It’s a race between the Clintons and Obama…
…to see who can throw who under the bus first, according to Ed Klein.
According to me as well, even though I have no insider info. It’s been rather obvious that Obama has been planning to blame Hillary, as SoS, for the disaster in Benghazi. It’s just as obvious that she and her husband would try to protect themselves.
I say you lie down with dogs you get up with fleas. I also assume the truth is even more Byzantine than described in the article.
aha. and see this link http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2215431/Death-U-S-ambassador-Chris-Stevens-revealed-AK-47s-grenade-attacks-smoke-filled-safe-room.html?ITO=1490
AP report says “Unnamed source” in State Dept says WH version is not and never was State Dept version.
Some say Obama plays chess. Well, Clintons play life: it’s a bigger game, and karma rules. My how they kept themselves quiet for these four years. My my my. Where is Aristophanes, covering all this?
Fascinating links.
When Hollywood makes the movie, Hollywood will blame Romney.
Two issues:
1. lack of adequate security in Benghazi
2. who ordered the propaganda offensive (Susan Rice, et al) to direct blame at a preview of an obscure video?
Notes:
–forget Egypt: at this point, references to Egypt amount to misdirection by the Obama Admin.
— forget the question of the exact identities of the persons who directed and executed the attack. At this point, references to investigations into exact identities … amount to misdirection by the Obama Admin.
Re #1: lack of adequate security
As news consumers, we are currently ignorant of what truly happened. Therefore, for the moment, let us assume the very simplest thing happened: clusterfark at the State Dept: someone beneath Hillary made a recommendation to deny additional security. Hillary was perfunctorily informed of it. She is not a security expert, and had no logical reason to object to the recommendation. Barack was perfunctorily informed of it, in a summary of a security briefing which he deigned not to attend. Barack speedily skim read the summary, then never thought of it again.
Re #2: the propaganda campaign
Let us assume the simplest thing:
Barack, at behest of genius statespersons Jarrett, Plouffe, and Axelrod, assented to the propaganda campaign.
Given the above, how do Hillary’s and Barack’s strategies play out from here?
>>>Hillary, by having an underling publicize the Presidential Security Briefing Summary info, could destroy Barack’s chance at re-election … while distancing herself publicly.
However, Dem insiders would understand that Hillary had destroyed Barack. And Hillary, if she is to run in 2016, needs Dem insiders on her side.
Hillary will not betray the larger Dem cause. She has a track record: in multiple instances, Hillary could have destroyed Bill, and betrayed the larger Dem cause, yet she did not do so.
If Jarret/Plouffe/Axelrod accurately calculate that Hillary will not betray the larger cause, then how does Barack’s team play out their strategy from here?
re Hillary’s strategic calculations:
Hillary never destroyed Bill … b/c supporting Bill equated to Hillary’s best career move for herself.
Similarly, in the present moment: supporting Barack equates to Hillary’s best career move for herself. For 2016, Hillary needs the support of loyal and long-time Dem insiders. She cannot gain that support via torpedoing the larger Dem cause of winning the 2012 Presidential Election … and/or of winning as many down-ballot Dem seats as possible: if Hillary destroys Barack, a down-ballot tsunami will drown Dem candidates all across the United States.
Therefore, for Hillary’s personal ambition: her only play is to support the larger Democratic cause, i.e. her only play is to refrain from destroying Barack.
gcotharn – not absolutely sure that there is only one “larger Dem cause.” The Pumas, as they were called when HC was pummelled down to let BO rise, may not ever have come fully into line under BO. Remember how James Carville wore Puma shoes to the convention? It could – just could – be true that what burns in Bill ‘n Hill’s heart is something … something else. They may wish to wrest the Dem party back to 2007 . . . or . . . something else. It will be of some interest to see how the severely wounded Dem Party tries to rise – or transform – or transmorgify.
gcotharn,
I see her throwing the president under the bus as a Net gain for Mz. Clinton. I think a 2016 presidential run will be easier for her as an outsider rather than a successor. She’d get to take advantage of the media’s anti-conservative bias for 4 years rather be one of the apologists. A position of strength, compared to where this could all be heading.
Especially if there is a way to throw the Prez under the bus and manage to look like the “noble” whistleblower who just had to take a stand.
And as a bonus, I have a feeling that right now, there are plenty of media and prominent democrats willing to pass such a deception along. It would give them an “out”…of sorts. Because we all know, they just aren’t capable of getting behind Romney or any Republican for that matter.
And if anyone thinks that a scorpion like her hasn’t made that calculation (whet her she acts on it or not), there’s also a rather large multi-lane bridge in NYC on the real estate market. Dirt cheap.
Excellent analysis, gcotharn.
Hillary might be induced to go nuclear if Obama & Co. continue to lay Benghazi off on her, because that (along with her age) will torpedo her chances in 2016 anyway. Taking down the Messiah then would be sweet revenge for 2008, and would effectively cost her nothing. Conversely, watching His Lordship do his Mussolini impression for another four years at her expense would be infuriating. So she just might do it.
And in any battle of wits, Bill Clinton (for whom Hillary is a proxy, IMO) would run a ring around Obama, who as Clinton famously pointed out, a years earlier would have been serving him coffee — and probably should be today, too, for that matter, if there were any justice in captivity.
…and you’re probably right. Truth stranger than imagination.
The Billarys vs. the Ophilias — now that’s a feud. I see dead people.
I tuned in a talk radio program today just in time to hear a guest report that Bill has been meeting with his closest advisers to determine a method to protect Hillary’s viability. If true, the Obama camp should be very, very afraid. Not a Clinton fan here but no one does hardball politics better.
I think the game here is that Obama and Hillary each need to throw the other under the bus, but neither can afford to look like they are doing it.
As they say – pass the popcorn.
Mickey Klaus has a take on this similar to Klein:
http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/12/obamas-got-drama-now/
I can’t see HC (and WJC) quietly sliding under the bus for BHO’s re-election. I believe both of them detest BHO to the very bottom of their hearts.
“Some say Obama plays chess. Well, Clintons play life: it’s a bigger game, and karma rules.”
I agree, and this seems like a perfect opportunity for the Clintons. Throw BHO under the bus and thus assist a R&R victory. Then the Clintons network within the party & the MSM setting HC up to receive the 2016 nomination.
In my limited vision of this I can’t see any real Clinton upside. If Hillary falls on her sword for the greater Dem good, it severly injures her for 2016; she runs as a faulty Sec of State. If she “takes down” Obama, it also severly injures her chances in 2016; she runs as an untrustworthy harridan. If Romney is elected and does even passably well in reviving the economy, a second Romney term would be difficult for her to overcome under the best of circumstances, let alone with the SoS baggage from either of the alternatives.
IMO she is at the end of her political road. If she, too, interprets her situation that way, then I would expect her to go “nuclear” on the USS Obama.
I’m merely guessing, but I think Hillary and Willy are interested above all else in HC being the first woman nominated for the presidency. Obviously, winning the presidency is the pot of gold, but being the first woman nominated places her in the history books.
“IMO she is at the end of her political road. If she, too, interprets her situation that way, then I would expect her to go “nuclear” on the USS Obama.”
If you are correct, its go ‘nuclear’ big time! Sherman’s march through Georgia is an act of kindness compared to what the Clintons long to do to Obama.
Whatever Hillary did or did not know, and whatever she did or did not tell Obama, should really not matter when it comes to assessing *Obama’s* responsibility.
If the captain of a ship tries to get out of responsibility for running the ship aground using the excuse that his executive officer didn’t tell him that the lookout was reporting a reef directly ahead, it’s not going to work. (Indeed, the captain of a US aircraft carrier recently lost his command because of a fire in a paint locker. He wasn’t the one smoking in the paint locker, against all regulations and common sense, nor was he that sailor’s immediate supervisor, but he still lost his command.
Biden’s comments about this matter in the debate demonstrate very clearly the complete lack of comprehension this administration has as to what executive responsibility is all about.
What a lovely narcissistic rivalry. Bill and Hillary must still seethe over this “guttersnipe” who “would have been getting their coffee a few years ago”. If Obama thinks they’re going under any bus, they are in for a terrible shock. And Bill has the intelligence and cunning the liberals only dream Obama has. This is heading into Shakespeare territory.
“This is heading into Shakespeare territory.”
What a great observation and turn of the phrase!
I get that you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas.
But in this case, who are the dogs and who the fleas? That’s not clear to me at all.
W Krebs: I meant it to be ambiguous about who’s the dog and who’s lying down with the dog. Hard to tell, isn’t it?
What David Foster said. I’m hardly trying to defend Hillary but one of the most appalling aspects of this debacle has been the way the “State Department” has been talked about as a separate entity from “the White House”. Is not the State Department an executive department? Is not the SoS appointed by the President and serve at his pleasure?
It gets even worse – in one place recently I saw “the White House” spoken of as if it were a separate entity from the President himself! The lengths to which Obama goes to shirk responsibility, abetted by his toadies in the press, for actions undertaken (or not undertaken) in his name is absolutely sickening. I have written before that Obama has a sign on his desk that says “the buck passes here”. This is an abomination for anyone claiming the mantle of leadership but above all for the President of the United States.
I wouldn’t bet too heavily on the Clintons. Obama waxed their tails four years ago without too much trouble: even they, slimy as they are, were stunned by the brazenness, the thuggery, employed by Hussein’s minions. (See the video “We Will Not Be Silenced (2008)” for details, and watch the people’s faces, democrats all. They never knew what hit them.)
The Benghazi debacle and the reaction to the Egyptian riots just underscore how ruthless and vicious this Administration and its supporters are.
The nature of the Obama Machine: “We Will Not Be Silenced.” Scary stuff.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGZFgMNM-UU
Beverly, I voted for Hillary in the 2008 TX Democratic primary. It was an Anyone But ∅bama vote. As I was registered as an Independent, I could vote in the Democratic Primary. After I had voted and had left the building, a campaign worker asked whom I had voted for. “Hillary,” I replied. She asked if I would like to participate in the Caucus afterwards. I declined the offer.
I now regret my decision. I read later of how ∅bama people had steamrolled the post-vote Caucuses in TX. I wish now I had been there to witness it.
The internecine warfare is just deserts for Hillary and Obama. I have to laugh about the supposed hard feelings that Hillary has regarding her treatment in 2008. This coming from the team that prides itself on political smarts.
Ego got in Bill’s way last time. Like McCain, he couldn’t believe his buddies in the Press would turn against the Clintons. If he decides to backstab Obama, it will have to be done by someone in the Press that is not in the tank for Obama. And I don’t see any moves made unless Hillary is in dire straits. I’m not convinced she wants to run in 2016, but she definitely wants to go down as a competent Secretary of State.
I caucused for Hilary, in Texas, in 2008. At that time, I did not suspect foul play. However, the caucus room was like a riot w/o the accompanying fisticuffs or violence. I made mention, back then, in a blogpost, of how disorganized things were.
http://theendzone.blogspot.com/2008/03/i-caucus-for-hillary.html
Also, I watched the video “We Will Not Be Silenced”. It is excellent work – so excellent that even my cynical self is surprised it has not received more play.
BTW:
at the time, I could not figure any logical reason for Texas Dems to haze their own voters via instituting both voting + a caucus.
After going through the caucus process, and then watching the video, the reason for a caucus is clear: Texas Democratic Party bigshots want to have an additional option available to them which allows them to readily and illegally manipulate the Texas Democratic Primary Vote.
There is no other reason — none, NONE — to force Texas Democratic voters to 1) vote in an election booth, then 2) return to muddle through a human riot of a caucus. No other reason. None. It is pure crooked.
Oh, btw: the Texas Democratic Party reinstituted the same system for the 2012 Democratic Primary. Dem voters must 1) vote in a booth, and 2) muddle through a human riot of a caucus.
Pure crooked.
Thank goodness Texas Democrats are irrelevant.
I personally think it’s too late for Hillary to look “noble” throwing the President under the bus. Or not.
After all, she has promoted the “spontaneous-mob- due-to-anti-Mohammed-film” theory as much as anyone. She even appeared in the ad targeting Pakistani Muslims as she and Obama virtually begged for forgiveness coming only short of swearing that the U.S. govt. had nothing to do with said video…said video which started protest which then killed Amb. Stevens & 3 other Americans. Most important to Hillary & Obama: Please, PLEASE?! Don’t blame us and U.S…..
She certainly can’t run for President in 2016 saying she “was forced” to repeat the story by her boss…or she felt it was her duty as part of the Administration…or, she said it for national security reasons (i.e. so terrorists don’t come after us because of the video — how ironic would that be, inasmuch as she & Obama essentially introduced the world to the obscure YouTube trailer with their lame story and direction of talking points designed to shift blame — both to Muslims and to U.S. voters soon to cast those precious votes for a President (hopefully, a NEW President.)
How does one pass oneself off as serious Presidential material after prostituting herself not just in this crisis, but throughout the last 4 years? Even with Bill & friends channelling every political dirtball trick they can think of to disengage Hillary from Obama, I don’t think it works. Even with aid of MSM and all those Democrat politicos, both of whom I think about now are dying to jump off the Obama ship as it begins sinking, and convince the world that it’s really Hillary who is “The One.” (Politics breeds short memories, and voters can be very forgiving to those who “misjudged,” made mistake re: Obama, and enough mea culpas.
And I don’t know about Obama, but Jarrett, Plouffe, and Axelrod are as capable of dirty politics and propaganda campaigns as much as Bill & Co. No inferiority there. They just didn’t cover their asses well enough in this instance, got bit, and tried to staunch the bleeding by lying. Obviously lying. And I don’t know how forgiving Americans will be when the bottom line comes down to our own national security and safety.
(And I have been thinking lately, these “little” Embassy deals may just be a prelude, or designed to be a distraction on the part of Extremist Muslims, Al Qaeda, the Salafists….take your pick. For all of Obama’s spiking the football in desperate attempt to hang onto power, he is also sticking it to every one of those Jihadists. I just don’t see them letting the murder of Osama bin Laden, essentially their prophet of modern times, go without some really, REALLY, REALLY major attack on all of us!
One last thing: Not to be forgotten is fact that Bill’s post-Presidential life is paying pennance to Hillary and doing anything and everything to advance her own political career…which most of us believe she wants to finish off with bursting through the ultimate glass ceiling: The Presidency of U.S. She could have waited until he made his first $100 million — what did it take? A year, or two? And then said Buh-bye, you jerk. And walked off with half, and personal dignity. You know there was a deal between them for her not to. (Besides the fact that I believe she really loves him — a LOT more than he loves her, as his serial behavior has shown the world).
I never understood why she took the position of S of S UNDER Obama. I never saw it as a win situation for her. I know there was some kind of deal, but I personally thought it weakened her, putting her in a subservient position to Obama (and she must have gnashed teeth many a night since). She would have been more visible as a Senator (even possibly have been hero of getting healthcare passed – HER big dream, instead of that thorn, Pelosi). Sure she could have used all that foreign policy experience in her Presidential run — but how valuable is that if the foreign policy under her and Obama is a major bust. Which it is. She took a big gamble. And doesn’t look like she’s going to be a winner now. She’s a loser coming and going. Maybe it was her own ego and ambition. She is a survivor in many ways, but surviving to do what? Isn’t it getting to be about time for a grandbaby?
The Benghazi episode is getting bigger & bigger. See Professor Jacobson’s post today re-Forbes and CNN.(legalinsurrection.com) Might just be that Hillary and Boy Barry implode as a result of the lies and coverup. Even the MSM-Lapdog protectors are showing signs of chops licking. (CNN for Gawdsakes!!)