CNN: Clinton laughs off $ 800,000 payment to Bill for Columbia free trade speech

Clinton: “How many angels dance on the head of the pin?”



http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/04/10/clinton... /

Clinton laughs off Colombia questions

PITTSBURGH, Pennsylvania (CNN) – Hillary Clinton used her trademark laugh Thursday to deflect a question about the $800,000 her husband earned in 2005 giving speeches for a Bogota-based group that supports the Colombia free trade agreement — the same trade deal she currently opposes.

Asked by CNN if those earnings represented a conflict of interest given that she has dipped into her family's pocketbook to pay campaign bills, Clinton threw up her hands and laughed loudly for several seconds.

"How many angels dance on the head of the pin?," she responded, continuing to giggle. "I have really, uh, nothing to … I mean, how do you answer that?"

The New York senator explained there are different sides to the argument over trade, and re-emphasized her own opposition to the trade deal, assailing the Colombian government's "outrageous" record of "targeting labor leaders."

"I am against the Colombia free trade deal," she said. "It doesn't matter who talks to me. It doesn't matter any circumstances. I have been against it. I am against it. I will be against it absent the kind of changes in behavior that I have been calling for from the Colombian government."

Earlier in the press conference, describing her husband's advocacy for the trade deal, Clinton said: "Everyone is free to express their opinion."

I'm surprised. They are a lot more blunt than I would have thought.

better.

I can only imagine how insulted some would be.

He works for world peace and self enrichment comes second.

this does not do her any good and now we have Bill trying to gloss it over.

I I just pushed the button to set off that missile ha ha ha, sorry my mistake hahaha

with stupid asinine questions.

...not.

Laughing like a human is off limits when it is Clinton.

Amazing how low you guys will stoop to find something to attack Clinton about.

"She does not breath like a Presidental candidate. How dare she. She is so hateful."

Ummmm....most of that don't have that luxury as does Queen Hillary.

n/t

...but some people don't see how un-presidential that truly is.

shes against it (she claims)
he takes money for it
they got both sides covered
the new clinton MO

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGeQ6dxGMFA

Obviously guilty. Period.

It is her oft used tactic for avoiding tough questions. Too bad for her that it no longer works.

She is the very definition of Lame.

but I'm a little uncomfortable that she couldn't answer a relatively simple question....they only get harder in the WH.
I WAS offended that she laughed off the sniper lie on Leno. this case, not so much.

and it looked a little crazy.

Hardly. She and Hubby are corrupt to the marrow. This campaign is coming to a tragic and broke-ass end. Haven't you had your fill of the delusionaide yet? This woman is not fit to run the country. Another corrupt liar is not what the people want.

America WE spent BILLIONS uncovering EVERYTHING the Clintons EVERY DID. And there was NO NONE NADA illegal behavior.

Remember Ken Star? He was paid BILLIONS to find illegal activity and found NOTHING. Because there was nothing to find.

Now, Rezko: If you are interested in corruption, why don't you show ANY curiosity about Obama's known LIES about his relationship with Rezko? We know REzko was corrupt. We know that Obama was his friend (Obama keeps lying about his friendship and changing his story as more comes out), We know that Obama took money (we don't know how much because that total keeps changing, recently on a Friday news dump he even disclosed more milllions given to him by Rezko et al).

I believe you are uninterested in corruption, but rather more crap to attack.

Bill Clinton gave a speech. He was paid for it. The topic was Trade and Columbia.

That the HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE? How do you make something out of that?

...VERY LARGE does of reality.

she could eat a puppy in front of you and all you would say is
"she has lovely table manners"
you lose credibility when you defend the undefendable
it seems like all you ever do is dodge and lie about what was said trying desperatly to invent some scenerio where she isnt a liar , a crook and frankly not too bright
im sorry you invested so heavily in her now that she has become the human equivalant of bear-sterns

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/02/01/starr... /

Oh..but she's best buddies with him now, so it's all ok.

him, I could care less how it would play in Pittsburgh or anywhere else. He is lowdown scum, scum, scum. If you smell a rat, Scaife probably is its father. He is one damned good reason for a huge "death tax" as his paid lackies probably coined!

all the files of its biggest client - Jackson Stephens who brought BCCI into this country as part of Poppy Bush's illegal operations and deals.

The same Jackson Stephens who GROOMED Bill's political career and underwrote his primary campaign in 92 when GHWBush expected to be impeached after BCCI report's release in Dec 1992.

How convenient that all those matters ended up deep-sixed for GHWBush and Stephens and Dubai and Saudi royals all throughout the 90s.

All it cost us was the congress, the return of Bush2, 9-11, this Iraq war and our future war with Iran.

That's all.

I forgot Jackson Stephens' name. This guy was known as a "king Maker", he was a friend of Poppy who backed Bill.

No one pays $800,000 for just a speech.

throughout the 90s.

And that 20 million was only the most RECENT payment from Dubai and Saudi royals to Clinton.

He not only deep-sixed the BCCI matters he deep-sixed the Bush connection to the BCCI matters. As well as the Bush connection to a lot of matters. All the "right-wing conspiracy" was interested in was putting a chain on his neck and being able to pull it. And every time they pulled it, he did what he was told. And after he left the White House they removed the collar. And he just jumped in their lap. Wanting his doggie treat. And so Daddy Bush gave him a doggie treat and adopted him. And he kept quiet. Daddy Bush is good to him. Obviously.

No doubt Hillary wants a chain as well. And then she will jump in their laps and want her doggie treat. From her Daddy-in-Law.

She will steal the nomination. And probably lose the election. People are tired of the dynasty.

Tony Rezko Photo Adds Fuel to Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama Feud

Hillary Clinton condemned Tony Rezko as a "slumlord" who contributed to Barack Obama's campaign. But a photo has since surfaced that shows Senator Clinton and President Bill Clinton posing with Rezko, a Syrian national. They were all smiles.

Clinton was shown the photo during an interview on NBC's Today Show this morning but told host Matt Lauer she did not remember meeting Rezko.

"No, I don't," Clinton told Lauer. "You know, I probably have taken hundreds of thousands of pictures.

During a presidential debate Monday evening, Clinton blasted Obama for his relationship with Rezko, telling Obama she had fought Republican policies as first lady while "you were practicing law and representing your contributor, Rezko, in his slum landlord business in inner-city Chicago."

And perhaps have landed one or both Clintons in jail, but Susan macDougall went to jail for months in order to keep them out of trouble.

you really do worship at the clinton altar...

He gets paid for speeches. You guys are so into hate and distortions and lies that you will blow anything and everything out of proportion to peeyourpantsinfauxoutrage.


Conflict of interest? How the hell is that a conflict of interest?

the fact that her campaign manager and her husband are lobbying (and getting paid) for a trade deal that she says she is against. I think that can be defined as 'conflict'.

for speeches that aren't going to change things in their favor.

Yeah. Right.

Do you really not see how that appears to be a conflict of interest? Do you even know what a conflict of interest IS?

while she uses personal money to fund her campaign.


Sorry I know its hard when your candidate does dumb things and you have to defend her but this is going to be the weekend story.

If this was a question posed to her about the silly bookbag gate, I could understand an astonished and frustrated reaction, but her reaction to this very legitimate question was rather bizarre.

It is the one thing a person needs to be aware of when asking themselves if they can trust whoever they are dealing with.

But money earned pimping Columbian free trade which potentially found its way into her funds is not?

it is a legit question about a conflict of interest.
she says she fired mark penn for his ties to the deal but Bill Clinton is FAR more in bed with colombian trade.
you would make your surrogate proud with you blind loyalty.

off, you would howl for blood. we cannot expect less from our side.

Spouse of candidate earns eight hundred thousand dollars speaking in support of one side of an issue.

Candidate takes advantage of same income to run for president, including on her platform just the opposite side of the issue.

For a candidate who makes no secret of taking advantage of her spouse's knowledge, contacts, etc., you just have to wonder at the range of conflicts she would deal with as president. And just think at the inside knowledge spouse of said president would gain in the process.

And giggling about it does not inspire confidence. Nor would giggling inspire confidence in a male candidate.

if it weren't so sad.

Can't you at least make an attempt at using something factual in your retorts?

How on earth is a question about her conflict of interest in a situation as grave as the deaths of thousands of Colombians attempting to organize unions stupid and asinine? How is it not relevant? How is it not newsworthy?

Do you also think the deaths of the Iraqis and our troops is stupid and asinine?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGeQ6dxGMFA

Did you notice the camera shutters clicking right about the time that laugh was going on way too long? Sounded like a hundred photographers trying to capture the last gasp of a dying campaign on film.

cackle cackle cackle. Darn, will the voters in PA read this?

And I can't wait to vote for her!

Believe it or not, husbands and wives often differ on the same issue - or do you live in Stepford?

Don't bother you, right?

I mean, if the University of Chicago Hospital needs public funds, shouldn't Michelle have stepped down? I mean, it's an obvious conflict!

well one's a hospital (which are usually in dire need of funds btw).

and the other is a South American neo-Fascist regime. When Colombia talks about its Human Rights record it points to the fact that they've only murdered 23 Union activists this year instead of a thousand...

And wait a minute, Obama didn't personally benefit from said earmark... did he? What, you mean what he did is get money for a publicly financed institution? What? Isn't that what politicians are supposed to do for their districts?



oh and btw, i disagree with my wife sometimes. But i think we would have to sit down and have a long talk before i could agree with her shilling for a Bush-lite government. She'd have to be pretty fucking convincing. Like, "They'll kill us if we don't honey" convincing. I'm poor, but damned sure i'll never get paid in BLOOD MONEY.

She claims to oppose the Columbian free trade deal. Just like she opposed NAFTA.

he is getting paid a fortune to do this, as is Mark Flop Sweat and Jowls Penn.

Let me guess, how will all this work out, with one as President, the other as Co President
and big time lobbyiest (more nicel labeled speach maker) for special interest.

She's against it...not against Bill supporting it, not when it brings in hundreds of thousands...and exactly what sort of role would Bill play in a Hillary administration, in terms of advisory capacity? A large one, probably, which is why the issues of conflict of interest are very pertinent. She doesn't get to distance herself from Bill when it's convenient and run on his policies and record when it suits her.

if however you want my opinion on your it will cost you $ 800,000 hahahahahahahha

Can we imagine if people gave Cindy McCain even HALF of what Bill gets?

And it is not a good omen that Bill Clinton is on the other side of Hillary's stated positions. Is he going to be lobbying her and getting her to "change" her mind in favor of people that gave him and her money?

she's against it, its just that those who she should have obvious sway over are for it.

after everything. Amazing!

Problem is, they are actually dangerous to our future.

Clinton presses disputed trade claims
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080411/ap_on_el_pr/clinton...

WASHINGTON - Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is pressing her claim that she opposed her husband's free trade push when he was president, despite her favorable words about it at the time.
ADVERTISEMENT

They've had more trouble dissociating themselves from the much more consequential North American Free Trade Agreement; Clinton especially, because she spoke up for its passage and early results when her husband Bill was president, years before Obama came to Washington.

THE SPIN:

"I have a long record of being on a different attitude toward trade than my husband does," the New York senator said after a campaign event near Pittsburgh this week. "We disagree on this.

otherwise, just more lies.

She's Fake fake fake!

Colombia's $800,000 makes up a hefty chunk of her $5M loan to herself, doesn't it?

...every issue depending on political expedience and the direction the wind is blowing"

$800,000 from Columbia. That is why she is laughing. If you sheep only knew how much we got from Columbia. I like the last line in your post

"I have a long record of being on a different attitude toward trade than my husband does," the New York senator said after a campaign event near Pittsburgh this week. "We disagree on this

So again she is lying about NAFTA and probably about Columbia too. We disagree till I take the office. And again I don't think she will roll back the damage Bush has done to the Constitution.
King George meet Queen Hillary.

800k for speaking my ass.

" I have been against it. I am against it. I will be against it absent the kind of changes in behavior that I have been calling for from the Colombian government."

Step 1: Colombia orders paramilitary death squads to refrain from slaughtering labor organizers for six months.
Step 2: Free trade lackeys in Congress will hail the "progress" in Colombia.
Step 3: Congress passes Colombia free trade deal.
Step 4: Paramilitary death squads resume shooting labor organizers.

$800,000 ain't for no speech.

It's a bribe, err payment to the Clinton's in return for them helping to make the trade deal happen.

24 hours after our posts, the New York Times comes out with an editorial in favor of the Colombia pact.
The Times never met a job-destroying "free" trade deal they didn't like.

I thought of our posts and chuckled at the predictabilty of our Wall Street plutocrats when I read this drivel in today's Times:

"It is time for Congress to ratify it. (the trade deal)

The trade pact would produce clear benefits for American businesses and their workers.

We remain very concerned over the killing of trade unionists by right-wing paramilitary groups. Last year, we advised Congress not to ratify the trade agreement until Colombia demonstrated progress in investigating the murders and prosecuting and convicting their perpetrators.

Though by no means ideal, the situation today has improved. Thirty-nine trade unionists were killed last year, down from 197 in 2001, the year before the government of Álvaro Uribe came to office.

Pressure from the United States Congress has contributed to this progress, nudging the Colombian government with its offer that gains on the human rights front would lead to ratification of the trade agreement."

The yes-vote is being manufactured right before our eyes.

They only murdered a few dozen labor organizers last year, so the Times and Bill Clinton think it's a good deal.

government? Did she call for those changes before or after Bill gave that speech?

...by a group whose position she opposes?

If she were for the trade deal, then it would make sense to ask if she had been corrupted.

What holds more weight 800K in her bank account, or the people who she's making promises to that aren't putting 800K in her bank account?

Oh yeah, I forgot. Women don't have an identity, and in your world they don't have their own bank accounts. They are appendages of the men they are married to...or they don't exist at all.

Some of you Obama supporters are too stupid. There are things that are good about Obama. Why don't you try to convince people of those things? Nope. You attack the other candidate with lies, inuendo, name calling and pure unadultrated stupidity. And that reflects on Obama.

Tell us what it is that you see in Obama. Why did he lie about so many things that have been listed on this forum? Try, for once, not to assinate the messenger, but explain the accusations and facts. Maybe you can sway some voters. Maybe the damage you've done is too great and you can't, but it might be worth a try.
Because let me tell you, you are not convincing any Hillary supporter, or McCain supporter, for that matter, to switch to your candidate. And you are going to need their votes to elect your candidate to the office.

it is a blatant conflict of interest.
are you fucking blind!?!

"Some of you Obama supporters are too stupid." Then you go on to say all we do is insult. Hmmmm?

This is relevant because they file taxes together. Spin it however you want, Bill's money is Hillary's money and visa versa.

You did not post one positive argument for your candidate. How can you lecture us? I have repeatedly said that I do not see Obama as a saint as many Clinton supporters like to throw around. I see Obama as the alarm clock for the American people. He is screaming wake up!!! You have been sleeping too long, and now you hold no rank in YOUR government. Obama knows he is not perfect, so do his supporters. His typical white person line was a flop. It was tasteless and not thought out, but really how many of those has he made?
His connections with Rezko, I do not see as that big of an issue. He got a deal on a piece of land that he uses as his home. He did not hurt anyone in the process. Is Rezko a shady person, yes, but these people can also do good legal things as well. I am in Chicago, and am well aware of these "Chicago-Style" politics that people here tout. I have even worked for "the mafia" as a bartender. They are still normal people with families. To a large extent, a lot of it does not exist anymore. The days of Goodfellas are long over. Our governors office was/is/always will be corrupt(I think we should just do away with it). There are shady deals in Cook county, but really its not that bad. Ask yourself honestly, how much $$ did the Clinton's make off of Water-Gate?
The Rev. Wright issue, it looked bad at the beginning, but he handled it well. I am a white woman, who honestly agreed with some of the sentiment. I have no idea what the black experience is in America, but I imagine is is not all that fun. I have openly racist people around me constantly, and it hurts me, I cannot imagine what it is like to have that kind of hate directed at you personally every day of your life.

I of course meant White Water. OOOPPS.

Take it how you want. Either her husband does not take the platforms she is running for president on seriously, or she can't take a principled stance by accepting the 800k in their joint accounts. Since she gets a measure of her wealth from her husbands speaking engagements there is some obvious influence in who he is speaking to and for. And please this is about her trade "policies" don't try to deflect the issue by bringing up other candidates just because old Billie boy got caught with his hand in the cookie jar, oops.

her husband is pocketing money to help them pass it.


And all she can do is laugh and giggle


This could lose PA for her.

..but her "Campaign Manager" and "Chief Strategist" are also pocketing money to help get this passed....ALL while getting paid by Hillary.

The money people are contributing to the Hillary campaign is actually being used to get the Columbian Free Trade Deal passed.

The clintons are braisen. They do any damn thing they want,
and then when they get caught, they just laugh it off or lie.

mixed messages can cause a lot of "fixin'" in order to get things "done" while giving the appearance of not being involved.

Bill obviously hasn't learned his lesson after NAFTA. What does that say about him?

He's out there stomping for her to Union audience. That's kind of like having the Pro-Lifer stomping to Pro-Choice audiences about someone else's pro-choice stance. Makes no sense. Really, it doesn't.

We don't need no "confused" White House full of Drama. We've already had enough of that.

Hillary:

1. Bill is free to have his own opinions on things, that are different than mine, and speak out for them.
2. I was against NAFTA, but I couldn't speak out against it, because Bill was for it.

can Hillary "manage" Bill ?

It's almost as if he's trying to sink her campaign.

to the American People about his true stance on NAFTA.

But, don't let the facts get in the way of another distortion and attack against Clinton.

Could've swore when that story wrapped up, it turned out to be a complete 180 of the original.

who did that. The Canadian gov't doesn't want nafta reopened. So they made it sound like it was Obama's people.

does she oppose it, or does she say she opposes it? If you can get past the belief issue, is it ok if the presidential candidates husband might likely lobby her for something that the presidential candidate is using her opposition to as a campaign draw?

Or, in more solid terms, if she were to become president, would she sign it into law when it came to her, despite her earlier claims to oppose it?

She says she opposes NAFTA. I'll give her the benefit of the doubt.

If Hillary is 44, and Bill remains a loose cannon, he could start to resemble another president's family member, Billy Carter. But I doubt BJC will be selling only beer.

That's some pretty serious conflict of interest there.

It doesn't say how many, which would have been better journalism.

"How many angels dance on the head of the pin?," she responded, continuing to giggle


CNN must have thought it strange they used it as the caption for the photo.

It sounds like she is starting to crumble under the pressure.



How many bags of cash can dance on the head of a worker?

Which makes it even more strange......that I can come to expect Bush worthy answers coming out of her mouth.

"How many angels dance on the head of the pin?,"

I never heard that before. That is a strange saying.

edit to add:

Well I googled it and got my answer: a way to express pointlessness.

How Rumsfeldian of her.

She's starting to remind me of Marie Antoinette!

"Bush-level annoying". I like that.

i never had nothing against her till the lies and the kitchen sink started.
she is now the object of my loathing.
no one i personally know (all democrats) support her.
only old ladies who don't follow politics and clinton worshipping cultists find her palatable.

than the fact that the potential Democratic first spouse took $800,000 from this country with its record on killing unionists and drugs? This is NOT a close case, where people with differing politics can reach different dependable positions. Bush is not even sending this trade bill to the appropriate committees in Congress.

That HRC is trying to bat this off as an unprovable theological debate is pretty telling. I don't know if there are angels, or if they take up any space because if they exist they don't have corporal bodies - but I do know that the current agreement with Colombia has no worker protections.

It proves that people have no clue what they're talking about, to them it is probably just another Latin American country. I'm sure most of those who misspell it probably can't even find Colombia in a map.

I remember whenever I posted a CAFTA thread here, which was quite often during the last year... the same 5 or 10 people would reply, and then it would just sink like a stone. The truth is, people on DU don't care much about this issues, so it strikes me as odd how suddenly the free trade agreement with Colombia is such a hot topic here.... of course, some DU'ers are using the issue politically, and I guess that's fine, although a little hypocritical. And it certainly wouldn't look so bad if at least try read enough to get the country's name correctly.

If you can't argue against it, attack the messenger.

Never have never will.

She's a woman -- is their rallying cry.

As someone who spent long long hours as a voting rights activist in 2004, the fact that she called Edwards personally and told him to quit his bitchin' over the election, while he was the one saying that every vote needed to be counted, the fact that her man Carville was involved in some heinous whisperings to Kerry which may well have been the factor having Kerry concede before the vote was counted in OHIO, and that this was about her ambition, her ambition, her ambition to be President this year makes me ill.