Sadly, there is very little chance that Hillary Clinton will be the Democratic nominee. Short of a nomination stolen by the super delegates, Hillary Clinton has no chance. However, in the event that the super delegates hand the nomination to Hillary Clinton, it is imperative that those of us who want a Democratic victory in November do what we can to dig up all the right-wing talking points against Hillary Clinton now so that she will be prepared when the general election comes. All Democrats, including MoveOn.org (a group that Hillary Clinton remains grateful to for bailing out her husband), should help vet the former First Lady in the event of a stolen nomination.
We all know what the usual attacks will be on Mrs. Clinton. There is no need to repeat them here. What we must do is vet her against attacks such as this one that the McCain camp is making against Senator Obama.
I take no joy in typing up right-wing talking points. But I consider it my duty as a voter to help Mrs. Clinton should she be the nominee.
One issue that Mrs. Clinton feels is relevant is who a politician associates with. She made it abundantly clear at the debate this week that no matter how tenuous the association, a candidate must be held accountable for the words or actions of these associates. I fear that this position that Mrs. Clinton has taken may come back to hurt her in November. The Republicans will surely bring up Abdurahman Alamoudi in connection with any Clinton general election campaign. Hillary Clinton should be prepared to defend this association.
Abdurahman Alamoudi was the founder of the American Muslim Council. He was charged with laundering money from Libya and of providing money to al Qaeda, Hamas and other terrorist organizations. He was convicted in 2004 and sentenced to 23 years in prison. It turns out Mr. Alamoudi was also involved in an assassination plot. Unfortunately it turns out that Mr. Alamoudi and his organization, the American Muslim Council, had raised money for both George W. Bush and Hillary Clinton.
The American Muslim Council and an associated group held a fundraiser in 2000 where they raised $50,000 for Hillary Clinton. Mr. Alamoudi also separately contributed $1000 to Mrs. Clinton's Senate campaign. When the news of this fundraiser and contribution surfaced Hillary Clinton was forced to return the money:
Hillary Rodham Clinton said yesterday that she would return $50,000 in political contributions received at a fund-raising event sponsored by a Muslim organization based in California.
Mrs. Clinton said she was offended by remarks attributed to members of the organization, the American Muslim Alliance. The group's president has been quoted as defending a United Nations resolution that he said allowed for the use of armed force by Palestinians against Israel, while other members have been accused of making anti-Semitic remarks.
Mrs. Clinton's decision to return the money, as well as $1,000 from an official of another American Muslim group, the American Muslim Council, puzzled leaders of both Muslim organizations. The groups acknowledge that they have some members with extreme views on Israel, but say that they are mainstream and oppose terrorism. Officials in the groups yesterday took issue with the characterizations of the remarks.
Hillary Clinton tried to distance herself from the fundraiser but it turned out that she had accepted a plaque from them:
At a news conference in Queens, Mrs. Clinton announced that she would return the money. ''The statements that are attributed to the organization and some of its members are offensive and outrageous,'' she said. ''I don't want anyone to be under a misimpression. I don't want anyone to have a false idea about what I believed was the case, so I am going to return all of the money.''
Mrs. Clinton also said she would return $1,000 to Mr. Alamoudi of the American Muslim Council. She said she did not know that the fund-raising event, which was held in Boston in June, had been sponsored by the American Muslim Alliance even though she was photographed at the event accepting a plaque from the chairman of the group's Massachusetts chapter.
Unfortunately there was also a letter with Mrs. Clinton's signature thanking the group for the fundraiser:
At the same time, Mrs. Clinton acknowledged that a White House office had written what she called a form letter, on official stationery, to the American Muslim Alliance, thanking the organization for a plaque it awarded her at a fund-raising reception in Massachusetts, where she raised $50,000 last June. After the donations were disclosed last week, Mrs. Clinton returned the money, saying that she had not been aware that the alliance, some of whose members have been quoted as defending the use of violence against Israel, had been an event sponsor.
Mr. Lazio's aides asserted that the letter was proof that Mrs. Clinton had misled New Yorkers about her knowledge of the event.
But Mrs. Clinton, whose aides had learned that some reporters had obtained the letter, called a news conference and forcefully denied the Lazio campaign accusation. She said the letter was an automatic response by the White House gift office after she had returned to Washington from the trip to Massachusetts. She said the signature was electronically generated and she had never seen the letter before yesterday.
Mr. Lazio's spokesman, Dan McLagan, laughed off that explanation. ''She said she didn't remember the group, or the plaque,'' Mr. McLagan said. ''But she thanked the group for the plaque. Surprise, surprise, Mrs. Clinton wasn't telling the truth again. I'm shocked.''
Mrs. Clinton had, in fact, acknowledged receiving the plaque, as one of hundreds she had been given.
One can understand that with so much money coming in, it is hard to keep track of who you are thanking for fundraisers. However, I suspect the Republicans in November will not be so kind.
To make matters worse, Mr. Alamoudi has been quoted in public supporting Hamas and Hezbollah:
At another Washington rally, on Oct. 28, 2000, the AMC's Mr. Alamoudi led the thousands in attendance to chant their support for Hamas and Hezbollah. "Hear that, Bill Clinton, we are all supporters of Hamas," he declared. "I wish they argued that I am also a supporter of Hezbollah." (When the New York Daily News asked about these comments earlier this week, Mr. Alamoudi denied making them, telling the reporter: "You better check your Arabic." When the reporter noted that he had given the speech in English, Mr. Alamoudi replied, "It was in English? Oh my God, I forgot!")
Back while Hillary Clinton was in the White House, she and Bill Clinton had no problems inviting groups such as Mr. Alamoudi's to the White House. The White House maintained that these meetings were part of their "big tent" approach:
In the spring of 1996, I had lunch with a senior adviser to the Clinton Administration and to Hillary. I asked him if there was any concern over the article I had published in The Wall Street Journal that revealed that both the president and first lady had hosted militant Islamic groups, which had, at the White House, proclaimed their support for terrorism.
"This administration believes in a big tent." the adviser responded. "Besides, we've gotten no flak, so why should we back off?"
Hillary Clinton herself defended these associations and meetings:
The most telling moment of the first lady's news conference--which has yet to be reported--came in response to a question as to why, she has met repeatedly over the years with other groups that had openly supported Hamas, Hezbollah and other foreign terrorist organizations.
"I think what you're referring to," she said, "is that over the course of the last seven years as part of the administration's efforts to open lines of communication and build bridges with Muslim Americans and Muslim leaders from all over the world, many, many people have been invited to the White House. I have been part of some of those events. I have hosted some of them. I would imagine that some of the people who were invited were members of organizations with whom I would have had serious disagreements about some of the things those organizations have said. . . . So I think that if you want to talk about what the White House has tried to do, what the administration has tried to do to try to promote a framework for peace, it certainly included lines of communication to many different groups and many different individuals."
Yet in the debate this week Hillary Clinton had this to say about politicians and their associations:
It is clear that, as leaders, we have a choice who we associate with and who we apparently give some kind of seal of approval to. And I think that it wasn't only the specific remarks but some of the relationships with Reverend Farrakhan, with giving the church bulletin over to the leader of Hamas, to put a message in.
You know, these are problems. And they raise questions in people's minds. And, so, this is a legitimate area, as everything is, when we run for office, for people to be exploring and trying to find answers.
...
And it goes to this larger set of concerns about how we are going to run against John McCain. You know, I wish the Republicans would apologize for the disaster of the Bush-Cheney years and not run anybody, just say that it's time for the Democrats to go back into the White House.
Unfortunately, they don't seem to be willing to do that. So we know that they're going to be out there, full force.
And, you know, I've been in this arena for a long time. I have a lot of baggage, and everybody has rummaged through it for years.
By her own standard, the Republicans are likely to come after her for her association with Mr. Alamoudi and all those people she hosted at the White House and gave them a "seal of approval". Yes, it is unfortunate. But Hillary Clinton should be prepared for the right-wing attacks. And in keeping with her campaign's approach of early vetting, I will do what I can to make sure she is prepared for these horrible horrible attacks on her character and her associations that are certain to come.
[Cross posted at my blog.]
Permalink | 19 comments