Slog: News & Arts

RSS icon Comments on Is Hillary Clinton Listening?


Well, assuming the allegations can be proven true, of course.

And even if true, one must pursue the question further by asking, "if Hillary Clinton was able to monitor cellphone calls, who's to say Republicans couldn't have done the same thing?"

Oh, but we already know for a fact that SOME Republicans DO monitor cellphone calls, thanks in part to the USAPATRIOT Act, so how much traction can the GOP really expect to get out of this, if it turns out pols on both sides have been doing it all along?

Posted by COMTE | October 15, 2007 10:15 PM

They have to prove it, or it's just more "Vince Foster was murdered" bullshit.

Posted by Gitai | October 15, 2007 10:30 PM

Deny, deny, deny

Posted by Mahtli69 | October 15, 2007 10:47 PM

"solid hit" my hairy red ass. i'm no hillary cheerleader, god knows, but frankly, compared to A-N-Ything any republican does/is cuaght (or not caught) doing on ANY given day, hillary would have to masturbate with the shucked husks of downs syndrom children that she strangled herself as homage to her lizard queen before ANY of those evil hypocritical sons-of-bitches could dare even cast the smallest fucking stone. Attn republicans: SHUT. The fuck. UP. crawl into your holes. die.

just in case, you know, anyone was unsure of my politics.

Posted by adrian | October 15, 2007 11:09 PM

Jeff Gerth has been nailed to the wall before about his biased and false reporting regarding the Clintons. A quick search of for Gerth will pull up a lot of well researched commentary on Gerth's proclivities.

Plug this into google: gerth

Gerth's allegations here may well work as a good hit piece if the MSM and the Republican party get hold of it. But a journalist who values his reputation probably shouldn't be repeating it without vetting it for accuracy, or at least noting Gerth's checkered history. Doing this the way you did it in this SLOG post is no better than what the "right-wing echo machine" does. If you repeat something often enough, it becomes part of the narrative, whether or not it's true. Gore said he invented the Internet! Clinton is a bitch! Bush is a dimbulb! The Stranger is better than this.

Posted by King Rat | October 15, 2007 11:37 PM

How friggin' embarrassing for my profession that these men can just write something like that, and then it's picked up by you.


Posted by Sam | October 15, 2007 11:40 PM

Josh. You're doing a lot of assuming here, ok for the bar but aren't you a reporter?

Posted by regina hackett | October 16, 2007 12:54 AM

Where's the hypocrisy if she wasn't planning on restoring our civil liberties anyway?

Posted by Trevor | October 16, 2007 8:32 AM

At least she can nail Republicans on their support of the USA PATRIOT Act and the Iraq war....right?

Posted by James Meisler | October 16, 2007 8:56 AM

1992. Information from Ken Starr. Reported by Jeff Gerth.

With that sort of provenance, this is obviously a completely true, completely valid, completely correct allegation. NOT

Posted by N in Seattle | October 16, 2007 10:50 AM

i was going to write something about this being ridiculous and unproven drivel, but then i read @4 & 6 who pretty much summed it all up. What a waste of cyber ink.

Posted by Kim | October 16, 2007 11:02 AM

Make the allegation. Get people talking. Assert it is true. Reassert. Reassert.
And there you have it: Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11.
This has ploy written all over it.

Listening to secret tapes aside, why wouldn't she vet senior campaign aides?
Wouldn't anyone vet a senior team member? You don't just take anyone off the street for an important position.

Why wouldn't she receive memos about campaign inquiries? that's called management. Everyone has a clipping service.

This is standard campaign procedure. Make a single allegation then add other normal things in an ominous tone and you create a monster.

Posted by inkweary | October 16, 2007 12:03 PM

Try a little skepticism, Josh. Did you have any knowledge of the background of (hit-men) Gerth and van Natta before you posted this? "The GOP may have a solid hit." Sounds like wishful thinking to me. Notice also that this stuff came out of a book that was published months ago. It's not news. Just a GOP attempt to "create" news. Did you check the sourcing in the book? (Keep in mind, also, that if Hillary is not your favorite Dem, don't take any solace in your ability to post pieces that take her down. They'll go after your preferred candidate next.)

Posted by bobbo | October 16, 2007 2:22 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).