Skip to main content

My jaw dropped last night during NBC Nightly News, when Tim Russert raised an eyebrow about the setting in which Hillary made her Wright attacks yesterday:

The setting in which she did this is particularly striking.  It's a newspaper in Pittsburgh owned by Richard Mellon Scaife who described by her allies as the godfather of the vast right wing conspiracy.  The man who raised questions about the suicide of Vince Foster, the death of former party chairman Ron Brown, who funded investigations of Troopergate and Whitewater.  It was that setting where she decided to offer the comments about Reverend Wright.

Scaife had lunch with Bill Clinton and donated to his Foundation.  His minion Chris Ruddy interviewed  Bill Clinton and wrote a puff piece about him in NewsMax.

This is a bigger story than if Bill Clinton and Ken Starr decided to become best friends forever.  This is like OJ and the Goldman Family developing an alliance.   What is going on?

I believe this is the underplayed story of the campaign season and I wrote a bit about the odd relationships between the Clintons and the Clinton-haters in a previous diary, which you may want to look at for reference.

Why is this important?

The investigations that hounded the Clintons are an undeniable part of our country's history.  They were a source of major distraction during the Clinton administration.  The scandals led to the impeachment of a US President.  As a result of these attacks, progressives such as myself would forget about the ways that the Clintons sold us out on issue after issue in the 90's and rally to their sides as they fought the evil right wingers.

Why, after all of that, would Bill Clinton be granting Ruddy an interview?  

Why would Ruddy do a puff piece?

Why would Scaife donate to the Clinton Foundation?

Why would Hillary choose to make the Wright attacks with the rabidly partisan right wing editorial board of Scaife's Newspaper?

Is it credible that figures like Scaife and Ruddy have "seen the light," and become Clinton allies?

Is it credible that Bill Clinton is merely buttering these people up like he did with Rupert Murdoch in exchange for more favorable coverage?   Or Rush Limbaugh in exchange for crossover votes?  The Arkansas Project is an order of magnitude worse than anything done by Fox News, the New York Post, or Rush Limbaugh.  The people accused the Clintons of murder, folks!!!!

I was surprised that Tim Russert raised an eyebrow last night and called the setting "striking," but look around the mainstream media landscape and there is no interest in pursuing this story.  

When it is Barack Obama, guilt by association is ok and they hound the Wright and Rezko stories endlessly.

But when the Clintons appear to have developed a cozy relationship with the very people who they claim to have persecuted them over so many years, an article of faith among hard-core Clinton loyalists, there is little media interest in elucidating the nature of this collaboration.

Why is that?  

Why is the media not doing its job and leaving one of the biggest stories of the year uninvestigated?

Where is the outrage?

Can anybody clue me in here?  I am very puzzled.

Originally posted to RKA on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 06:17 AM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  And the Clinton relationship (0+ / 0-)

    with Drudge?

  •  simple equation (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Scaife = The Media

    I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man's reasoning powers are not above the monkey's. - Mark Twain

    by route66 on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 06:23:17 AM PDT

    •  That is what I fear... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Blue Texas

      I fear that the media at large profit from the clinton soap opera and so they really don't want the "villain" of the sitcom to ever go away.  I know it sounds conspiratorial, but it does worry me.

  •  why doesn't dae media investigate the media? is.. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    is that what you're asking?

    i think the question is also the answer.

  •  HRC is teetering on the edge of the cliff.... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    she knows it.  All she can do is throw canon balls, and conspire with the enemy.

  •  Useful idiots (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Unfortunately, the Clinton campaign and many their supporters who joyfully tout the investigative journalism of Sean Hannity, the wit and wisdom of Bill Kristol, the 'objectivity' of FoxNews and NewsMax -- completely miss just exactly who is being played as the useful idiot.

    It's quite sad.

    I guess everyone's got their own blog now.

    by zonk on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 06:25:25 AM PDT

  •  You know about this (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Paolo, rainmanjr

    because you heard Tim Russert talking about it, and you ask why "the media" doesn't investigate?

    Tin foil much?

    •  It's a matter of degree... (0+ / 0-)

      This gets passing offhand mention by Russert, NYT, Newsweek, but it has not been fully investigated.  With any other candidate, there would have been a feeding frenzy....

  •  how about this? (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RFK Lives, bumblebums, ronlib, rainmanjr, RKA

    . His (Scaife)commitment to conservative politics has never been primarily about upholding traditional morality; it has been about promoting policies that help to preserve his own wealth and that of people like himself. On the subject of Clinton his weather vane is now spinning wildly. Scaife speaks of a "very pleasant" two-hour-and-fifteen-minute private lunch with Bill Clinton at the former president’s New York office last summer. "I never met such a charismatic man in my whole life," Scaife says, glowing with pleasure at the memory. "To show him that I wasn’t a total Republican libertarian, I said that I had a friend named Jack Murtha," a Democratic member of the House of Representatives from Pennsylvania. "He said, ‘Oh, Jack Murtha. You’re talking about my golfing partner!’ "

    Scaife sides with his money

    It is easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them. Alfred Adler

    by Quicksilver2723 on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 06:26:35 AM PDT

  •  VERY important (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Paolo, Blue Texas, rainmanjr, RKA

    Great post.  I've been outraged since yesterday.  But your point about guilt by association -- right on the mark.  Frankly, I had no idea there was an ongoing relationship between the Clintons and the funder of the Arkansas Project.  This is as bizarre as it gets.  

    Democrats need to hear this -- need to see the cozying up of these people with the very same people out to destroy them.  

    It appears as if Scaife has truly won:  he's turned the Clintons into himself.  


  •  Why go to a right-winger who (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Blue Texas

    wrote tonnes of crap about you and who is your actual enemy no less???
    Isn't she scared of losing her democratic cred???

  •  Keith Obermann mentioned this (5+ / 0-)

    on his show last night.

  •  McCains VP (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Blue Texas

    I know this sounds crazy but I would not be at all surprised after Obama wins the nomination if Hillary becomes McCain's running mate.

  •  She thinks the low information voters/supporters (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    will not care and the last name will do for them.
    The few high-information voters who support her have turned into some sort of a cult who now believe that there's a vast left wing conspiracy against her and so enemy of an enemy is a quasi-friend for them I guess and hence they have been blindsided. Tomorrow she may go to Pat Buchanan and get cozy with him and say slavery was a boon to 'them n*s' and her supporters won't bat an eye.

  •  I one knows! (0+ / 0-)

    Josh Marshall wrote a piece on this in Talking Points Memo. And I saw it mentioned on Olbermann. So I think everyone is just as puzzled as you.

    Cynicism is a sorry kind of wisdom- Barack Obama

    by jenontheshore on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 06:31:42 AM PDT

  •  Marriages of convenience are the Clinton norm (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Paolo, Blue Texas, manwithnoname, soms, RKA

    The common pursuit of mutual self-interest is the sole coin in which they traffic.  So McVain voted to remove WJC from office on both counts, and he made a little "joke" about Chelsea, and he also made a little "joke" about bombing Iran.  That doesn't mean that HRC can't vouch for his CIC bona fides and WJC can't tell everyone what a great guy he is.  Obviously, the same approach applies to Scaife.

    When it comes to principles and Team Clinton, as Gertrude Stein said about Oakland, there is no there there.  Lani Guinier   learned that lesson to her painful detriment years ago.  In 1993, the Clintons left their personal friend twisting in the wind as the hounds of the VRWC bayed below.  When the same hounds came after Team Clinton 5 years later, we were told we had to rally for that Team.  Now that elements of the VRWC can be used to help restore the Team to the throne, bygones are bygones.

    WJC, HRC, McA, Wolfson, Davis, Ickes, Carville, and all the rest are utterly amoral creatures whose sole interest lies in the acquisition and the maintenance of personal power.  Once that basic fact is clearly understood, everything that happens as a result makes perfect sense.

    Some men see things as they are and ask why. I see things that never were and ask why not?

    by RFK Lives on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 06:41:22 AM PDT

  •  Scaife & Paula Jones (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Time after time, Paula Jones' lawsuit was on the brink of going where it should have gone: down the toilet. It was a meritless lawsuit.

    But Scaife used his considerable fortune to keep it going. Scaife is the one who managed to get the lawsuit past the usual hurdles of reasonableness and into deposition-mode.

    And, as we all know, once that happened the deposition by Clinton in the Jones case became the fishing expedition Ken Starr was looking for.

    What happened to the Jones case after Ken Starr got the dirt on Clinton's girlfriend? TOSSED OUT. Meritless lawsuit. As had been determined years before.

    Yet, Jones kept it going with an appeal, thanks to Scaife. Clinton finally settled with her for a million dollars just so he could go on with his life.

    So, yes, it's very interesting that Clinton is cultivating contacts with Scaife. It's not as unusual as the diarist thinks, though. Bill Clinton has an obsession with winning over everyone. If someone doesn't like him, he gets fixated on trying to figure out how to win them over. This quirk of his personality is well documented.

    And let's get real. Bill Clinton's wife is running for president. He doesn't want Scaife dusting off the Clinton hate machine for another run. Probably futile to try to "do business" with Scaife. He'll stab the Clintons in the back if Hillary is the nominee. But for now, Scaife is helping Clinton in the effort to tear down Obama.

    Why? Because running the Clinton hate machine was SO much fun for Scaife, and he misses it.

    Scaife is one of the social aristocrats that needs some serious readjustment. Even if Hillary isn't the nominee, Scaife has some come-uppance coming. He's a PNAC cheerleader, and ALL those involved in the Crime Against Peace need to account for their part.

  •  Maybe they have all come together in The Family (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I'm a latte-drinking scone-eater and proud of it!

    by machiado on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 07:02:01 AM PDT

  •  I'm Glad The Media isn't Caught Up in This Crap (0+ / 0-)

    it's just too bad they got caught up in the Wright shit period.  We still have a chance of ending up with a great President, but he's going to win for bullshit reasons, just like the last fifteen or twenty of them.

  •  At the very least (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Scaife and company owe the country an apology for Clinton investigations.  If they honestly thought Bill Clinton was a bad man its one thing.  However the current Clinton-Scaife alliance suggests it was all just politics at its basest of levels.

    Lurleen Rodham Wallace: Ready on day one.

    by Woodwards Friend on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 07:02:40 AM PDT

  •  Another under-reported story: (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Blue Texas, ronlib, Shhs, RKA

    Mark Penn, chief strategist for the Clinton assault on the Democratic Party, is CEO for Burson-Marsteller, PR firm for some of the most savagely lawless corporations in the world.

    Charlie Black, a top McCain adviser, runs BKSH, a lobbying subsidiary of Burson-Marsteller.
    Another under-reported story - and you'd think it would be a big one. Isn't this unprecedented, even in the depressing history of American presidential politics? Obviously Bill and Hillary don't care how this looks, and don't have to care. Like everything else about Hillary's campaign, that's so, um REPUBLICAN of them.

    Why isn't this important - why isn't this a huge story? And more to the point - what's going on here?

    Clearly what's going on here is the same thing that has been going on since the Clintons founded the DLC, the corporate wing of the Democratic party, and began the work of corrupting and marginalizing the Democratic party to ensure there would be no effecive opposition to the corporate takeover of our government. Excuse me, Monsanto's government. Scaife is only a nasty little part of the big picture.

    This is not personal ambition; this is a war: not just within the Democratic party but between the corporations the Clintons work for and the American people.


    •  GREAT POINT!!! (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Blue Texas, Shhs

      These corporate connections are massively hushed up.

      When you combine this fact with the venom by which the media have gone after Obama over the Wright affair, you don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to note something really fishy going on here....

  •  I know this is speculation... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    but let's put a fine point on what it seems like. Scaife and his media hounds savaged the Clinton's in the 90's. Bush turned out to be an idiot running the country, and therefore, even though he is in the pocket of big business, since our country is suffering as a whole, his business suffers. Scaife sees the light, realizes how misguided his pursuit of the Clinton's was in the 90's. (He was quoted as saying Clinton wasn't as bad as he thought, in hindsight).

    He wants to put someone he thinks is competent back in the white House. Bill and Richard have lunch. Richard expresses regret over the past. Offers to make amends by helping Hillary with her presidential bid. Offers of this kind include favorable media treatment of Clinton, while playing the same old game of media gotcha with Obama as the target. If Hillary wins in Nov. Scaife turns his enemy into his friend, and has the Clinton's in his pocket for her turn. Not bad for guy who was arguably the tip of the spear in the media over Bill's impeachment.

    Scaife is willing to back Hillary and Savage Obama to gain a friend in the White House. IMHO he is playing the Clinton's for fools. The public is on to this smarmy quid pro quo.

    You know, I used to feel sorry for Bill and Hillary in the 90's because of all the frenzy and vitriol. Now I'm dismayed that Bill and Hill are seemingly willing to play this game of gutter politics by smear and innuendo, kneecap your opponents with the help of those that kneecapped you. This is more than ugly to me. I wanted to put an end to this type of thing, not ramp it up against someone else. All those old feelings of disgust are coming back, and this time it is not helping the Clinton's.

    "In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act."-George Orwell

    by Babsnc on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 07:07:59 AM PDT

    •  A plausible theory... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I had not throught of it...

      My very cynical view is that the Clintons welcome the Scaife investigations in a perverse way because they get progressives to forget about issue sell-outs and rally to the Clintons who can then put forward their corporate DLC agenda with impunity, and the corporate media not suprisingly fails to report on the corrupt bargain.

      I think the elephant in the room here is the interests of corporate America.

      But your theory, decidedly less conspiratorial than mine, may be close to the truth.

      This is what I want to know....and why I wish there were more attention to this issue....

  •  Murdoch... Scaife... McCain (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Blue Texas, RKA

    Judge Hillary by the friends she keeps and the people she talks to (or takes money from).

    I've detested HRC for years. I guess I'm just astounded that many here at Kos were blinded by her for so long. I remember Kos himself, I believe, stating the Dems have "three fine candidates" whilst the Rethugs had none (or something similar).

    Dealing with the Clintons is like dealing with the devil. I'm sorry, but some people (through greed, avarice, political ambition or some other vice) are just evil. And don't get me started on Bush and McCain.

    I would be more upset if I weren't so sedated...

    by Paolo on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 07:09:07 AM PDT

  •  Hillary and Bill were always a part of the right (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Blue Texas, Shhs, soms, RadioGirl, RKA

    wing...Bill was the chairman of the DLC before his run .. the DLC is a probusiness, Republicanlite organization..after Jesse Jackson won in South Carolina in 1984 and 1988, Southerners formed the DLC which went about the task of infiltrating the Democratic Party with the express purpose of continuing the process of dismantling Roosevelt's New Deal..

    That is what the right wing wants to do..completely dismantle Roosevelt's New Deal and allow neoliberalism to privatize every government service or asset making sure their cronies benefit and the people pay for it..

  •  Clintons Have Become the Right Wing Conspiracy (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    This story points to the heart of my belief that the Clintons are really Liberal Republicans that have hijacked our party.. No two people have done more damage to the party than the Clintons.

    If McCain wins, the Supreme Court will be changed for 20 years. Something to Ponder.

    by Blue Texas on Wed Mar 26, 2008 at 07:23:09 AM PDT

    •  Nobody talks about this... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Blue Texas

      ...they lost congress in 1994...

      They lost governorships

      They lost statehouses

      They screwed Al Gore in 2000..

      Yet the media CW is that the Clintons are the best thing for the Dems since FDR...

      It is a fiction!!

  •  apolitical amoral power players (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Blue Texas, soms, RKA

    There is a class of these folks out there. It's amazing how many are really using politics as a cynical tool to further their careers. Most of the consultants are that way. I really believe that Karl would work for Hillary. (is he already?) Some players are worse than others. It seems that Bill and Hillary are up there.

    Which leads me to an interesting conclusion. We have had a few candidates for the Presidency who really believed in their politics. Ronald Regan and George Bush come to mind. Perhaps that explains the fact that such obvious dolts could garner so much voter support. Yeah, George has no verbal skills, is simple minded, and unfit to be President, but he is sincere about being a right-wing asshole. In his case the fact that he could eke out anything close to a majority is a miracle. But he's sincere. The risk with McCain is that he too appears sincere. If we are to compete against him we need equally sincere candidate. We know who that is.  

  •  Simple. No sex? No racism? No story. nt (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    soms, RKA
    •  Good point... (0+ / 0-)

      The fact that Scaife is not a household name is huge as well.

      But the thing is that Scaife did pursue stories of Sex with the there is some juiciness there...

      I think this is a big story that is being ignored...

  •  Why isn't this on the REC list, damnit! nt (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site