This is crazy. In more evidence that HRC employs the same scumbag tactics as GWB/Cheney, and rivals Nixon in terms of paranoia this article on TheHill.com reveals details of Hillary's spying operations.
The article makes reference to the recent autobiograpy by New York Times reporter, Jeff Gerth, with the relevant language as follows:
She received memos about the status of various press inquiries; she vetted senior campaign aides; and she listened to a secretly recorded audiotape of a phone conversation of Clinton critics plotting their next attack.
"The tape contained discussions of another woman who might surface with allegations about an affair with Bill," Gerth and Van Natta wrote in reference to Clinton’s husband, former President Bill Clinton. "Bill’s supporters monitored frequencies used by cell phones, and the tape was made during one of those monitoring sessions."
Apparently HRC does not dispute the accuracy of these assertions.
Gerth told The Hill that he learned of the incident in 2006 when he interviewed a former campaign aide present at the tape playing. He has not revealed the aide’s identity. Clinton’s campaign has not disputed any facts reported in the final version of his book, which became public this spring, he said.
"It hasn’t been challenged," said Gerth. "There hasn’t been one fact in the book that’s been challenged."
Apart from the frightening control-freak paranoia reflected in this, it turns out that these actions may have also been illegal.
Several legal experts said it was illegal to intercept cell phone conversations in 1992.
"It’s been clear that since 1986 it was illegal to intercept an individual cell phone call," said Barry Steinhardt, the director of the technology and liberty program at the American Civil Liberties Union.
In 1986, Congress broadened wiretapping law to prohibit the interception of electronic communications, as well as the use or disclosure of intercepted electronic communications. Two court cases have since cited that action in ruling the interception of cell phone communications illegal: Bartnicki v. Vopper, 2001, and Company v. United States, 2003.
And of course this also undermines HRC's attempts to portray herself as a proponent of privacy given GWB's abuses of the Patriot Act.
It's bewildering that we democrats would nominate this woman and re-open the pandora's box of Bill and Hill bs, thereby propogating a whole new spectrum of warfare against "the vast right wing conspiracy." Make no mistake, this will all be red meat for the GOP should HRC be nominated. Fortunately, there are better democrats running. But I admit, the days are dwindling to turn this thing in their favor.