor and chief executive of the data company, InfoUSA Inc.
The lawsuit by company shareholders accuses Gupta of excessively spending millions of dollars, including $900,000 worth of travel on the Clintons.
Sen. Clinton, who complained about corporate America's largesse and skyrocketing executive pay during campaign events Wednesday, said she did not believe her message was undermined by her acceptance of the private flights. In line with Senate rules then in effect, Clinton's campaign has said she reimbursed Gupta at the cost of a first-class flight, typically a significant discount off the expense of a private jet.
"Those were the rules. You'll have to ask somebody else whether that's good policy," she said.
The Senate earlier this year voted to change the rules to require senators, their staff and candidates for federal office to pay the charter rate for flights on corporate jets. All the presidential candidates serving in the Senate, including Clinton, voted for the change.
Clinton struck several populist notes Wednesday in a speech at a union hall and at a town hall appearance at a North Las Vegas high school with large number of minority and low-income students.
The senator told members of the Culinary Workers Union, a group that represents casino and hotel workers, that it should be made easier for unions to winning Nevada's Jan. 19 caucus.
The senator made light of her own personal wealth.
"I know a lot of rich people. My husband and I never had any money ... now all the sudden we're rich," Clinton said. "I have nothing against rich people. ... but what made America great is the American middle class."
Clinton won her loudest applause with her promise to end the war in Iraq.
In the AP interview, she defended her vote against an Iraq war funding bill, saying she believes that President Bush will begin withdrawing troops from Iraq soon and she doesn't want to back his strategy any longer.
Clinton said she came to the conclusion while watching the president's Rose Garden news conference last week in which he referred to the bipartisan Iraq Study Group report.
"He talked about it favorably for the first time I've ever heard him talk about it," Clinton said. "That was to me a big signal that starting in the fall and toward the end of the year we're going to start seeing troops withdrawn from Iraq.
"My argument is, why wait?"
Among other things, the Iraq Study Group warned against sending more troops for long stints in the war zone and initially called for withdrawal by early 2008.
Clinton and her chief rival for the Democratic presidential nomination, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama (news, bio, voting record), voted against the funding bill last week in the face of strong pressure from liberal groups who wanted Democrats to use the bill to force a change of course. Clinton earlier supported a bill calling for a withdrawal timeline, which was vetoed by the president.
Clinton initially opposed cutting off funding for the troops, but said Wednesday that she believed last week's vote was cast in support of soldiers abroad. "The best thing I can do to continue my very vigorous support of the troops is to begin to bring them home," she said.
Clinton declined to comment on two unreleased biographies that, according to press accounts, describe the former first lady's road to her candidacy in unflattering terms. She said she wasn't familiar with the books.
Clinton acknowledged an assertion reportedly contained in one of the books: that she did not read a National Intelligence Estimate before voting to authorize the president to go to war in Iraq.
"I don't believe that I did or that vast majority of my colleagues did because we were briefed repeatedly about everything that was in it," she said.
Of course she defends it. The elite can legislate, confiscate, and incarcerate at will. As does Hugo Chavez, as will Empress Hillary. Ethics are only for the little people.
LOL! Oh,well, that goes without saying!
That really is a classic response. I guess she doesn’t have an opinion on whether it’s good policy, and why should she have an opinion on this or any policy? She’s only running for president. God, what a phony.
As a senator she is one of the rule and policy makers.
Page borrowed from AlGurr. When questioned about the Monks' campaign contributions solicited from the White House he said "There was no defining authority".
I've been trying to sell Hitlery and Pelosi carbon-offsets, to cover their jet-travel, from my electric mower - none of my calls get returned. Why's that????
Funny you should say that.
California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger arrived in Ontario today by private plane, and was met by a fleet of SUVs.
9 of them, I think.
He's up here to sign agreements with our Liberal Premier Dalton McGuinty.
They are agreeing to force you and I to sacrifice ourselves on the altar of global warming.
I wish she would fly with the TB guy.
“Whatever I’ve done, I complied with Senate rules at the time.”
Betcha big bucks that’s a lie. Is that the same as “no controlling authority”. Or is it more like “It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.” I get confused on all the reasons why Democrats can lie and get away with it.
“the elite can legislate, confiscate, and incarcerate”
Don’t forget incinerate.
Waco, anyone?
“but what made America great is the American middle class”
But she’s doing her best to destroy that same American middle class...
What was it that Hitchens said in 2001? Something about that it wasn't a question of whether America was better off after eight years of the Clintons, but were the Clintons better off.
: |
Here we go “ I am for the middle class” She needs us because who will fund her programs AKA the fairness doctrine which we all have come to know and love as INCOME REDISTRIBUTION! Lets make everyone the same! thats fair, isn’t it?
Thanks for that. Only plays part way for me. But enough to get the general stench
Hillar says “YES, we must raise taxes ‘for the common good”, however, Chelsea, William Jefferson Blythe and Hillary Rodam Clinton are exempt as they are the leading communists in America and they get to keep all they can get their hands on and into an off shore banking account. Only the unwashed get to have their taxes raised and share with those who don’t work.
or ebola
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.