Penn's Got Trouble

News that Hillary Clinton's chief strategist, Mark Penn, took a meeting with Columbian officials to talk about ways to advance a free trade deal is at once not surprising, given Penn's refusal to step down from his position as CEO of Burson-Marsteller.

I've asked several Clinton aides and advisers for their reaction. Some declined to comment. Others responded with pejoratives, but since I don't print anonymous pejoratives as a policy, I will refrain from sharing them.

It's true that other campaigns have consultants with day jobs. The closest analogy is that of Charlie Black, a senior McCain strategist who resigned from his lobbying/PR firm in order to devote his attention full-time to McCain. (The irony: Black's firm falls under the umbrella of Penn at Burson Marsteller.)

One of the toughest tasks for a political journalist these days is to try and find someone in Clinton world who is willing to defend Mr. Penn or his sense of political optics.

Incidentally, Penn has said that he has time for only two clients: Clinton and Microsoft. Now, perhaps, he has three.

Obama aides had nothing to say. (Indeed -- can you blame them for wanting to allow this story to unfurl without any help?)

Comments

WHOA! THIS will be BIG.

Posted by Sam | April 4, 2008 9:45 AM

Who's surprised?

There's no clear reason why HRC is still in this race, as even her staff says it's almost impossible for her to become the nominee. The only reasons I can see are 1) to enhance Bill Clinton's financial fortunes, and 2) to enhance Mark Penn's financial fortunes.

Can anyone give other reasons why Hillary doesn't graciously concede now that she's lost? Doing so would smooth her path to becoming Senate Majority Leader.

Posted by penn again? | April 4, 2008 9:48 AM

There is a related article that is getting fewer headlines, but made me understand why it is that Columbian officials are cooperative with the Clintons and Mark Penn but President of Columbia, Uribe, is attacking Obama openly.

http://narconews.com/Issue52/article3055.html

It seems as though the Clintons have a long relationship with Mr. Uribe and are unlikely to ensure that American labor protections make it into trade agreements if Sen. Clinton is elected.

Posted by Ruth | April 4, 2008 9:50 AM

There is a whole lot more to this story than trouble for Penn. I think there is trouble for Hillary.

It appears that the Columbian President has attacked Obama for his stance on the trade deal but did not attack Hillary for supposedly having the same stance.

http://www.eltiempo.com/economia/02deabrilde2008/ARTICULO-WEB-NOTA_INTERIOR-4067845.html

Bill Clinton also has a friendship with the Columbian President. This a guy who not only

More information about this can be found here:

http://narconews.com/Issue52/article3055.html

Posted by Jessica | April 4, 2008 9:54 AM

Clinton and Microsoft:

Parallels;

Illegal attempts to extend monopoly.

Dud product years late that missed the market (Vista and Hillbilly street fighter politics.)

Having to bring back Windows XP for UMPC market or let Linux be the de facto standard.

Having to bring back Bill C to campaign or let OBammBamm be the de facto standard.

A nearly homogeneous and impenetrable staff at the top levels. (White, 50ish for Microsoft, the Hillbilly cabel of loyal women.)

Inability to be successful outside of its core monopolies. (x86 OS and Office for Microsoft, and being wife of former President who won a "safe" Democrat Senate seat.)

Delusions that its problem is PR, rather than substance.

Posted by D | April 4, 2008 9:55 AM

It's "Colombia," not "Columbia."

Posted by LESD | April 4, 2008 10:14 AM

The Clinton staff (including Penn) will want to say he was only there in his lobbyist capacity. However, does anyone really believe he was not asked about Clinton's view and what approach she would take if elected?

The fact that Uribe has blasted Obama, but not Clinton for saying the exact same things about the agreement will be considered as telling to many.

Posted by john m | April 4, 2008 10:17 AM

Others responded with pejoratives, but since I don't print anonymous pejoratives as a policy, I will refrain from sharing them.

Oh come on, can't you give us a hint? Do any of them involve the letters "a**hole" or "f**king mo*on"?

Posted by live | April 4, 2008 11:00 AM

Penn is really slipping. In his prime, he would have polled disabled female Jewish coal miners to gauge their reaction before going through with the meeting.

Posted by Howard | April 4, 2008 11:08 AM

THIS IS EXCELLENT NEWS!! FOR HILLARY!!!

Posted by idiotic | April 4, 2008 11:28 AM

Howard, perhaps he did!

Besides, the Clintons are counting on their ability to manipulate poor white voters in PA into believing that Jeremiah Wright is a bigger deal that some trade talk with Colombia.

Posted by wj | April 4, 2008 11:30 AM

Won't this get more attention as Bush promotes CAFTA in the days ahead. This story is made for Philadelphia talk radio.

Posted by Dan in Bronxville | April 4, 2008 11:35 AM

It could offer an unbeatable opportunity to have Mark Penn withdraw "for the good of Hillary's race" and then the rest of the office could burn him in efficy and roast marshmallows.

If they have any sense at all, they'll get those tax returns out there today, and the earmarks and library donors, too. Exactly what Obama did with the Rezko interview.

I haven't yet noticed much sense (see saying they wouldn't release their fundraising--as though they didn't understand speculation would be worse than their total), so I'm guessing they'll try to brush off Penn's private dealings while misplacing the tax returns.

Posted by Deborah | April 4, 2008 11:39 AM

So Penn meets the ambassador on Monday, and President Uribe of Colombia blasts Obama on Wednesday?
Coincidence, no?
So which is it, does Hillary secretly support the Colombian trade deal, but publicly opposes it? Kinda like NAFTA, eh? Except opposite (publicly supported it, privately opposed it, "supposedly")?

Already recommended on this thread but this Al Giordano article is a must-read:
http://narconews.com/Issue52/article3055.html
Money quote from Al:
"Somewhere in Pennsylvania there is a factory that employs Americans at union wages. Somewhere in North Carolina and Indiana, too… The “free trade” agreement that Penn was paid $300,000 to shepherd to passage would open the door for the company that owns the factory to move it to a country where if a worker tries to start a union, chances are he or she will be assassinated. The company will be able to get the same work done, in that case, for slave wages, and without any of those pesky environmental, safety and health regulations that protect the worker in Pennsylvania."
http://ruralvotes.com/thefield/?p=998#comment-13390

Posted by KD | April 4, 2008 11:44 AM

Hey, give the guy a break. This whole trade deal thing was probably just a cover story. His real purpose was to get the Clinton's some more blow.

Posted by rita forte | April 4, 2008 12:08 PM

Fire Mark Penn, jesus...

Posted by Korha | April 4, 2008 12:39 PM

President Uribe blast Obama: that will certainly get the workers in PA to turn against him. Maybe he will endorse Clinton.

Posted by Dan | April 4, 2008 1:03 PM

His real purpose was to get the Clinton's some more blow.

C'mon, he can get that legally in Nevada. What? Oh. Not that kind of "blow".

Posted by LFC | April 4, 2008 2:01 PM

Check out Naomi Klein's Shock Doctrine for another tidbit on Burson-Marsteller: this PR firm was involved in the seventies in promoting Argentina's fascist government as "friendly to multinational corporations." Truly evil stuff going on here.

Posted by Zephyrbag | April 4, 2008 2:45 PM

Could this have been a strategy by Penn to get himself ousted from the HRC campaign because he knows its sinking & can't pay its bills-- least of all his $10 million tab?

Posted by yvonne | April 4, 2008 3:11 PM

Actually, Marc, this is a blog; let's hear the pejoratives. Seriously. I don't know about anyone else, but I get so very tired of the "diplomatic" campaign-spokesperson pap that we get so much of. Proof that folks inside a campaign are actually human beings and not automatons--such as flinging around four-letter words--would be profoundly refreshing.

Posted by Douglas Moran | April 4, 2008 3:19 PM

They all got trouble, right here in River City. Considering that both Accuracy in Media & Accuracy in Academia are Hillary Clinton creatures, it's a wonder Mr. Zeifman ever got his account of firing Hillary into the light of day. As you may know, Jerry Zeifman fired Hillary for her misconduct during the Watergate Investigation. Zeifman’s story is important. Not only does it go to character, it goes to a lifelong pattern of lying and obfuscation on the part of Hillary Clinton. And, it took Zeifman twelve years to get it aired. A candidate must be vetted; before being elected or appointed to a position of trust; and it is this awareness, to which every white-collar criminal fine-tunes his or her antenna. The things I have learned about Bill Clinton and Hillary Rodham during the Watergate Investigation have proven consistent. They are in fact true. Word of mouth may travel only so far, but should anyone doubt Mr. Zeifman's veracity regarding Hillary Clinton: http://theseedsof9-11.com

Posted by Peggy McGilligan | April 4, 2008 3:45 PM

Let's see --- Hillary's TV Ad - It's 3:00 AM - does Hillary know where Mark Penn has been!
Can you believe Mark Penn's firm was PAID $300,000- for this contract? And, Bush is ready to sign and PASS-IT! Depending on wages in the Penn-State and Ohio - it would take 6-8 plus years for some of those "Blue Collar" workers to make that kind of money! Obama doesn't have to beat Hillary - since she is such a fighter - she is beating herself and thank God!
This is what happens to people when they are bent on trying to destroy other people! Bye Hillary - take Bill Clinton with you and please go some where and "CHILL"!

Posted by Venus | April 6, 2008 1:57 AM