Skip to content

Former Bill Clinton Staffer says Hillary is Exaggerating Her Experience

March 11, 2008

hillarybj.jpg Many of us have been wondering exactly what kind of experience Hillary Clinton has that qualifies her on day one to be president that Barack Obama doesn’t have. True she is in her second term as a senator while Obama is only in his first term, but that is the only difference when it comes to actual experience.

 Hillary likes to claim that because she is married to a former president she has all this experience. While it is true that she accompanied Bill across the globe while he met with foreign leaders, she has been grossly exaggerating what her role was as first lady.

 Former director of the policy planning office under Bill Clinton, Greg Craig, is now attempting to set the record straight.

 According to Craig:

 There is no reason to believe, however, that she was a key player in foreign policy at any time during the Clinton Administration. She did not sit in on National Security Council meetings. She did not have a security clearance. She did not attend meetings in the Situation Room. She did not manage any part of the national security bureaucracy, nor did she have her own national security staff. She did not do any heavy-lifting with foreign governments, whether they were friendly or not. She never managed a foreign policy crisis, and there is no evidence to suggest that she participated in the decision-making that occurred in connection with any such crisis. As far as the record shows, Senator Clinton never answered the phone either to make a decision on any pressing national security issue – not at 3 AM or at any other time of day.

 While this is scathing enough, he then goes on to debunk many of the examples that she has given to prove her national security/foreign relations experience.

Northern Ireland:

Senator Clinton has said, “I helped to bring peace to Northern Ireland.” It is a gross overstatement of the facts for her to claim even partial credit for bringing peace to Northern Ireland.

 at no time did she play any role in the critical negotiations that ultimately produced the peace. As the Associated Press recently reported, “[S]he was not directly involved in negotiating the Good Friday peace accord.”


Senator Clinton has said, “I negotiated open borders to let fleeing refugees into safety from Kosovo.” It is true that, as First Lady, she traveled to Macedonia and visited a Kosovar refugee camp. It is also true that she met with government officials while she was there. First Ladies frequently meet with government officials. Her claim to have “negotiated open borders to let fleeing refugees into safety from Kosovo,” however, is not true. Her trip to Macedonia took place on May 14, 1999. The borders were opened the day before, on May 13, 1999.

 Greg Craig goes on to site more inaccuracies in this article, it is a must read. I have found it laughable that Hillary Clinton has played this experience card by claiming that she has 35 years of experience because she is married to a former president.

 The truth is that while she claims that Obama doesn’t have enough experience to be president because he is only a one term senator, she doesn’t have the experience either, being only a two term senator.

 Just because she watched what Bill did while he was president, it doesn’t add to her qualifications.

10 Comments leave one →
  1. Bowie, NV permalink
    March 11, 2008 8:36 pm

    Granted…..she might not have too much experience but look at what we have in exchange….a nobody from nowhere. A overhyped, smooth orator who needs to remember that in the end the man who says needs to be bigger than what he yaps about. I mean listen to this guy……he could make Hillary look like the Pope talking of the scriptures. After months on the trial all he peddles is still hope. I mean he makes it look like Hope is the last thing I am entitled to. Boy…would I like this myth to explode!


  2. Peter permalink
    March 11, 2008 11:38 pm

    You say Obama is overhyped, but isn’t the point of this article that Hillary is overhyped? And, in fact, Bill Clinton had no real “Washington” experience before he was president. He had only been the Governor of the 32nd largest state in the country. But most importantly, Hillary’s two biggest failures have been 1) trying to get healthcare passed, and 2) voting to authorize the war. Obama passed the toughest ethics reform legislation US Senate since Watergate, and opposed the war. Moreover, if you listen to his speech at the time, it was eerily prescient. What, really, is the best determiner of who should be in the white house? Experience? Or judgment?

    Many people try to denigrate Obama’s gift as being a “smooth orator.” But I think that what people are really responding to is his judgment; His ability to think clearly, even when under fire, to not get flustered, or angry, and to not only make the right decisions, but to express to others WHY they are the right decisions – that is what people see in him.


  3. dee permalink
    March 12, 2008 12:47 am

    Obama maintains his dignity even as the Clinton campaign throws mud and trys to drag him down to their level of dirty politics. Hillary’s claim to “fight ” special interests while she remains the recipient of more special interest money than any other candidate in eighter party is hypocritical and dishonest. Her claim to fame is as the wife of the always liked but never respected former president. Her approach to running her campaign of dividing the party, hiring clueless friends,silly smears, fear mongering and hiding her records remind me too much of Bush. We really Do need fresh air in the White House..


  4. David permalink
    March 12, 2008 3:51 am

    Hillary’s kitchen sink should be renamed to kitchen stink


  5. March 12, 2008 6:22 am

    Appletree has covered my thoughts on this. McCain is sitting pretty as a willing observor.

    First visit, some good posts here…


  6. March 12, 2008 8:19 pm

    Thanks American Interests, please come back. I will be looking at your site also.


  7. March 12, 2008 11:53 pm

    Thanks you…subscribed to your feed and blogrolled…..


  8. March 12, 2008 11:57 pm

    Damn, hit that submit button too early. Was goiing to say, great to see the good General near the top of your blog… See:


  9. March 13, 2008 12:38 pm

    Hillary and Bill Clinton have made a significant issue about how the press is treating Hillary unfairly in their hyper-critical reporting on her and their “softball” reporting on Barak Obama. Hillary maintains she has been fully investigated by the media and Barak hasn’t!

    As the Tony Rezko trial begins in Chicago, Clinton and her surrogates are linking Obama to Rezko and the media is speculating about whether Obama will be called to testify as a witness in the case. Obama has always admitted he received $85,000 in contributions from Rezko which Obama has now donated to charity rather than keep.

    Yet the civil fraud trial of Bill Clinton for defrauduing Hillary’s largest donor in 2000 into giving her campaign more than $1.2 million, pending in Los Angeles courts since 2003, is now preparing for a November, 2008 trial. The discovery that is now proceeding after a February 21 hearing, and the pending trial, have NEVER been announced by the mainstream media.

    Hillary was able to extricate herself as a co-defendant in the case in January, 2008 after years of appeals to be protected by the First Amendment from tort claims arising out of federal campaign solicitations she made. Her abuse of the intent of California’s anti-SLAPP law after the California Supreme Court refused to dismiss her from the case in 2004 is emblematic of her contempt for the Rule of Law.

    Hillary will be called as a witness in both discovery and the trial according to the trial court Judge who so-advised Hillary’s attorney David Kendall when he dismissed Hillary as a co-defendant in 2007. A subpoena is being prepared this month and will be served personally on Hillary, along with Chelsea, Pa Gov. Ed Rendell, Al Gore and other well known political and media figures.

    Yet the media has refused to report about this landmark civil fraud case- brought by Hillary’s biggest 2000 donor to her Senate race, regarding allegations that were corroborated by the Department of Justice in the criminal trial of Hillary’s finance director David Rosen in May, 2005. That indictment and trial was credited as resulting from the civil suit’s allegations by Peter Paul, the Hollywood dot com millionaire Bill Clinton convinced to donate more than $1.2 million (according to the DOJ prosecutors and the FBI) to Hillary’s Senate campaign as part of a post White House business deal with Bill.

    The media – except for World Net Daily- has also suspiciously refused to report on Hillary’s last FEC report regarding her 2000 Senate campaign, filed in January 30, 2006. In a secret settlement of an FEC complaint by the plaintiff in Paul v Clinton, Peter Paul, the FEC fined Hillary’s campaign $35,000 for hiding more than $720,000 in donations from Paul, and it required Hillary’s campaign to file a 4th amended FEC report.

    In that report Hillary and her campaign again hid Paul’s $1.2 million contribution to her campaign and falsely attributed $250,000 as being donated by Paul’s partner, Spider Man creator Stan Lee, who swore in a video taped deposition he never gave Hillary or her campaign any money.

    Lee did testify to trading $100,000 checks with Paul to make it appear he gave $100,000 to Hillary’s campaign (admission of a felony) but none of that has been reported by the “overly critical” media!

    Where is the outrage from Obama that the press is engaging in a double standard relating to his possible role in the Rezko trial and his refunding the $85,000 contributed to his campaign by Rezko- which Obama has always admitted taking. The media makes no mention of Hillary’s role as a witness in Bill’s fraud trial for defrauding Hillary’s largest donor- and Hillary’s refusal to refund the $1.2 million she illegally received from Paul, which she has denied taking from Paul ever since the Washington Post asked her about Paul and his felony convictions from the 1970’s before her first Senate election in 2000?legally received from Paul, which she has denied taking from Paul ever since the Washington Post asked her about Paul and his felony convictions from the 1970’s before her first Senate election in 2000?

    Visit for videos and info. See the video that had over 6 million hit which was taken out, and back again in youtube. Let the truth be told.



  1. appletree » Blog Archive » Feminists Should Get Behind Obama

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: