New Ground

You'd think it wouldn't be possible to actually break new ground in the field of ridiculous anti-Clinton news coverage, but Josh Gerstein deserves some kind of medal for this piece taking a close look at her summer internship when she was in law school in 1971. The real gold comes on the second page where we learn that "The most eye-catching claim about Mrs. Clinton's time at the Treuhaft firm is that she attended a plea negotiation on behalf of armed Black Panthers who stormed into the California legislature on May 2, 1967 to protest a gun-control measure." One interesting thing about this claim is that it's false. The case in question was resolved in 1967, and Clinton worked for the firm in 1971. But one of the partners at the firm seems to have misremembered this, and felt that he drove with HRC to Sacramento for the hearing. Gerstein dedicates seven full paragraphs to this even though it's stupid bullshit and clearly not true anyway, before launching into a paragraph that begins "Regardless of whether Mrs. Clinton was on hand for the Panthers' legislature case ..."

Regardless, indeed.

Comments

It's dog bites man when the NY Sun plays up this stuff. The regnant infantilism in the gop with respect to HRC is an objective reality. So the NYSun plays to that.

It's only truly annoying when the so-called liberals at the NY Times muck around with this bias.

Posted by Comment | November 26, 2007 1:54 PM

It's all just the current version of 1984's 'two minutes hate'-- with Hillary Clinton instead of Emmanuel Goldstein. A profound communal experience for the wingnuts.

Posted by MattF | November 26, 2007 2:00 PM

But when the Clinton campaign points out these defamations, and (god forbid!) makes phone calls to try to get some modicum of accountability, or maybe even an apology, everyone laments that Clinton is a paranoid hatchet-woman who wants to muzzle the press like Putin or Chávez.

Posted by Rich | November 26, 2007 2:14 PM

You'd think it wouldn't be possible to actually break new ground in the field of ridiculous anti-Clinton news coverage

Really, Matt? That's a tad ironic coming from an Atlantic blog.

Andrew Sullivan is ground zero for the "field of ridiculous anti-Clinton news coverage."

Posted by SoCalJustice | November 26, 2007 2:17 PM

The Sun is too upscale to push the Vince Foster conspiracy stories - They don't like to troll with Rush et al.

So instead they are pushing the 'Hillary is a marxist' meme. That's what this Treuhaft business is all about.

Posted by Comment | November 26, 2007 2:19 PM

But, I believe that in debates etc. Hillary has mentioned that she has been "fighting the right for 35 years". So, apparently, this comes just before that.

Posted by El Cid | November 26, 2007 2:24 PM

Here's an article on the subject for context, in which the reporter correctly indicates the Sun's hostility for all things Clinton.

http://www.rediff.com/news/2007/nov/20aziz1.htm

Posted by DH in DC | November 26, 2007 2:31 PM

I've just finished reading Jessica Mitford's collected letters (Ms. Mitford was married to Bob Treuhaft), and the editor included not only a couple of letters from Ms. Mitford to Senator Clinton while she was First Lady of Arkansas (about the James Dean Walker case, if I remember correctly) but a mention of the oppo research in 1992 uncovering the Clinton/Treuhaft connection. Since Ms. Mitford and Mr. Treuhaft were Communists (tho' no longer members of the CP by the time of the internship), I'd guess they were disappointed with both Senator Clinton and her husband... Anyway, my point is that (a) this stuff is old news, although interesting in the same way as Senator Obama's years as an organizer, and (2) um, something. Oh, yes, it seems that there were people back then who thought that even the Black Panthers deserved a fair trial. Shocking!

One of the things that Bob and Decca Truehaft did, back in their Commie days, by the way, was to front for black families who wanted to buy houses from segregationist racists. Just to tie it in with earlier posts...

Thanks,
-V.

Posted by Vardibidian | November 26, 2007 2:55 PM

Right, and Josh clearly knocks down the claim about the black panthers, a claim made by the San Francisco Chronicle in 1992 and later in the book "hillary's choice," by quoting others at the law firm who said she was not there, and pointing out the discrepancy between the dates of the trial and her internship at a lawfirm that was actually run by, you know, commies.

Posted by Eli Lake | November 26, 2007 2:56 PM

Wouldn't Republicans like someone working against a gun control measure?

Posted by Gus | November 26, 2007 2:57 PM

It's funny, but if I didn't know the Sun and Gersten were supposed to be anti-Clinton, I'd have taken this article as a preemptive strike against Republicans trying to make something of Hillary's tenure at the law firm. It knocks down every suggestion that her sojourn there indicated an interest in radical left-wingery and makes it crystal clear that she wasn't involved in the Panther case.

Which surprised me, because Matt's post had seemed to me to suggest exactly the opposite; and several commenters here apparently took it that way, presumably not having actually read the article itself.

Posted by Swift Loris | November 26, 2007 3:11 PM

Is that really the Eli Lake leaving comments here? I have my doubts because the comments, like that above, are even stupider than his NY Sun writings, if that's possible. Maybe it's just a sinister liberal plot to discredit him by leaving brain-dead comments on lefty blogs?

Posted by Glenn | November 26, 2007 3:12 PM

Some things from Hillary's past do have relevance.

1. Her spinmeisters have created the image of the unberconfident female lawyer, "voted one of the top 100 lawyers in the country" - not mentioning she failed her DC Bar exam which led her to only be listed as a "researcher" on the Watergate Committee staff along with undergrad interns. Then to to Arkansas, because she did manage to (barely) pass that state's Bar Exam, to take a law school adjunct prof job Bill wheedled for her. She has no litigation record in court to speak of at Rose Law - her work as a lawyer was mostly to bring in clients she encountered at the Boards of corporations doing business with the Governor she had been appointed to. Her lifetime record as a lawyer is being lead counsel in under a half dozen cases. No scholar work in any law journal but child advocacy papers. And she was mentioned as Supreme Court material?

2. Her presentation as being the co-executive running the Governorship and Presidency - with no accomodation to any journalists or scholars seeking to examine her paper trail to see if the claims can be verified. Scholars explain that a true executive would be documented at the major work up meetings, be routed the memos underlying rationales pro and con for key Gubenatorial and Presediential decisions, included in briefings Clinton attended.
Claims of "regular pillow-talk" being their "co-executive" equivalent don't fly.

3. Her past of membership and accomplishments on all sorts of Boards and appointments and meteoric rise to full partner at Rose in two years despite no courtwork has to be examined as coming from her own merits or her nepotic ties to Clinton and to a Feminista network always pushing her as a "balancing female appointment" to committees and slots. An argument can be made examining her past that the last accomplishment she did on her own without powerful sponsors was getting admitted to Yale Law School.
***

And all this is surprising, given her 16 years of national fame, how few people knew she failed the DC Bar Exam and interned for a communist law firm in Oakland at the center of Leftist political action in the SF Bay area in the 60s and 70s. How few people know she was made partner in two years at Rose despite doing no litigant work for court. How few people have questioned how all her paper trail from being a Rose Law "mover and shaker", Co-Governor, Co-President has been put in a Presidential Records legal blackbox, under lock and key.

Posted by Chris Ford | November 26, 2007 4:10 PM

Chris Fraud is the scummiest of all frauds. You are number 1 in scumminess, Chris Fraud. Lyuing degenerate racist summy Fraud.

Posted by Jennifer | November 26, 2007 4:21 PM

Also, Chris Fraud is a scummy woman hater just to be scummy in every possible lying way.

Posted by Jennifer | November 26, 2007 4:23 PM

IOKIYAR to imagine things. Reagan got away with it many times. Bush imagines himself to be a smart fellow.

Posted by Hedley Lamarr | November 26, 2007 4:45 PM

Is 'Jennifer' sometimes actually 'Chris Ford' attempting to pre-emptively insult himself in a simple manner?

If so, I'm not sure that would be a gentlemanly way to behave with honor given the delicate state of Our Confederacy.

Posted by El Cid | November 26, 2007 4:52 PM

Hey when Jennifer's right, she's right. There are wittier things to say about Chris Ford than "scummy racist fraud", but not more accurate ones.

Posted by lemuel pitkin | November 26, 2007 5:08 PM

Chris Ford isn't a human being, El Cid, he's a torture-loving robot who types out standard right-wing piffle.

as for the issue at hand, i had forgotten about that moment in the history of the black panthers, but i'm sure that professor instanitwit (not to mention our gun-loving host) both think more highly of the party for its strong pro-second ammendment stance....

Posted by howard | November 26, 2007 5:11 PM

Jennifer, don't be a dumb cunt. Go wash your dishes and get din-din ready for hunny like a good little girl..
**************
Well, finally Obambi, the sweet little fawn, has finally decided to hit Hillary on her "I was Co-President, running domestic and International Policy with Bill while you have no similar high executive experience and are naive":

I think the fact of the matter is that Sen. Clinton is claiming basically the entire eight years of the Clinton presidency as her own, except for the stuff that didn't work out, in which case she says she has nothing to do with it," Obama said, and added, referring to his relationship with his wife, Michelle, "There is no doubt that Bill Clinton had faith in her and consulted with her on issues, in the same way that I would consult with Michelle, if there were issues," Obama said. "On the other hand, I don't think Michelle would claim that she is the best qualified person to be a United States Senator by virtue of me talking to her on occasion about the work I've done."

Ouch! And Obambi didn't even have to mention the Arkansas Co-Governorship which of course was news to Arkansans when Hillary claimed she was, on the campign trail in 1992. Or pressed her yet on the paper trail that could confirm or debunk she was involved in an executive decision making capacity in Little Rock or the White House.

Nor did Obambi get into what are HIllary's own credential accomplishments vs. she got through nepotic influence of Bill. Or the Feminista Network she hooked up with at Yale. No doubt Obambi has researchers dissecting that part of the Empress with Little Clothes..

Ooo! The fawn is kicking back!

Posted by Chris Ford | November 26, 2007 5:14 PM

No, really, there's no Jennifer, ever, on here, and then Chris Ford shows up and posts one of his odd rants, and then Jennifer appears and says Chris Ford is a scummy racist, and then Chris Ford calls her a dumb cunt.

I think it's not a coincidence, nor a blog stalker. It's a pre-emptive but false dialogue.

Posted by El Cid | November 26, 2007 5:44 PM

Hey Chris, lots of people agree with Jennifer, you teeny, tiny prick.

Posted by David in NY | November 26, 2007 5:47 PM

So Chris Fraud shows what a scummy lying degenerate racist and sexist he is. No one scummier.

Posted by Jennifer | November 26, 2007 5:47 PM

See what I mean?

Posted by El Cid | November 26, 2007 5:52 PM

Get ready for 24/7 shit like this, leaking into all areas of the MSM.

Another reason to support Edwards.

Posted by Gore/Edwards 08 | November 26, 2007 7:42 PM

I was more amused by the alleged related report of this period that when police raided the Panthers in Sacramento, they found Hillary in the sack with a black woman.

Apparently being an interracial lesbian is considered worse than being an armed Black Panther.

Wonder what they would think of an armed interracial lesbian Black Panther?

Personally, I'd like to see any real evidence that Hillary is a lesbian (let alone a Black Panther). It would raise my opinion of her (slightly).

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | November 26, 2007 9:40 PM

Eli - what you say is technically true, but ...

Posted by Comment | November 26, 2007 11:59 PM