Democrats embrace criminals and smear artists, shun patriots

posted at 7:20 pm on September 13, 2007 by Bryan

Data point #1: Confessed thief Sandy Berger is good enough to become one of Hillary Clinton’s three senior national security advisors:

My informed sources suggest that what Berger destroyed were copies of the Millennium After-Action Review, a binder-sized report prepared by Richard Clarke in 2000—a year and half before the 9-11 attacks. The review made a series of recommendations for a tougher stance against bin Laden and terrorism. There are 13 or more copies of this report. But only one contains hand-written notes by President Bill Clinton. Apparently, in the margin beside the recommendations, Bill Clinton wrote NO, NO, NO next to many of the tougher policy proposals.

You can see why Clinton might be happy to see these records vanish down the memory hole.

So Berger was stuffing in pants and socks and later shredding the evidence that President Clinton did not want to take a tougher line on bin Laden, following the 1998 attack on two U.S. embassies that killed 224 people (including 12 American diplomats).

Now for the Hillary connection…

So what does the Democratic front-runner and former First Lady do?

She makes Berger one of her top three foreign policy advisers.

The ever-wise Jonathan Adler has some interesting thoughts on this over at the Volokh Conspiracy.

And I have a few questions:

Did she bring him aboard to reward him for his criminal destruction of classified material? Or did she sign him up because of his stellar record in fighting bin Laden in the late 1990s?

She might have brought him on board to keep him from telling anyone what he knows.

Data point #2: Hillary wants convicted felon Norman Hsu’s Ponzi scheme proceeds, and that appears to be the source of the money that he lavished on nearly every Democrat who ever got within arms’ reach of the man, re-laundered so that she can re-accept them.

If you’re keeping track, that’s two known criminals that the Democrats expressly embrace and approve of. They’re not giving Hsu’s money back on the principle that it’s tainted; they’re giving it back in the hopes that they’ll be able to appear clean, and then get the money back shortly. And they’re only giving it back because he got caught. Clinton, for one, was warned that he was dirty, yet took his money anyway.

Now, let’s look at a few people the Democrats neither embrace nor approve of.

John Rizzo, nominated to become the CIA’s counsel general by the Bush administration, is being sidelined by Democrat fears that he may be too tough on captured terrorists.

Ted Olson, whom Sen. Harry Reid will block to become the next Attorney General, though Olson has already served as US Solicitor General and lost his wife, Barbara, in American Airlines Flight 77 on 9-11.

Gen. David Petraeus, smeared by the Democrat MoveOn machine, though he has spent about 30 years in uniform and may yet save the Iraq war. MoveOn wasn’t alone in smearing the general: Sen. Clinton lectured the general and Democrats in the House and Senate all but accused him of perjury to his face. Dubbing Petraeus’ testimony the “Bush report,” as most Democrats have by now, accuses him of lying under oath when he said the testimony was his own work.

Tally it up: Criminals and smear artists, ok with Democrats. John Rizzo, Ted Olson and Gen. David Patraeus, not ok with Democrats. The twice-demoted Pvt. Scott Thomas Beauchamp is evidently the Democrats’ model soldier; Gen. Petraeus is just a political shill.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Oh ya., the party that is sleekly clean is gonna shake up the White House. Or should I say Slimey clean. How about “dunked in a tank of excrement” clean.

MalkinFan on September 13, 2007 at 7:28 PM

and you expected what?!! These are Democrats…..

serenity on September 13, 2007 at 7:28 PM

Talk about a culture of corruption.

Is this the face of new democratic party?

He asked knowingly, nudge nudge, wink wink

Kini on September 13, 2007 at 7:31 PM

You’ve sold me on Hillary Clinton (particularly the Berger thing — reward for helping her husband avoid responsibility for his neglect?).

She should never step foot in the White House. So it’s very important that Republicans win in ‘08 because if not, it’s her or Obama for goodness God sakes.

Christoph on September 13, 2007 at 7:35 PM

About that pic…is that a donkey or a camel? Or is it some grotesque hybrid? Do the Dems have a new mascot?

RedWinged Blackbird on September 13, 2007 at 7:35 PM

What else can you expect from them? Liberals are the enemy within.

jdawg on September 13, 2007 at 7:35 PM

Its such a strange political move for Hillary make Sandy Burger a national security advisor. It really makes me wonder, why is she doing this?

Perhaps she thinks it would be more damning to push away her husband’s national security advisor and as a result admit to the wrong doing he was charged of? I really have no idea.

A good debate question for Hillary would be, “Why did you choose to make Sandy Burger your national secuity advisor now that you know he is very sloppy and keeps a very messy desk?”

Zetterson on September 13, 2007 at 7:37 PM

Does this surprise anyone?

conservativecaveman on September 13, 2007 at 7:39 PM

Zetterson on September 13, 2007 at 7:37 PM

Good points, or did Sandy destroy all of the evidence?

right2bright on September 13, 2007 at 7:39 PM

Berger’s not sloppy. He was very thorough.

baldilocks on September 13, 2007 at 7:42 PM

2008 is starting to look bright for us.

Iblis on September 13, 2007 at 7:43 PM

Obama’s poll numbers just went up a notch.

SoulGlo on September 13, 2007 at 7:47 PM

I’d wager to bet that old Sandy still has some copies and reiterated that to Ms. Clinton. She probably didn’t have a choice.

Capitalist Infidel on September 13, 2007 at 8:05 PM

Democrats embrace criminals and smear artists, shun patriots.

wow you could knock me over with a feather

Mojack420 on September 13, 2007 at 8:25 PM

Democrats embrace criminals and smear artists,

Birds of a feather…

Misha I on September 13, 2007 at 8:55 PM

Criminals and smear artists, ok with Democrats. John Rizzo, Ted Olson and Gen. David Patraeus, not ok with Democrats. The twice-demoted Pvt. Scott Thomas Beauchamp is evidently the Democrats’ model soldier; Gen. Petraeus is just a political shill.

This shows that those who have no honor – fear it!

Tennessee Dave on September 13, 2007 at 9:35 PM

About that pic…is that a donkey or a camel? Or is it some grotesque hybrid? Do the Dems have a new mascot?

RedWinged Blackbird on September 13, 2007 at 7:35 PM

I think it’s a mule, if so, not a good mascot for the dems, mules are quite intelligent in spite of their reputation for stubborness.

I think Hillary wants to keep a character like Sandy Burglarized close both to reward and keep an eye on… that’s the problem with having hit men like that working for you, you never know when they might turn on you.

4shoes on September 13, 2007 at 9:40 PM

Sickening to think any pol would publicly flaut his/her connections to crooks. But the Dumbs have never been forgiving for such acts.

madmonkphotog on September 13, 2007 at 9:52 PM

Well how else do you expect them to get convicted felons to vote for them?

- The Cat

MirCat on September 13, 2007 at 10:38 PM

The Constitution provides for advice and consent, not approval and certainly not for a veto by a corrupt runt of a Las Vegas Senator.

I say nominate Ted Olson because it will force the (D)emocrats to smear a man whose wife died in the plane that hit the Pentagon exposing the (D)emocrats transparent politicizing of 9/11 by trotting out the few 911 widows stone-stupid enough to support appeasement.

I want to see Ted Olson face down the (D)efeaticrats and ask them how many of them are “Truthers”.

I say nominate Ted Olson because he has already beat the (D)emocrats before the Supreme Court by stopping Al Gore and his partisan (D)emocrat appointees of the Florida courts from selective “hanging chad count’em” re-counts and suppressing military votes which is one of the real reasons the (D)emocrats hate him.

I say nominate Ted Olson because his wife wrote two books exposing Hillary(D) and the fight will remind us of those horrible truths exposed by that heroic woman and is the second reason the (D)emocrats hate him.

I say nominate Ted Olson because it will expose the (D)emocrats lie that they had any reason to dislike Gonzalez, or Ashcroft, except for their petty partisan politics.

I say nominate Ted Olson because we want a fight up to, and including, jamming that brave man up the party of the ASS until it bleeds.

DANEgerus on September 13, 2007 at 11:13 PM

Great job of tying that all together, Bryan.

A good debate question for Hillary would be, “Why did you choose to make Sandy Burger your national secuity advisor now that you know he is very sloppy and keeps a very messy desk?”

Zetterson on September 13, 2007 at 7:37 PM

Very funny.

And isn’t it fun to fantasize about what questions we would ask Hillary in a debate. That could be a thread in and of itself.

How about, “Boxers or briefs”?

As for Sandy Burglar, for some reason this phrase by Web Hubbell comes to mind: I guess, I’ll just have to roll over one more time.

Buy Danish on September 13, 2007 at 11:40 PM

Great job Bryan, again doing the job the MSM s/b doing. This should run as a full-page ad in prominent U.S. papers.

Entelechy on September 14, 2007 at 1:08 AM

I find her appointment of Richard Holbrooke a thousand times more depressing. How this man can even show his face in public is beyond me.

aengus on September 14, 2007 at 1:30 AM

That the Democrats are corrupt personally and as a party is absolutely true.

The Republicans need to reiterate at every opportunity these facts.

georgej on September 14, 2007 at 3:52 AM

The only good liberal left-wing Democrat is a liberal left-wing Democrat who is voted out of office come next election.

pilamaye on September 14, 2007 at 7:21 AM

That photo is an insult to the real donkeys who are wonderful beasts of burden and do more HONEST work in one hour than a whole senate full of democrats do in ten years.

Poor donkeys! To be associated with such criminals and traitors.

Mommynator on September 14, 2007 at 9:30 AM

All this really makes a patriot want to cry.
.

Did she bring him aboard to reward him for his criminal destruction of classified material? Or did she sign him up because of his stellar record in fighting bin Laden in the late 1990s?

Some hire ex-criminals to catch criminals (i.e. true story behind ‘Catch me if you can’).
Others hire experienced criminals to perpetuate the crimes with even less chance of being caught. Experience indeed, Sandy Burglar and both Clinton’s, lots of experience in deception and most probably waves of crime.

shooter on September 14, 2007 at 12:09 PM

Donkeys are indignant, again.

Entelechy on September 14, 2007 at 12:14 PM

DANEgerus on September 13, 2007 at 11:13 PM

Comment of the month!

shooter on September 14, 2007 at 12:16 PM

I wonder how long Sandy Berger figures he’ll last before he is found in a park a’la Vince Foster?

Jonas Parker on September 14, 2007 at 2:32 PM