Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Howard Dean’

Clinton Surrogate Howard Dean Says Labor Unions Are Just Super PACs That Democrats Like


waving flagReported by Chuck Ross, Reporter; 02/05/2016

Former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean isn’t a very good surrogate for Hillary Clinton.

The failed 2004 presidential candidate threw labor unions under the bus during an interview on MSNBC on Friday while making a feeble attempt to defend Clinton against criticism over the millions of dollars she has earned on the corporate speech-making circuit.

“Why does Hillary Clinton have to put up with a double standard?” complained Dean, who served as chair of the Democratic National Committee after his failed presidential bid.

“I don’t hear anybody asking Bernie Sanders for his transcripts for some speech he made with a labor union,” Dean continued.

He then took aim at Sanders’ frequent campaign stump claim that he does not receive money from super PACs, which have become a target of progressives who support campaign finance reform.

Dean said that the statement is inaccurate since the 74-year-old candidate receives money from labor unions.

“For Bernie to say that he doesn’t have a super PAC, labor unions are super PACs. Now they’re super PACs that Democrats like, so we don’t go after labor unions,” asserted Dean, who is perhaps most famous for a maniacal scream he made following a third-place finish in the Iowa caucuses in 2004.Picture5

“This is a double-standard. I’m tired of the attacks on Hillary Clinton’s integrity. I think they are unwarranted.” 

Clinton’s paid speech income took center stage in two Democratic events held this week.

At a town hall hosted by CNN on Wednesday Clinton fumbled a response to questions about $675,000 she was paid to speak at an event for Goldman Sachs, the investment bank. Clinton said the price tag was so steep because “that’s what they offered.”

That claim was inaccurate, however, since Clinton’s normal speaking fee for all events is $225,000.

Clinton also inspired little confidence on Thursday when she was asked during a debate hosted by MSNBC whether she would release transcripts from the Wall Street speeches.

“I’ll look into it,” she said before changing the subject.

Dean said in defense of Clinton that when she gave the speeches shortly after leaving the State Department she had not committed to running for president.

Stop Picture1 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Clinton Defender Howard Dean Loses Morning Joe


waving flagPosted by Aleister    Friday, April 24, 2015

URL of the Original Posting Site: http://legalinsurrection.com/2015/04/clinton-defender-howard-dean-loses-morning-joe/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+LegalInsurrection+%28Le%C2%B7gal+In%C2%B7sur%C2%B7rec%C2%B7tion%29

Howard Dean MSNBC

Wow. First David Brock and now Howard Dean. Is there something in the water at MSNBC?

Dean is the former chair of the DNC, a role now filled by our favorite Democrat Debbie Wasserman Schultz. As a long time party loyalist, Dean appeared on Morning Joe yesterday and attempted to downplay new scandalous revelations regarding the Clintons.

Hosts Mika Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough could barely contain their skepticism.

David Rutz of the Washington Free Beacon:

Mika Tires of Howard Dean’s ‘Jihad’ for Clintons: ‘The Facts Are The Facts’

The New York Times reported Thursday that the Clinton Global Initiative accepted millions of dollars from a Russian oil company when the State Department, then headed by Hillary Clinton, was approving a deal that would give Russians control of the company Uranium One and bring Vladimir Putin “closer to his goal of controlling much of the global uranium supply chain.” The charges are part of Peter Schweizer’s book Clinton Cash.

Dean, rather than directly address the Clintons’ latest problem, went after Schweizer for taking money from “billionaires” who “support Ted Cruz,” essentially arguing that anything his book revealed should be dismissed because of his conservative political leanings.

Yet, MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough pointed out outlets such as the New York Times and others were doing legitimate reporting off the accusations in Schweizer’s work.

“So forget the author at this point,” Brzezinski said. “If the facts are true, we need to pursue that. You can go on your little jihad against the author, but it’s not going to change the facts. The facts are the facts.”Liberalism a mental disorder 2

Watch the exchange:

v04

Dean also recently lashed out at a New York Times reporter on this subject, calling the Times sloppy.

Evan McMurry of Mediaite:

NY Times Reporter Snaps at Howard Dean for Calling Paper ‘Sloppy’

New York Times reporter Jeremy Peters wasn’t taking guff from former DNC chair Howard Dean on Morning Joe Thursday morning.

Dean was there to defend Hillary Clinton against charges leveled in a new book and reported out by the Times that the Clinton Global Initiative took undisclosed funds from a Russian oil company as that company was securing State Department approval for deals in the U.S. The article is part of access deals secured by the Times and others to Peter Schweizer’s Clinton Cash. Clinton surrogates have spent the past few days criticizing Schweizer as a conservative ideologue funded by right-wing Clinton opponents.

“In general New York Times has been sloppy,” Dean said. “Particularly their political writers. I use the Times as an example in journalism classes, because by the fifth paragraph in any political story…they’re substituting their judgment for news.”

Pass the popcorn, please.

OARLogo Picture6

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

OBAMA’S INSURANCE ‘FIX’ IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL


http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/11/14/Obama-s-Fix-is-Unconstitutional

by KEN KLUKOWSKI

Outlets are quoting Democratic operative Howard Dean saying of President Barack Obama suspending certain Obamacare requirements, “I wonder if he has the legal authority to do this.”

To remove all doubt: The Take Care Clause of the Constitution absolutely forbids any president from doing exactly what Obama did Thursday.

Obama said he would allow insurance companies to keep offering previously-offeredinsurance plans that Americans would like to keep. Nobody knows if this means all plans, or only some of them, and how the White House will make such determinations. He says he has “enforcement discretion” to make this change to the Affordable Care Act unilaterally, without consulting Congress.

This is a frightening claim of a sweeping power that is completely inconsistent with the Constitution. A president has “prosecutorial discretion” to prioritize which lawbreakers to prosecute in federal court, but there is no “enforcement discretion” to determine which laws on the books he will enforce.

Article II, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution commands of every president: “he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” Like every provision in the Constitution, it has a legal meaning—and that meaning is the Supreme Law of the Land, which Congress, the courts, and—yes—each president is bound by his oath of office to follow carefully.

Everyone should know from their high-school government classes that Article I of the Constitution gives Congress exclusive power to make federal laws, and Article II of the Constitution gives the American president the executive power to administer and enforce those laws. Article II then includes the language about how the president must faithfully execute those laws.

Among other things, the Take Care Clause was inserted in the Constitution to abolish the Royal Prerogative that the Framers of the American Constitution knew from their lives as Englishmen. It was the power of the king of England to disregard or effectively suspend Acts of Parliament. The king could not make laws, but he could shelve a law that Parliament had passed.

Obama’s announcement is a flagrant and undeniable violation of his constitutional duty under the Take Care Clause. The provisions of Obamacare causing enormous trouble forinsurance plans are mandatory, and only Congress can change those parts of the Affordable Care Act. Every day provides additional proof that Obamacare is a complete train wreck, but it is one regarding which only Congress can change the terms.

This president’s relationship to Congress is reaching toxic levels, due in large part to the regularity of his hyper-partisan rhetoric and ongoing disrespect. He is learning that the campaign tactics that enabled him to win two presidential elections are manifestly counterproductive when applied to the arduous task of governing, especially in a country as large and diverse as America.

It is not clear at this point whether anyone would have standing to sue over this matter in court. If the experts who are saying today that this unilateral move will only make matters worse are correct, someone might suffer an individualized injury that they could litigate.

President Obama should hope that doesn’t happen, because if a federal court can get past the procedural hurtles to reach the merits of the case, it’s an open-and-shut case that this president’s actions are unconstitutional—again.

Ken Klukowski is senior legal analyst for Breitbart News and coauthor of “Take Care, Now,” forthcoming from the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy. Follow him on Twitter @kenklukowski.

Category:

Political

Tagged with:

Tag Cloud