Sunday, March 16, 2008
Greg Craig, former counsel to Bill Clinton and now Barack Obama supporter, sat down for an interview with National Journal. His comments suggest that Hillary Clinton’s claims of experience were overblown. An excerpt from the interview:
Q: But was that experience, do you think, that is — having a lot of influence with advisers, giving private advice to her husband — was that experience that has helped prepare her to be commander in chief?
Craig: Oh, I don’t doubt that. The point that I am making is that her claims of the nature of that experience are overstated. The fact is she did not sit in on national security meetings. She did not have a security clearance. She did not attend meetings in the situation room. She conducted no negotiations. She did not manage any part of the national security bureaucracy. She did not have her own national security staff. That’s the fact. Now the experience that she did have — watching and sometimes sitting in the room where discussions were going on and also meeting heads of state and foreign ministers — that is good experience, and it’s invaluable to understanding how the world works when it comes to international organizations as well as international negotiations.
Please read the entire interview HERE.
From the Left 
To think i used to adore her, that i willing to get in the streets to fight for this fake Democrat. The Democratic party has been nothing but a vehicle for Hillary to satisfy her personal aspirations.
Message to Hillary: The Democratic party is bigger than you and Bill. Millions of people across the earth “need” Obama. I not only hope that you badly lose this primary. But i hope you lose your Senate seat, and take your big corrupt butt right back to Chicago, or Little Rock, your choice.
The evidence is mounting about Hillary’s challenges with the truth. Jesus, even the president of Ireland busted her recently.
I find it amazing how so many people want to bash Hillary for promoting herself and perhaps exaggerating truths. When has a politician not done that? McCain, Obama and Clinton will all do whatever it takes to position themselves ahead of the other in the hopes of becoming the next President of the USA.
At the end of the day, there is only one candidate that has lived in the White House and understands the system thanks to that experience and regardless of exaggerated claims, can be our Commander in Chief from day one. That’s Hillary Clinton.
Fox news wants to talk about that they are fair and balanced, but in reality they are not. To talk about the rest of the media is avoiding talking about the pastor of Obama and try everything they can to make Obama (A Half Black/ Half white person) to be a black suppressor. But if they want to talk about the media avoiding, why are they avoiding to talk about the case that Hillary Clinton has in November with Peter Paul? The news was all over it when they didn’t have evidence on the Peter Paul case, but as soon he came out with recorded tapes and so much evidence that could put Hillary Clinton in jail for 5 years, the media chicken out. Not everybody in Fox News is unfair, even Bill O’ Reilly said the media itself was corrupted.
Hillary and Bill Clinton have made a significant issue about how the press is treating Hillary unfairly in their hyper-critical reporting on her and their “softball” reporting on Barak Obama. Hillary maintains she has been fully investigated by the media and Barak hasn’t!
As the Tony Rezko trial begins in Chicago, Clinton and her surrogates are linking Obama to Rezko and the media is speculating about whether Obama will be called to testify as a witness in the case. Obama has always admitted he received $85,000 in contributions from Rezko which Obama has now donated to charity rather than keep.
Yet the civil fraud trial of Bill Clinton for defrauduing Hillary’s largest donor in 2000 into giving her campaign more than $1.2 million, pending in Los Angeles courts since 2003, is now preparing for a November, 2008 trial. The discovery that is now proceeding after a February 21 hearing, and the pending trial, have NEVER been announced by the mainstream media.
Hillary was able to extricate herself as a co-defendant in the case in January, 2008 after years of appeals to be protected by the First Amendment from tort claims arising out of federal campaign solicitations she made. Her abuse of the intent of California’s anti-SLAPP law after the California Supreme Court refused to dismiss her from the case in 2004 is emblematic of her contempt for the Rule of Law.
Hillary will be called as a witness in both discovery and the trial according to the trial court Judge who so-advised Hillary’s attorney David Kendall when he dismissed Hillary as a co-defendant in 2007. A subpoena is being prepared this month and will be served personally on Hillary, along with Chelsea, Pa Gov. Ed Rendell, Al Gore and other well known political and media figures.
Yet the media has refused to report about this landmark civil fraud case- brought by Hillary’s biggest 2000 donor to her Senate race, regarding allegations that were corroborated by the Department of Justice in the criminal trial of Hillary’s finance director David Rosen in May, 2005. That indictment and trial was credited as resulting from the civil suit’s allegations by Peter Paul, the Hollywood dot com millionaire Bill Clinton convinced to donate more than $1.2 million (according to the DOJ prosecutors and the FBI) to Hillary’s Senate campaign as part of a post White House business deal with Bill.
The media – except for World Net Daily- has also suspiciously refused to report on Hillary’s last FEC report regarding her 2000 Senate campaign, filed in January 30, 2006. In a secret settlement of an FEC complaint by the plaintiff in Paul v Clinton, Peter Paul, the FEC fined Hillary’s campaign $35,000 for hiding more than $720,000 in donations from Paul, and it required Hillary’s campaign to file a 4th amended FEC report.
In that report Hillary and her campaign again hid Paul’s $1.2 million contribution to her campaign and falsely attributed $250,000 as being donated by Paul’s partner, Spider Man creator Stan Lee, who swore in a video taped deposition he never gave Hillary or her campaign any money.
Lee did testify to trading $100,000 checks with Paul to make it appear he gave $100,000 to Hillary’s campaign (admission of a felony) but none of that has been reported by the “overly critical” media!
Where is the outrage from Obama that the press is engaging in a double standard relating to his possible role in the Rezko trial and his refunding the $85,000 contributed to his campaign by Rezko- which Obama has always admitted taking. The media makes no mention of Hillary’s role as a witness in Bill’s fraud trial for defrauding Hillary’s largest donor- and Hillary’s refusal to refund the $1.2 million she illegally received from Paul, which she has denied taking from Paul ever since the Washington Post asked her about Paul and his felony convictions from the 1970’s before her first Senate election in 2000?
Check out Hillcap.org for proof of Hillary Clinton commiting crimes. The evidence that could have put Hillary Clinton in jail for 5 years.
I find it amazing how so many people want to bash Hillary for promoting herself and perhaps exaggerating truths.
Wagner, now come on?
Are your expectations really so low that you’re OK with Hillary Clinton just making things up from thin air?
Exaggerting is one thing. Outright lying is something else entirely.