Dr. Jason Johnson discusses the tweet of President Trump of an unsubstantiated conspiracy theory that the death of Jeffrey Epstein’s death is tied to the Bill/Hillary Clinton family. Other panel members are Aaron Blake (The Washington Post), Frank Figliuzzi (Fmr. FBI), Jonathan Lemire (MSNBC), Elise Jordan (Time Magazine), and host, Chris Jansing.
Bill Clinton
The Root: Democrats Must Make Sure Russiagate Isn’t Like 1996’s Chinagate
Name a successful president who takes campaign assistance from a “frenemy” of the United States, pretends not to know what his vice president does and does not know, and radically alters foreign policy towards the nation that helped him get into the White House.
Raise your hand if you thought of Bill Clinton.
As bad as Donald Trump’s #FlynnGhazi and #Russiagate scandals are, Bill Clinton’s re-election in 1996 was marred by shockingly similar collusion with Chinese spies and agents. Unfortunately, Republicans attempts to hold Clinton accountable at the time failed spectacularly due to arrogance, underestimating the White House and forgetting the long game.
Donald Trump is no “Slick Willy” but if today’s Democrats aren’t careful Donald Trump could escape Russiagate just as easily.
The similarities between Russiagate and Chinagate are uncanny given the scandals are almost exactly 20 years apart. February 14, 2017, the New York Times reported that Trump campaign staffers were in regular contact with Russian intelligence during the 2016 campaign. February 13, 1997, Bob Woodward (of Watergate fame) broke a Washington Post story alleging similar malfeasance from Bill Clinton and the Democrats in the 1996 campaign.
A Justice Department investigation into improper political fund-raising activities has uncovered evidence that representatives of the People’s Republic of China sought to direct contributions from foreign sources to the Democratic National Committee before the 1996 presidential campaign, officials familiar with the inquiry said.
The day the story broke, unlike Trump, President Bill Clinton kept his cool. His first comments on the Washington Post story were to call for an investigation.
“This is a serious set of questions raised here, and the first I knew about any of it was last evening,” Clinton told reporters. “They obviously have to be thoroughly investigated and I do not want to speculate or accuse anyone of anything. I know nothing about it other than what I heard last night.
“But obviously it would be a very serious matter for the United States if any country were to attempt to funnel funds to one of our parties for any reason whatever,” Clinton added.
Clinton appeared to let Republicans have their way and hearings on campaign finance were headed up by Law & Order actor, Senator Fred Thompson (R-Tenn.) and Rep. Dan Burton (R-Ind.) in the House. While Republicans beat their chests and stunted in public hearings, Clinton privately covered his tracks and paid back his Chinese benefactors.
First, the DNC gave back over $2.4 million in questionable contributions before the Congressional investigations were completed in 1998. Then, from 1997 to 1999, Clinton quietly lifted the ban on American companies selling satellite and nuclear technology to China, a move that helped the Chinese military jump ahead almost 20 years. Calls by the FBI to appoint an independent counsel to investigate Chinagate were blocked by Attorney General Janet Reno.
Over the course of two years and several investigations Republicans uncovered a cast of unscrupulous Chinese Bond villains to splash over the airwaves.
- John Huang: a businessman who raised over $3 million for the Democrats in the 1996 election, much of it from Chinese government-run businesses. He was rewarded with an unusually high security clearance and a position in the Commerce Department.
- Johnny Chung: a businessman in 1996 who took $366,000 directly from the head of Chinese Military Intelligence and funneled it to the DNC and the John Kerry Senate campaign.
- Charlie Trie: a restaurateur from Arkansas looking to cash in on his friendship with Bill Clinton took over $1 million from Chinese government-fronted companies and sent over $200,000 to the DNC.
You could easily switch Rex Tillerson, Paul Manafort or even General Michael Flynn for any of this trio. Vice President Al Gore, like Mike Pence today, claimed to know nothing despite being at ground zero for much of the scandal. In 1996, Gore swore he thought he was attending a “community outreach luncheon” at the Hsi Lai Buddhist Temple in Los Angeles. Yet somehow the DNC raised $65,000 from a bunch of monks who had taken a vow of poverty. In 1997, after being caught lying to the FBI Gore used the “iced tea” defense. He claimed that he drank so much iced tea that he was always in the bathroom when illegal fundraisers were being discussed at the White House.
In the wake of such damning evidence and overwhelming public support for the investigations, why were the only indictments of fundraisers not in the White House? Why did Chinagate backfire and propel Democrats to unprecedented wins in the 1998 midterms? Because Republicans were more interested in smearing Clinton than protecting national security. Because Bill Clinton is a better politician than Donald Trump. Because Bill Clinton wasn’t at war with his own national security agencies. And ultimately because Republicans promised a knockout and delivered a nosebleed. However there are lessons for today’s Democrats in the Republican failures from 20 years ago.
Democrats should be calling for an independent investigation into Russia’s influence on the Trump campaign and should use that as a litmus test for any future confirmation hearings. Also, Democrats need to get behind this story. The NSA and CIA are strategically leaking information to weaken what is seen as a compromised presidency. All Democrats have to do is capitalize on the information. Democrats don’t need to sell any wolf tickets, they’re being handed out for free. Trump has only been in office a month and Russiagate is a national security issue, not a springboard for 2018 and 2020. It’s much easier to motivate calls to Congress when voters think they’re protecting America against corruption instead of setting up Corey Booker or Elizabeth Warren for Iowa.
Donald Trump doesn’t have the political capital, nor the loyalty within the national security apparatus to cover himself the way that Clinton did. It is also unlikely that he will get impeached. Nevertheless Democrats, with some long-game planning can hamstring his administration and translate their patriotic acts into local elections across the nation in 2017. Let this play out, strike when necessary and let Trump hang himself. Russiagate is open but Democrats would be wise not to rush through just yet.
This article originally appeared online at The Root.
MSNBC: Jason Johnson on the New York Primary
On MSNBC’s The Place for Politics with Joy Reid, The Root Politics Editor discussed the political issues of the week.
On Bill Clinton’s Response to a Black Lives Matter Protest in Philadelphia, with Mychal Denzel Smith of The Nation and German Lopez of Vox.
On the upcoming debate between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton, with Juan Manuel Benitez of NY1 and Michelle Goldberg of Slate.
On the winners of the week.
The Root: Did Bill Clinton Attack President Obama’s “Awful Legacy?”
It’s no secret that former President Bill Clinton and President Barack Obama are more “frenemies” than political friends. Bill Clinton was his wife Hillary Clinton’s biggest attack dog in the 2008 Democratic presidential campaign, and both publicly and privately suggested that then-Sen. Obama wasn’t up to being commander in chief. Hillary Clinton and Obama have since buried the hatchet, but there have always been two Bill Clintons when it comes to his dealings with the president.
One Bill Clinton desperately wants his wife to win and supports Obama as a fellow Democrat. The other Bill Clinton is like an ever-competitive Michael Jordan watching Kobe Bryant, grousing every minute and throwing shade by pointing out how he was better in his prime. Which is why it’s not surprising that on Monday, Bill Clinton described Obama’s presidency as having an “awful legacy.”
The question now is, which Bill Clinton is going to clean up the mess?
On Monday during a campaign stop in Spokane, Wash., Bill Clinton said the following about his wife during an extended riff: “If you believe we can rise together, if you believe we’ve finally come to the point where we can put the awful legacy of the last eight years behind us and the seven years before that, where we were practicing trickle-down economics, then you should vote for her.”
Republicans jumped on the statement, and the Hillary Clinton campaign immediately started having flashbacks to “off message” Bill Clinton from campaign 2008. This is a horrible way to start the stretch run of the nomination race for Hillary Clinton.
It’s difficult to claim that this was just a slip of the tongue, since Bill Clinton clearly references not just the Obama administration but also the previous Bush administration in the same sentence. And it’s not as if he got confused and somehow thought he was stumping for his wife in 2008. Next, and perhaps most important, the Hillary Clinton campaign has unofficially dubbed itself the third Obama term, so any suggestion that Obama’s administration is a failure is not a good look, especially when she so desperately needs African-American voters this fall.
Angel Urena, a spokesperson for Bill Clinton, came out to “clarify” those statements for the campaign almost immediately. The former president was “referring to the GOP’s obstructionism and not President Obama’s legacy,” she said.
She went further, repeating the many times over the years that Bill Clinton has given President Obama credit for rescuing the U.S. economy and fighting for progressive values against Republican resistance.
In Bill Clinton’s defense, this isn’t the first time his comments have been taken out of context or edited to make it sound as if he’s still got it in for Obama. In February, media outlets reported that Clinton slammed Obama by saying “you don’t have a president that’s a change-maker” at a campaign rally in Memphis, Tenn.—the implication being that Obama didn’t bring the change he promised and that the “frenemy” rift between Team Clinton and Team Obama still exists. However, the entire quote had the absolute opposite message: “ … you don’t have a president who is a change-maker with a Congress who will work with him. But the president has done a better job than he has gotten credit for. And don’t you forget it!”
It’s hard to believe that a month ago Bill Clinton would be praising Obama and now he’s suddenly calling his legacy a disaster, but that is the kind of scrutiny the former president will be under for the rest of this campaign. The “pro-Hillary, team-player Democrat” Bill Clinton needs to have a come-to-Jesus conversation with the “Obama can’t do it like I used to do it” Bill Clinton. The two of them can be an effective combo to win the White House for Democrats in three consecutive elections, but only if they can reconcile their differences and watch their tongues. There are only so many times you can spin an “awful legacy” into a positive before people start to believe Bill Clinton.
Or, at least, one of them.
This article originally appeared online at The Root.
MSNBC: Jason Johnson Discusses Politics on Up on MSNBC
On Up on MSNBC, Dr. Jason Johnson discussed the political issues of the week with MSNBC anchor Richard Lui, Guardian political reporter Sabrina Siddiqui and GOP strategist Katon Dawson.
On President Obama’s proposed executive action on gun control
On the #CarlyCurse at the Rose Bowl and the Shakeup in Ben Carson’s Campaign
On Donald Trump’s Campaign Style
On the Top Political Surprises of 2015
On New Year’s Resolutions
