Hillary’s Senate confirmation hearing

Posted by: ST on January 13, 2009 at 10:50 am

Malkin’s following the latest news developments on La Socialista Clintonista’s confirmation hearing today before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. The latest? The Associated Press’ story on Hillary helping out Friends-Of-Bill (yeah, we’ve heard this one before):

WASHINGTON (AP) — Secretary of State appointee Hillary Rodham Clinton intervened at least six times in government issues directly affecting companies and others that later contributed to her husband’s foundation, an Associated Press review of her official correspondence found.

The overlap of names on former President Bill Clinton’s foundation donor list and business interests whose issues she championed raises new questions about potential ethics conflicts between her official actions and her husband’s fundraising. The AP obtained three of the senator’s government letters under the Freedom of Information Act.

The hearing is expected to go smoothly with no major hurdles for Senator Clinton to have to cross (and did we expect anything else?). Heck, even some Republicans are even heaping praise on Bubba’s better (or more cunning, I should say) half.

It’s all about the spirit of “bipartisanship,” you see …

RSS feed for comments on this post.


4 Responses to “Hillary’s Senate confirmation hearing”


  1. I understand she’s been flapping her gums about global warming, too. *sigh* It’s nice to know our leaders are either ignorant of or uncaring about real science.

    And I do wish someone would ask Hillary some real questions, such as “Do you think you were wrong when you questioned General Petraeus’ honesty and his assessment of Iraq? If not, why not?”

  2. Steve Skubinna says:

    Well, were I on the Committee I’d vote for her, on the principle that the harshest critics of the Bush Administration need some time in the driver’s seat themselves, both to show them what the real world is really like, and to show us that they really can do better. Or to show us what reality does to partisan principle. Anyone started a pool yet on how quickly Gitmo closes down?

    Not that I’d let her completely off the hook. I’d for damn sure ask her if she’s reassessed Gen. Petraeus – sorry, I mean Gen. “Betray Us.” Make her squirm and try to weasel out of tossing Move On under the bus.

  3. Leslie says:


    I’ll put the over/under on the Gitmo closing at 15 months. (I.e., 15 months till they turn out the lights, not when the first inmate is moved.)