Hillary Clinton: Amnesiac
There's been a new development in the story of how Hillary Clinton, Democratic leading light and presidential hopeful, in 2000 accepted $1.2 million from a two-time ex-felon, then lied about it to the Federal Election Commission.
Or, should we say, there's been a new iteration of an old development?
Mrs. Clinton recently provided Americans with the latest example of business-as-usual in Clinton-Land, a fresh specimen of what we could expect under a second President Clinton: A chronic amnesiac in the White House.
On April 7, she executed a declaration in Paul v. Clinton, et al, in which she reprised the classic Clintonian Amnesiac Defense.
First, in case you thought the ex-First Lady had changed her stripes when she changed offices, let me catch you up on the case. As we reported in Donkey Cons: Sex, Crime and Corruption in the Democratic Party:
- Senator Hillary Clinton in 2000 accepted $1.2 million in in-kind contributions from Peter Paul, a two-time ex-felon and a top executive at Stan Lee Media, whose namesake is creator of the Spider Man franchise. You can read the documentation here.
- In a lawsuit filed in L.A. Superior Court, Paul claimed he made the donation in return for a promise that Bill Clinton would become Stan Lee's spokesman after leaving the White House.
- Paul claimed the Clintons broke that promise and promptly sued them both for civil conspiracy and fraud. Paul also alleged that he could not properly claim his campaign donations because Hillary Clinton did not report more than $721,000 of his largess to the FEC -- and that she continued to file false FEC reports even after he sent her letters citing the omission.
- In December 2005, the FEC agreed with Paul about Mrs. Clinton's failure to report the $721,000 and change.
Here's the new stuff: Earlier this month, the Clinton's stable boy, attorney David Kendall, successfully cleaned up yet another pile of Clinton road apples, convincing the judge to let Mrs. Clinton out of the case. But before Mr. Kendall learned that the judge had already ruled, he submitted into evidence a revealing declaration, a document of just a few hundred words in which the junior senator from New York showcased again the bizarre Clintonian pathology of a person who can't remember a damn thing and yet wants to lead the free world.
A few examples of poor Mrs. Clinton's malady:
"I do not remember..."
"I have no recollection whatsoever..."
"I do not recall..."
"I have no memory..."
"I also have no recollection..."
Mrs. Clinton's declaration statements bear an astonishing resemblance to others she and Bill have made over the years (she being the first First Lady to come under criminal investigation and he having been the first president to establish his own legal defense fund.) (Remember: As we explain in Donkey Cons, the trouble with the Democratic Party is that they know all this and yet are willing, once again, to hand over the reins of the nation to a pair of scandal-plagued amnesiacs.)
Over at the Progressive Review, some folks honest enough to admit that liberals had, in the Clintons, picked a pair of lemons, took the trouble to tally the Clinton administration's use of the Amnesiac Defense. Here's the number of times people who testified in various Clinton scandals said "I don't recall" or something similar:
- Bill Kennedy ............... 116
- Harold Ickes ............... 148
- Ricki Seidman ............ 160
- Bruce Lindsey ............ 161
- Bill Burton ................. 191
- Mark Gearan ............. 221
- Mack McLarty ........... 233
- Neil Egglseston ......... 250
- Hillary Clinton ......... 250
- John Podesta ............ 264
- Jennifer O'Connor .... 343
- Dwight Holton ........ 348
- Patsy Thomasson .... 420
- Jeff Eller ................ 697
The Progressive Review also reprises a Washington Times count of all the creative ways Bill Clinton claimed he couldn't remember during his Paula Jones deposition. You can read that here.
Meanwhile, I'm going to wind this up with my personal favorite from Mrs. Clinton's April 7, 2006, declaration:
"I do not believe that I made any such statements because I believe I would remember such a discussion if it had occurred..."
So she can't remember, recall, or recollect anything that happened, but believes that something didn't happen because if it had she would have remembered it?
You can't make this stuff up.
DONKEY CONS: Buy it
DONKEY CONS: Buy TWO!
DONKEY CONS: Rave review
DONKEY CONS: Another rave review
DONKEY CONS: Yet ANOTHER rave review
DONKEY CONS: About the book
DONKEY CONS: On Book TV
DONKEY CONS: On Capitol Hill