Posted on 05/14/2007 5:07:37 AM PDT by Zakeet
Frontpage Interview’s guest today is R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr., the founder and editor in chief of The American Spectator.
[Snip]
FP: What inspired you to write this book?
Tyrrell: The rogue himself. He is one of the most preposterous figures in American political history.
[Snip]
FP: Illuminate for us a few of the ingredients that make Bill Clinton a tortured man in his retirement.
Tyrrell: He senses that he has failed as a President—there are many examples of this in the book. Hence you see his angry outbursts in the book. But he also, being a sociopath, cannot perceive that he has done anything wrong. Hence his denunciations of prosecutors and his two hundred pardons and commutations to felons. I list them in the book. It is an astounding list of scoundrels, but Clinton lacks the probity to recognize this.
FP: In what ways is Clinton a sociopath? Is Hillary one as well?
Tyrell: Well, neither knows right from wrong. They lie when they don't have to and tell whoppers when a little white lie would be perfectly adequate. That gets them into trouble. As I report in the book no first couple ever attracted so many prosecutors, cops, criminal lawyers. At one point they had the entire Supreme Court engaged, and the Senate and the United States House of Representatives, the FBI, the Justice Department, who knows, possibly even the CIA and Russian intelligence? You will recall that I report that the “phone sex” between Lewinsky and Clinton were al taped by foreign intelligence agencies and might be released at any point, a particularly dramatic point might be during Hillary’s run for the White House..
(Excerpt) Read more at frontpagemagazine.com ...
Clinton watchers will not be surprised by any of the revelations, but will find some new material. For example, "the Clinton campaign lives in constant fear of another problem: bimbo eruptions from the bimbos he has been picking up with in retirement."
Enjoy.
I’m sure HRC has nightmares that Bill will do something else stupid before the 08 election.
man, I hope so!
The only nightmare they have... is being hung for treason.
Will do? He already has been with several women. Monica was just one of five regulars visiting the White House. Bill can’t stop.
The most destructive set of sociopaths in American history.
A blast from the past speculating about the tapes:
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3786c5344c3f.htm
"There are different agencies in the government that make it their business to tape certain things for certain reasons, and it was one of those agencies" that did the taping, Kyl said. "Incidentally, it may have been more than one of those agencies," he added.
Kyl said of the sources: "They are people who claim to have information about those tapes, who by virtue of who they are have some credibility with respect to the information they have come forward about."
When asked whether the sources were members of U.S. intelligence, Kyl said, "You can assume that they are people who at some period in time have been in the employ of the federal government." ...
On the first day of President Clinton's Senate trial, Washington Post columnist Jim Hoagland dropped a bombshell which, if pursued, could result in Clinton's conviction and removal from office. He urged the Senate to examine "one corner" of the Lewinsky scandal that hasn't gotten much attention. He wrote, "Clinton recognized in a telephone conversation with his young paramour that foreign intelligence organizations could, without much trouble, be listening in on their phone sex and other musings, according to Lewinsky's detailed and unchallenged testimony."
"n his January 14 column, Hoagland, a Washington insider, went on to say, "What then did the president do to protect himself, and national security, from blackmail and damage, other than propose an absurd cover story to Monica?"
Does this sound like something that might come close to a high crime and misdemeanor? You bet. This Hoagland column has given Senate Republicans a softball they should hit out of the park. This is the break they needed to transform the case into a demonstrable crime against the Constitution. With the national security angle factored in, they can now argue for conviction on the ground that the Clinton conspiracy to conceal his relationship with Lewinsky was actually an effort to prevent the Congress and the public from discovering how a foreign intelligence service may have penetrated the White House.
A vote to convict the president then becomes a vote for protecting the national security of the U.S. Members of the U.S. Senate, if they take their own oaths seriously, should vigorously pursue this line of inquiry. If Clinton is called as a witness, he should be asked directly whether he was concerned at all about his illicit affair threatening national security. Thus, Clinton can be exposed before the American people as someone who put his own sexual appetite before the national security of the U.S. (and)...he is callous toward the "people's business" he claims to be so busy on.
This line of attack has the potential to turn the charge of "sexual McCarthyism" on its head. It will demonstrate to the American people that sexual perversion, of the kind practiced by the president, must be considered when it involves people with access to our most sensitive secrets.
The big questions: which foreign intelligence agency or agencies monitored the affair? And what did they do with this blackmail material? Was Clinton blackmailed? And how did Lewinsky get a top-secret clearance in the Pentagon anyway?
Hoagland's attention to this matter is welcome, but it is actually an old story. Independent counsel Kenneth Starr had reported that, according to Lewinsky, the president had "told her that he suspected that a foreign embassy (he did not specify which one) was tapping his telephones, and he proposed cover stories. If ever questioned, she should say that the two of them were just friends. If anyone ever asked about their phone sex, she should say that they knew their calls were being monitored all along, and the phone sex was just a put-on."
The other four may have been "regulars"...Monica was a "large".
Lots of PSI on that g-string.
Yes they are. And why would anyone want them back in the White House???
by Paul R. Hollrah, Lincoln Heritage Institute Senior Fellow
During the summer of 1992, Bill Clinton trailed George H.W. Bush and H. Ross Perot in all the major head-to-head polls. By comparison, he was an absolute novice in foreign affairs and he needed something to help him establish an image as a “player” on the international stage. By coincidence, Russian President Boris Yeltsin was then in the midst of a high profile tour of the U.S. and Clinton asked for and received an audience with the Russian leader. It was just what the campaign needed.
As Strobe Talbott explains in his book, The Russia Hand, “Before his presidency, Clinton’s (foreign policy) claims extended to no more than an Oxford essay on the possibilities of political reform in the USSR, and an early trip to the country.”
That storied trip took place in the summer of 1969 when Clinton and Talbott, Oxford roommates, traveled together to Moscow. It was on that trip that Talbott was recruited by Victor Louis, the KGB’s infamous “talent scout,” leading him to become the Kremlin’s “most trusted friend” in Washington. Then, in the early 1970s, Talbott returned to Moscow as a correspondent for Time Magazine. It was during those years that he became closely allied with an up-and-coming Yeltsin partisan named Anatoly Chubais.
Shortly after his inauguration in January 1993, Clinton named Talbott, who had acquired a reputation as something of a Russia “expert,” as Ambassador-at-Large to Russia; while in Russia, Chubais had been given the Herculean task of privatizing all of the country’s previously state-owned enterprises. Talbott and Chubais were suddenly the glue that cemented the Clinton-Yeltsin relationship.
However, that relationship would soon become a bit more complicated. As Yeltsin wrote in his memoir, Midnight Diaries, “In late 1996, after Clinton’s reelection, Russian intelligence (SVR) sent me a coded report containing a prognosis of how the Republicans would resolve the major political problems emerging for them.…In the near future, the report said, Clinton’s enemies planned to plant in his entourage a young provocateur who would spark a major scandal capable of ruining the president’s reputation…”
When asked in an interview with the Times of London if he knew the identity of the woman (Monica Lewinsky) before it was disclosed in the Drudge Report on January 19, 1998, he replied, “I knew.”
The difficulty with Yeltsin’s recollection is that the Clinton-Lewinsky affair was already a year old, their first sexual encounter having occurred in the Oval Office on November 15, 1995. Also, there has never been any informed speculation that Lewinsky was a Republican plant. Meanwhile, in Russia, the “privatization” program had become a major scam in which Chubais and his friends became instant billionaires. By early 1997 the looting of state enterprises was so complete that the International Monetary Fund (IMF) refused to approve the billions in loans needed to avert economic collapse. Desperate measures were required if Yeltsin and Chubais were to escape with their political hides intact.
Informed speculation has it that Yeltsin then told Chubais of the SVR memorandum regarding Clinton and Lewinsky. Chubais called Talbott to Moscow for a meeting on March 5, 1997, and informed him that, if the multi-billion dollar IMF loan was not approved (one-fifth of it coming out of the pockets of American taxpayers), he was not sure he could “keep the lid on” the Clinton-Lewinsky affair. Talbott returned to Washington and shortly thereafter Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, who had been unalterably opposed to the approval of the IMF loans, suddenly began referring to Chubais and his fellow looters as a “dream team” for their “superb” handling of the Russian economy. The IMF loan was quickly approved and the Clinton-Lewinsky affair remained a secret until shortly after Clinton suborned Linda Tripp’s perjury and Matt Drudge broke the story.
So how did Larry Summers and the IMF “get religion” so quickly? On what basis did Clinton worry out loud to Lewinsky, three weeks after the Talbott-Chubais meeting, about “a foreign power listening in” on their steamy telephone conversations? If Clinton knew about Yeltsin’s SVR memo, who told him? And how might the rehash of this sordid affair have an impact on Hillary’s presidential ambitions?
It is reasonable to assume that Talbott did what most men would do; he told his wife the juicy story about the president’s sex life. That scenario becomes even more probable when we realize that Talbott’s wife was none other than Brooke Shearer, one of Hillary Clinton’s closest friends and, at that time, head of the White House intern program. Monica Lewinsky was Bill Clinton’s lover, and Strobe Talbott’s wife was Monica Lewinsky’s boss.
So, was the President of the United States blackmailed by the Russians? And did Hillary have a hand in forcing a blackmail payoff involving billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars? It is an interesting speculation.
Lincoln Heritage Institute • lhi@wmis.net
Tyrrell was interviewed by Brian Lamb on CSPAN. He told how he was sitting with a bunch of Clinton cronies at a party. One asked what he did and he told them he is a writer. They asked if he’d written anything they might know and he told them he wrote Finnegan’s Wake. They believed him. His conclusion was that the crew surrounding Bill is not nearly as smart as they believe they are.
LOL! Products of the late twentieth-century Amercian education system.....
Bill is a sociopath
Hellary is just a manipulating control freak
Sean Hannity last was comparing Hillary's version in her book with the recollections of other Clintonistas, to show the inconsistencies, while ignoring the larger issue that Hillary's pretense of belatedly discovering the truth was a big sham.
Of course, no one wants to talk about her affairs (as alleged by various sources)...she's as pure as the driven snow.
Isn’t part of being a sociopath being superficially charming? Hillary lacks that part.
Bill is *not* a sociopath. He’s more of a borderline personality/narcissist, constantly craving attention and love.
Hillary’s another matter entirely. But I’ll leave her analysis to others.
Tyrell: This is the most important theme of the book. Both are 1960s lefties. They are narcissists. Self-love propels them through life and often amusingly so. A major theme is that the 1960s generation was the most momentous of the twentieth century. The left-wing of that generation has been competing with those of us who are from the right-wing of the 1960s generation for decades. I talk about how the two sides have variously taken over the politics of the country. Now in 2008 we shall see the last great battle of this intragenerational war. It is going to be a tremendous battle. It already is.
This article brings back a lot of memories from the early days of FR. The fact that the Clintons have achieved the highest office in the land speaks volumes of the cultural decline of America. God be with us.
She is too busy working hard for the public. /sarcasm
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.