The Weekly Standard on Vince Foster

I'm not sure I agree with their analysis that Trump's play here is inferior to what a "a more responsible opponent" could do. A more responsible opponent could raise the question the Standard wants to discuss, which is whether or not the Clintons behaved improperly in the wake of the death of a friend. There is a classic Clinton two-step dance around such a question: (1) That's a private matter, and (2) "Politics of personal destruction." By election day all anyone would remember is that the responsible opponent made a boorish attack. Trump, on the other hand, will have people remembering that they thought they heard Hillary had somebody killed, but if they think to check the record they'll find that Trump technically said that while it was fishy, it wasn't fair game and he wouldn't raise it as an issue.

All the same, the Standard does bring up an interesting fact I did not know:
As if that wasn't bad enough, in 1995 the New York Times reported an aide, Sylvia Matthews, was dispatched to go through Vince Foster's trash:
The committee also focused today on Mr. Foster's office trash. Members questioned Sylvia Mathews, a former White House aide, in laborious detail about what she had found in Mr. Foster's garbage on the night he died. Other than a few routine documents, the garbage contained nothing that shed light on Mr. Foster's thinking, said Ms. Mathews, who is now chief of staff at the Treasury Department.
Miss Matthews is now Mrs. Burwell. That's right: Sylvia Burwell, the current Secretary of Health and Human Services who is now busy sorting out Obamacare's refuse, is the same aide that went through Foster's trash the day he died. Loyalty to the Clintons has a generous rewards program, as the quasi nationalization of health care means that Burwell is now pulling the strings on a sixth of the national economy. And whatever lobbying gig is sure to follow will no doubt be extremely lucrative.
Makes that $75,000 in Justice Department investments seem like a wise use of one's money, if one was a ranking government bureaucrat.

And that's really the point: it's why Washington loves her and why Wall Street loves her. She makes the money flow, from the People to the people. From the taxpayer people, that is, to the loyal people. The ones who belong to the club.

The ones who do what they're told.


ColoComment said...

A "more responsible opponent" would go down the tubes much like a Romney and a McCain. Courtesy and concern for the feelings of one's opponent has proven ineffective at promoting Republican candidates.
I do remark that Trump has this knack for using verbal tactics on the order of "I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him." He says something like, "I'm not the one who said this, I'm just responding to those who accuse me of ...."

As the article quotes, "He added, 'I don't bring [Foster's death] up because I don't know enough to really discuss it. I will say there are people who continue to bring it up because they think it was absolutely a murder. I don't do that because I don't think it's fair.' "

This man is not stupid, by any means. I can't wait for a Trump/Clinton "debate."

raven said...

The Clinton's do not have A skeleton in the closet- they have a whole ossuary packed and stacked with bones. Trump will have a lot to chose from.

Ymar Sakar said...

There is a reason why stormtroopers Obey Orders.