Ben Smith of Politico has written a Clinton State story that goes way beyond what he contends is his “just the facts” journalism. His opening paragraph is the tell:
Hillary Clinton’s departure for the State Department was meant to end the era of Clinton drama, and to leave the turmoil of her campaign behind. But one former Clinton aide, now a senior adviser to Secretary Clinton, has brought at least some of that drama along with him. [...]
Fasten your seat belts, it’s going to be a bumpy read. Old story wrapped in “news” in order to resurrect primary drama through new entry at State. Here we go.
Of course, Mr. Smith is talking about Philip Reines, Clinton’s campaign press secretary now at State, which is put under the Politico heading of “Reines storm: Clinton conflict brews.” Brewing in Ben’s world and on the pages of Politico, that is. Smith referring to Reines in the second paragraph as: “one of the combatants in Hillaryland’s long civil wars.” This is relevant today because?
As a real believer in the possibility of what Secretary Clinton could achieve at State, I’m certainly not offended by harsh criticism of her that’s warranted. But this is your typical TMZ like article, without breaking any news, that serves no one, except perhaps Politico’s traffic aims. (It’s linked to on another place at their site as well, but also at a conservative website.)
Pressed Monday on the button incident, Reines denied that he’d ever blamed McFaul, and sent over a joking statement taking responsibility for the gaffe.
“Ultimotely [sic], this was my soul [sic] risponsibility [sic], nobody else’s in or out of the building. While the Russians laughed off the error and accepted the gift in the spirit of cooperation that it was meant, I’ve been sic [sic] about the mistake since, especially that I let down the Secretary and the fine professionals at the State Department,” he e-mailed.
McFaul didn’t respond to e-mail seeking comment, and National Security Council official Denis McDonough brushed a question about it off as a “typical Washington story.”
Smith also didn’t waste the moment so he could dig into the Kessler archives of March 1. Now, Kessler’s beef with the State Department was justified, however, Ben Smith digging it up 23 days later to make the case for his “Reines storm: Clinton conflict brews” piece today is not.
No one’s going to say the button issue wasn’t a silly, self-inflicted mistake that should have been caught by someone at State. Noted. Won’t happen again.
But resurrecting the story and dredging up every fact related to it including a quote from AEI, the conservative group, as well as John McCain, so you can go after Reines and resurrect the Clinton primary conflict talking point looks like the only aim to me. Dredging everything up, ala Drudge:
“This is a pretty tough crew, and to come up with a naïve and childish way of talking about the relationship is probably the wrong signal to be sending to Moscow,” said Gary Schmitt, a Russia analyst at the conservative American Enterprise Institute.
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) also raised an eyebrow at the incident. “If I gave him a reset button, I’d find someone in the State Department who understands Russian,” he told the Financial Times.
Tisk. Tisk. And. Cluck. Cluck, responds the chattering class. Always willing to concoct another “Clinton conflict brews” story, even if the only conflict “brewing” is in certain minds.
I’m confused Taylor. Who is the supposed “conflict” between? Because Hillary brought someone from her campaign staff in? Is this an implied Barack/Hillary conflict?
It really does seem like one of those “whole cloth” type stories.
Yeah, in a nutshell. Staff conflict because Reines was her press chief in the campaign, which we all know got nasty. Ever looking for that moment when they can make “Clinton conflict brews” a problem. I really think it is, frankly, otherwise I would have ignored it. But keeping track of this stuff is important I believe, because Obama doesn’t need anyone sewing this type of stuff.
As I said in the post, Kessler had a valid point back when it happened, but that was March 1. Criticism where it’s due, including the Russia button issue, which was a silly mistake. But this stuff today is really something unworthy of Ben Smith, imo.
I think this is an inside the beltway story that no one outside of it will care about.
BTW I don’t think Politico is as good as it used to be. Kind of gossipy.
Frankly I don’t know what the brouhaha is about? Don’t they have more important stuff to write about? Like you said it happened March 1. If there sole purpose is to make people assume there is a conflict it’s ludicrous. I’m starting to take every rumor I hear with a grain of salt judging from where it’s coming from. I like good meaty analysis of an issue but when they write crap like this it shows me they have nothing else to write about.
BTW kris I agree with you about Politico. They’ve become stale and I just don’t bother much with reading what they have to say. I suppose that’s wrong but if there really is something worthwhile to read about I’m sure TM will be on it in a heartbeat.
Yeah JA they are pretty fluffy these days. I don’t read all the articles there but I do check in to see the headlines. When I read some of the comments I think regular readers are fed up with them too.
Anyone else catch Barney Frank dressing down Code Pink during the finance hearings? It was awesome.
No justlen. What happened?
justlen says:
24 March 2009 at 1:43 pm
_______
Pray tell. I was watching the other “Barney” (you know the pink dinosaur) with the munchkin. I don’t get to watch much adult TV when I’m babysitting so you’ll have to summarize if you could.
It’s on HuffPo now.
My take is that Obama effectively has derailed Hillary into a position where she’s no news, nothing.
But……she accepted this.
*sigh*
It completely sucks to me, but she’s so inconsequential, who cares?
She would have been better off being a senator;.
Alas, her career is over.
AnninCA says:
24 March 2009 at 4:07 pm
My take is that Obama effectively has derailed Hillary into a position where she’s no news, nothing.
But……she accepted this.
*sigh*
It completely sucks to me, but she’s so inconsequential, who cares?
She would have been better off being a senator;.
Alas, her career is over.
______
on the top thread you and I agree. Here? Not even close. What? just because she’s not on the front page you consider Hillary “inconsequential? That is a serious slap by you in her face. She has been active in resurrecting our foreign policy from the ashes of the Bush/Cheney bonfire. That may not mean daily headlines for Hillary but it means she is at the center of the most important work being done by this administration.
You say “her career is over”? another slap to Hillary’s face Ann. In my opinion she is 100% engaged in the job she chose to accept.
GeoT says:
24 March 2009 at 5:36 pm
AnninCA says:
24 March 2009 at 4:07 pm
My take is that Obama effectively has derailed Hillary into a position where she’s no news, nothing.
Well be still my heart, GeoT stands up for Hillary….. Purrr
boohall says:
24 March 2009 at 6:24 pm
GeoT says:
24 March 2009 at 5:36 pm
AnninCA says:
24 March 2009 at 4:07 pm
My take is that Obama effectively has derailed Hillary into a position where she’s no news, nothing.
___
Well be still my heart, GeoT stands up for Hillary….. Purrr
____
How could I not boohall? In the face of Ann’s dour conclusions?
Ann was and is a big Hillary supporter but why she would make statements like “Hillary’s career is over” is puzzling. I know Hillary is not in the “top slot” and the disappointment about that. But all in all the final outcome is good for us all: we have two good/great leaders working together, for us.
No I didn’t vote for Hillary but I was strong is support of her nomination as SOS and I remain VERY supportive of what she has and is doing.