By Roger Stone
The key thing about conventional political wisdom is that it is usually wrong. This idea that the election of Hillary Rodham Clinton is “inevitable” is wide of the mark. In fact her survival to the finish line is dubious. The Clintonistas and their dupes in the MSM may not want to open the magnum of Champagne just yet.
Neither the voters and some in the media want and need a contest. Coronations are not American and they don’t sell newspapers or generate web traffic.
Clinton faces multiple challenges and vulnerabilities and predictions by the main stream media of her coronation are indeed premature. So daunting are her challenges, I’m shocked she appears to running. Clearly taking a paid speech in the late spring means she intends to milk it and perhaps get in later. Good Idea. She won’t wear well.
More importantly Mrs. Clinton has nothing to say. Her claim to be “dead broke” shows her isolation from the real world, Her claims that “companies do not create jobs” seems a sop to the party’s hard left. She has no over-arching theme other than it is her “turn” to be president. Hilary is as stale as ten-day-old bread
A reporter with a major mainstream political website who traveled with her on the book tour told me she was “ trapped in the past…. much of her motive was revenge” against those who haven’t paid the Clinton’s due respect for her accomplishments and who have questioned their past activities and criminal actions.
Hilary’s handling of Obama is also problematic. A high level Obama intimate who worked six years to put Obama in the Casa Blacnca told me at a recent dinner party that the friction between the Clinton’s and Obama’s are very real. The Presidents “ endorsement” of Hilary was Obama at his passive-aggressive best. After saying Hillary would be “good president” he talked about “mileage” and the public’s interest in a candidate “with a clean car smell” in response to a question about a woman who will be 69 when she runs for President.
Hilary cannot wander too far from Obama, who is still wildly popular in the party’s base ,while seeking the nomination, yet a full embrace of Obama is potentially poisonous in the general election. The Democrat’s lock on independent, younger and Hispanic voters was broken in the last election. Obama has crumbled with key constituencies where support for Obama is deadly.
More problematic is the Clinton’s past behavior. In fact, given the Clinton narrow escape in a slew of ethical scandals during the years of Bill’s governorship, presidency and post Presidency, I’d say the Clinton’s are pressing their luck.
No Clinton has been on the national general election ballot since 1996. More than half of registered voters have no memory or knowledge of the Clinton presidency. These voters can be educated during a campaign and everything about the Clinton’s will be under a magnifying glass. Hilary’s soaring poll numbers are her high watermark. Her role in the Vince Foster Death, Travelgate and Waco , all on the table. A re-examination will yield many facts not reported at the time. Hillary’s co- presidency is not pretty.
Frank Bruni of the New York Times suggest that “breaking the glass ceiling for women “is the rationale for Hillary’s candidacy. This path is however wrought with even greater danger because of the activities of her husband.
The new public scrutiny of Bill Cosby is also problematic for Bill Clinton. I am not talking about consensual sex but, in some cases, violate rape, physical assault, torn clothing and at least three victims say he bit their lips as a disarming move and also a bid to them to remain silent. In short, Bill Clinton has a Bill Cosby problem.
Eileen Wellstone, 19-year-old English woman said Clinton sexually assaulted her after she met him at a pub near the Oxford where Clinton was a student in 1969. In fact Clinton was expelled from Oxford and earned no degree there.
Juanita Broaddrick, a volunteer in Clinton's gubernatorial campaign, said he raped her in 1978. Mrs. Broaddrick suffered a bruised and torn lip, which she said she suffered when Clinton bit her during the rape. Broaddrick gave a stunning interview to NBC’s Lisa Myers about the assault.
Carolyn Moffet, a legal secretary in Little Rock in 1979, said she met Governor Clinton at a political fundraiser and was invited to his hotel room. “When I went in, he was sitting on a couch, wearing only an undershirt. He pointed at his penis and told me to suck it. I told him I didn't even do that for my boyfriend and he got mad, grabbed my head and shoved it into his lap. I pulled away from him and ran out of the room." she said.
Elizabeth Ward Gracen, the Miss Arkansas who won the Miss America crown in 1982, told friends she was forced by Clinton to have sex with him shortly after she won her state title. Gracen later told an interviewer that sex with Clinton was consensual. Ward Gracen’s roommate Judy Stokes has said the ex-Miss Arkansas told her she was raped after the incident.
Paula Corbin, Jones ,an Arkansas state worker, filed asexual harassment case against Clinton after an encounter in a Little Rock hotel room where the then-governor exposed himself and demanded oral sex. Clinton settled the case with Jones with an $850,000 payment.
Sandra Allen James, a former Washington, DC, political fundraiser Clinton invited her to his hotel room during a political trip to the nation's capital in 1991, pinned her against the wall and stuck his hand up her dress. She fled.
Christy Zercher, a flight attendant on Clinton's leased campaign plane in 1992, says Presidential candidate Clinton exposed himself , grabbed her breasts and made explicit remarks about oral sex. Zercher said later in an interview that White House attorney Bruce Lindsey tried to pressure her into not going public about the assault.
Kathleen Willey, a White House volunteer, said that Clinton grabbed her, fondled her breast and pressed her hand against his genitals during an Oval Office meeting in November, 1993. Willey became a target for a Hillary directed smear campaign after she went public.
More important however is the evidence that Hilary had full knowledge of her husband’s activities and authorized and directed the use of heavy -handed private detectives to wage a intimidation campaign to terrorize Bill’s victims into silence.
In other words Hilary has violated women in her lust for power. Hilary Clinton raped Bill’s female victims psychological as much as her Husband did Physically. Will some of these women come forward to challenge Hilary Clinton over her husband’s actions and her role in their cover up?
Women voters could be deeply offended by Hilary’s abuse of her sisters. Here in lies her greatest vulnerability. As Boston Globe columnist Joan Vennochi wrote “….maybe, while Bill is off the hook, Hillary isn’t. The next two years will certainly tell us whether his long-ago activities are the shadow campaign issue for his wife.”
Roger Stone is a New York Times Bestselling author. His next book. “The Clintons’ War on Women” will be published by Skyhorse Publishing in March, 2015.
By Roger Stone
The House of Bush is clashing with the Romney dynasty. The son of President George Bush is throwing jabs at the son of presidential candidate and Governor George Romney. The 2012 nominee squares off against the heir apparent of the Bush clan. George H.W. has ordered "the Bush dynasty be restored to power "according to POLITICO. Mitt , thinking three times a charm (Nixon lost and ran again and won, his minions repeat endlessly) and is moving ahead. The Establishment types are having a tiff! Meanwhile Chris Christie hit Iowa in search of early support while trying to figure out how to finance a 2016 bid.
First Mitt floats a trial balloon.
"Can’t quit Mitt: Friends say Romney feels nudge to consider a 2016 presidential run "By Robert Costa & Phillip Rucker"
Next day, Jeb tells public Barbra supports run....
"Questions Abound as Jeb Bush stumps for Son"
"......Bush said his mother, the former first lady who declared last year there had been "enough Bushes" in the White House, was now "neutral, trending in a different direction." His wife, Columba, is "supportive" of a potential presidential campaign, he said."
Then ,Jeb Hits Romney at the WSJ Forum:
"Jeb Bush on 2016: GOP needs to 'lose the primary to win the general" By Kasie Hunt
"....The comments came in wide-ranging conversation with Gerald Seib, the Journal’s Washington bureau chief, who followed up, asking: “Are the things that you need to do to win a Republican nomination contrary to the things you need to do to win a general election?”
Bush shot back: “Well, frankly, no one really knows that because it hasn’t been tried recently.”
It was a veiled jab at former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who tacked hard right on issues like immigration to get through the 2012 presidential primary. Bush went on to quickly change course and say he thought Romney would have been a great president."
Next on December 5th, Ben White talks on CNBC clearly planted by Romney.
"Mitt Romney Run Won't Depend On Jeb Bush": White -
If you read the Ben White /Maggie Haberman article on Romney, Romney has been mentioning Jeb's investments to donors to make them hesitant on supporting Jeb:
"Backers: Romney More Open to 2016 run
He has sounded unimpressed with the emerging GOP field, associates say"
By Ben White and Maggie Haberman
"..........He has assessed various people’s strengths and weaknesses dispassionately, wearing what one ally called his “consultant cap” to measure the field. He has said, among other things, that Jeb Bush, the former Florida governor, would run into problems because of his business dealings, his work with the investment banks Lehman Brothers and Barclays, and his private equity investments.
You saw what they did to me with Bain [Capital],” he has said, referring to the devastating attacks that his Republican rivals and President Barack Obama’s team launched against him for his time in private equity, according to three sources familiar with the line. “What do you think they’ll do to [Bush] over Barclays?”.........
Later in the day, Jeb hits back at Romney with Consultant Mike Murphy spinning Heileman and Halprin and Josh Green reporting it.
...Before grappling with those questions, it’s worth noting what Romney seems to have missed. To my knowledge, Bush never bought a company and laid people off. He never closed a factory. And he never made a corporate acquisition and then squeezed it with debt. It’s harder for someone to paint him as a “vulture capitalist.” But of course, as Mark Halperin and John Heilemann pointed out on “With All Due Respect,” even Mitt Romney didn’t recognize he had a Mitt Romney problem"
Are Establishment men Bush and Romney in each others way? Where does leave Chris Christie who has appointed Gays, Asians and Muslims to the bench-but not constitutional conservatives. Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. is looking at potential financial fraud by Chistie in a bait-and switch Port Authority financing for the Pulaski Highway. Will Vance become the best known Democrat in the nation (and more popular in Manhattan) if he indicts Chris Christie?. Christie may be looking to broker a deal with Jeb for a commitment to be appointed Attorney General in return for endorsement and New Jersey's delegates.
Christie could also have money problems. Veterans of Rudy Giuliani's campaign have told me Rudy Financial Chair Ken Langone " talks a good game but is neither a big donor or big fundraiser." Langone is Christie's main money man.
By Roger Stone
Last November I wrote “The Man Who Killed Kennedy- the Case Against LBJ “in which I used deep politics, eye-witness evidence and fingerprint evidence to tie a long time hit man for Lyndon Johnson to the murder of John F. Kennedy. I lay out in detail LBJ’s motive, means and opportunity to kill the President. I was certainly not the first to lay out these facts. Phillip F. Nelson's LBJ: The Mastermind of the JFK Assassination is the compelling and standard text in the matter and Barr McClelland gave his inside Texas view. In his Blood, Money and Power. The Texas Establishment has attempted to discredit this truth-teller but his book is deadly accurate.
Phillip F. Nelson's new rendering, LBJ – the Colossus is a sequel to his first, LBJ: The Mastermind of the JFK Assassination, and is just as provocative as the first volume. The "Colossus" book begins where the "Mastermind" tome ended, as Johnson achieved his lifetime goal -- an "obsession" according to Nelson -- the presidency of the United States. Having shot his way into the Oval Office according to this thesis, Lyndon Johnson then proceeded to have two Senate investigations targeted to him suspended as he simultaneously redirected the country's attention to the plethora of legislation that he, practically singlehandedly, according to most biographers, began pushing and shoving through Congress. But that "Great Society" legislation, according to Nelson, had previously been set aside and stalled by Johnson himself throughout his tenure as the "Master of the Senate" (a moniker that was not reflective of his legislative successes, of which there were few). Now that he was president, the "time was right" finally and his patented "Johnson treatment" was at last put to use to aggressively push the same legislation that he had previously impeded. This is definitely not the way most of Johnson's other biographers have framed his legislative successes, but Nelson's case is at least persuasive of that argument.
Compared to the first book, which was derived almost entirely from other books, the Colossus book contains much newly developed evidentiary information related to settling the first of Johnson's treasons (the murder of JFK) within the book's first chapter. The most important of this newly revealed information came from Texas Ranger (later, U.S. Marshal) Clint Peoples' oral history which he had gifted to the Dallas Public Library in 1984. Within that set, he had stipulated that a number of pages would remain closed until he, his wife and his daughter had all passed away; that did not occur until April, 2012 when his daughter died. According to Nelson's research, the reason for that was because of a feud between Peoples and federal judge Barefoot Sanders, a Johnson acolyte who had repeatedly stymied Marshal Peoples in his attempts to investigate the death of U.S. Department of Agriculture agent Henry Marshall, who died in 1961.
His death was declared a "suicide" by Sheriff Howard Stegall, a "Johnson man" who had apparently been warned in advance by an aide to LBJ to make that determination; this despite the fact that he had been severely beaten, with flesh showing from several open wounds, one of his eyes hanging from the eye socket, a high level of carbon monoxide was found in his body and he had been shot five times by a long-barrel rifle within a four inch circle on his chest. One year later, because of the Marshall family's insistence that it was a homicide, Ranger Peoples convened a grand jury to correct this grievous error. But Johnson's political machine took over that grand jury and it became tainted through and through. Leading that effort was Johnson's own political appointee, U.S. Attorney Barefoot Sanders, who took charge of that grand jury and censored nearly the entire file on Henry Marshall's investigation of Johnson's corruption. The result, according to author Nelson was unsurprising: The grand jury found no reason to correct the official record and left the "suicide" verdict stand. For twenty-two more years, Peoples tried to fight the Johnson juggernaut, to no avail.
Then Marshall Peoples finally got the verdict changed to "homicide" in 1984 -- eleven years after Johnson died -- but not without a "showdown" in a Texas federal courtroom as now-Judge Sanders, having persuaded two other federal judges to join him as a "three judge panel" in an attempt to harass Marshal Peoples and force him into stopping his continuing attempt at getting a new grand jury to overturn that verdict. He had come to distrust Sanders so much that he decided to ensure those "closed" pages would remain out of reach until Sanders's death. What those papers revealed was the depth of Judge Sander's complicity with Johnson in what Nelson calls a case of "obstruction of justice." This chapter alone is worth the price of the book.
But it is about much more than re-proving the primary thesis of both books, which is the focus of Chapter 1 of the new book. The succeeding several chapters are dedicated to strengthening the case against Johnson by examining his multiple psychological and psychiatric conditions, using specific descriptions of his behavior as reported by his own aides and other high level government officials, such as Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., Richard Goodwin and, vicariously through their reportage, Bill Moyers. Other books written by medical experts have also been referenced as a part of this intense examination. His most elemental character traits are put under the microscope in a fashion that leads to the conclusion, as quoted from two psychologists who wrote Lyndon Johnson, The Tragic Self, that "Johnson’s decisions as the identified leader, and hence his leadership, were not merely flawed, they were not decisions befitting a leader of a democratic nation.”
Nelson's focus on the more esoteric of Johnson's character traits -- his cunning and guile, his secretive, behind-the-scenes maneuvering mixed with a domineering personality characterized by sociopathic narcissism and megalomania, combined with a manic-depressive (bi-polar) disorder and general paranoia -- provided a good frame of reference for the last few chapters. Because only after understanding the extremity of Johnson's still untreated mental problems can one understand the Shakespearian dimensions of his tenure as the thirty-sixth president of the United States.
The period of LBJ's reign as a "Colossus" (when he had anointed himself "King of the World" during his presidential years) began, according to Nelson's narrative, after he had committed his first of three major treasons: The assassination of JFK. Vietnam was the second, which he argues was fought primarily as a means to secure Johnson's place in history as a great wartime president, just like Abraham Lincoln and Franklin D. Roosevelt. Another reason for that war, according to this thesis, was Johnson's attempt to distract the attention of the American public from JFK's murder. The third treason was as equally appalling as the first two: His attempt to have Israel attack and sink his own ship, the USS Liberty, as a means for him -- in his deluded and psychotic mind -- to join Israel in defeating Egypt in the Six Day War. He was upset that so many Jewish people did not support "his war" in Vietnam and this was a way for him to regain their support. It sounds outlandish, but the story Nelson has written answers a lot of questions about that incident: Why, for instance, has this been the only peacetime attack on a U.S. Navy warship that has never been openly investigated; in the military investigations to date, it has clearly been done for the purpose of a "cover-up." The "elephant in the room" question which remains unresolved is this: "Isn't the present state of affairs in the Middle East a direct result of the fruits of that Six Day War, foisted upon the world by LBJ?: The expropriation of major parts of what was once "Palestine" to strengthen the state of Israel, for a war that they started, clearly now in retrospect, for that very purpose?"
Nelson has presented a case against Lyndon B. Johnson that has all the elements of the Shakespearian characters Macbeth and Richard III; in fact, he has drawn that analogy within the book. It is a "stunning indictment" according to Gerald McKnight, author of Breach of Trust and The Last Crusade, in his dust-cover review of Colossus. The unstated question is, "Will Robert Caro and Robert Dallek attempt to rebut this argument" since it is in direct contrast to the portrait of the thirty-sixth president that they have painted, which portrays Johnson as merely a "flawed," somewhat eccentric cowboy?"
For the hottest Political news follow me on Twitter at:
Follow the STONEzone on Facebook: