>> host: welcome to "after words." today daniel halper, his new book "clinton, inc." the audacious rebuilding of a political machine. daniel halper welcome. this is so interesting. we are in the summer of 2014. hillary clinton looks like she's the inevitable democratic nominee and i say inevitable with a bit of this dark because we been here before but this time or number come her poll numbers are daunting. this summer there are a number of books about the clintons and especially hillary clinton. your book now comes out and the angle you take is fascinating

because the suggestion here is that the clintons are not just the marriage of 38 years but in fact a political partnership and a business, a business enterprise. i think you say that the clinton foundation revenue, $214 million last year something like that? >> guest: something like that. >> host: that's an incredible way of looking at the clintons come a business. help us to understand what are the dimensions of clinton inc.? >> guest: is like any business there are several leaders and in this bear are bill and hillary clinton. i also suggest that it's not just the primary goal of money like any other corporation though that is a major goal but it's also political fortune. the clintons here since leaving the white house in a cloud of scandal and impeachment and all these unsavory things have really fought their way back. they have created this organization which is in a way

multinational and they are sitting on top of the political and global elite. whether or not she decides to run whether or not she ends up running whether or not she becomes red president doesn't matter because the story is fascinating anyway. as you suggest this has never been done before. no other political couple have achieved so much success in so little time and come from such a -- to where they are in this pinnacle. >> host: you know in writing in the forward part you mentioned that they have an unquenchable thirst for wealth and power and you say the subtitle actually is meant to obscure them. you talk about audacious rebuilding. given they are coming from a point where they went through the impeachment and the scandal you don't see this as a good thing. you see it as evidence of people who are shameless in a way.

>> guest: there's an element of shamelessness obviously. to be able to stand up on the stage and say on the best politician and there's nobody better than me and entrust your kids featuring me and my ability so there's a bit of shamelessness but it's not all bad. one of the key to their success has been this philanthropy or at least this vision of them doing philanthropy. i think it's been enormous with successful and in some ways it's help people and it has trickled down to help people in need across the world. so there is shamelessness for sure. it's not totally shameless. it's a more complex and i hope more nuanced approach than just a single label to this political couple. >> host: now newt gingrich suggested the title shouldn't be "clinton, inc.." what if he suggest? >> guest: i think he suggested something like how their mutual marriage comment in the book.

>> host: what i saw izzy said power couple mutual survival. yeah yeah it strikes me that conservatives at the moment are preoccupied with hillary clinton but the clintons in general and part of their preoccupation is the idea that the liberal media is insufficiently critical of the clintons and part of that is in your book in that people are reluctant to talk about clinton inc.. >> guest: this is the conundrum. what they are saying now is for political gain but as i was reporting the book i was struck by how many republicans have only nice things to say about both bill and hillary and i credit to the systematic approach to whenever their enemies. bill was impeached by republicans not democrats. they realize when they leave the white house their problem is with republicans, not democrats. bill clinton called the police republicans than he is the phonecalls with newt gingrich.

whenever he sees one united states senator i spoke to he says up a on tv last sunday. just small complements that are meaningful to these people. on a human level he wins over all his enemies from james rogan a former congressman who helped the impeachment further publicans lost re-election largely because of the awaiting impeachment. they exchanged letters these days. i think one issue is that republicans have really been won over by bill and hillary clinton. hillary made laws in the senate during this time after leaving the white house and hillary is incredibly nice to people like john mccain and lindsey graham also impeachment leaders, also staunch republicans. it soften their image but it has also sought that has also softens hillary's image and i think that's an important key to understanding how they came back as the republican part of this.

when i am speaking to them they are only say nice things and even if i'm not going to credit these people are saying nasty things about the clintons. they have warm feelings for them that i think it's really a credit to the human interactions understanding of human nature that humans in a way or complex than in no way can be won over rather easily won a powerful man like bill clinton gives you a complement you look toward him with more favorability than he did beforehand. 15 years of doing this has paid off and i would also argue it is they do in the book that in 2008 the comeback have been so sufficient for the conservatives with republicans that hillary's problem was never with conservatives and republicans. hillary's problem was she didn't win over democrats. democrats were disappointed that bill clinton as president was in the transformational liberal president they envisioned.

he couldn't be there ronald reagan that he wanted him to be. instead he serves at a time with relative peace and prosperity, some due to its own own governing in some due to good fortune but nonetheless this problem the democrats that they run into and i think that's one of the reasons she goes to the state department and over the last five years they have been focusing on democrats and less so on republicans. >> host: i'm interested to follow up on a line here. one, i think the publisher of the pittsburgh paper when he is sick and remember he was one of the prime antagonist during the clinton presidency for the clintons. with all kinds of conspiracy theories and the like that when he gets sick what happens? >> guest: richard mellon's gaze as you suggest was the vast right-wing conspiracy. peace funding all these, sometimes overboard attacks on the clintons in the 90s. he is a sponsor anti-clinton

conservative in the way the koch brothers are painted now. that's the equivalent. he receives a letter outrage from bill clinton himself when he gets sick and he gets a letter hey i'm really sorry to hear you are not doing well and i hope you hang in there buddy, i'm praying for you. sincerely, bill. that's remarkable. >> host: that illustrates your point and also in the book you talk about how bill clinton reaches out in 2008 to john mccain as mccain is running against the democrat barack obama. >> guest: this is in the general election. hillary has already lost and bravo obama is campaigning against john mccain. on the slide this in september or october 2008 in the heat of the campaign. there is a financial crisis and everything like that. on the slide he received phonecalls from none other tha than -- and they are talking

about what american voters want to hear at a time like this. they are talking about all sorts of things regarding the campaign. i asked senator mccain as i interviewed him in his office and i estimate sounds like he's giving you advice. he said while advice may be a little too far. nonetheless it's clear when he describes it that it sounds exactly like advice. it sounds like he is essentially campaign consultant and that's i think shows how the clintons no matter what happens they always are looking out for themselves no matter what their fortune is, no matter what's going on. the clintons want to secure their place in history. they want to secure their place for the next election whenever that might be. >> host: what's interesting here is, here in this book you actually say that contrary to public perception bill clinton is the cold calculating one. hillary clinton he described as a warm personable, charming

person. >> guest: this kind of surprised me because i grew up reading about the clintons and listening to them on npr or whatever and i didn't really get to know them until reporting this book and i was shocked at the people who knew them best suggested their general perception of them was wrong and it was the opposite of reality. bill clinton bubba, a gregarious guy great to hang out with and of course you want to have a beer with him and things like that in hillary clinton is this cold calculating unapproachable woman. people who know them and people who like them say the opposite is close to being true. that bill clinton is the politician. he is constantly seeking his own place in his own legacy. he's constantly cold and calculating and consequently doesn't have many friends. he doesn't have any long-term friends. he has some hangers on that

benefit transactionally with having a relationship with bill clinton that any friends come in and in and out of his life. hillary actually has real friends. she actually is considered likeable. they actually say she is warm and funny although funny is somewhat subjective. >> host: this is curious because as i said at the start we are in the summer of 2014. hillary clinton's political star seems to be rising at the moment. conservatives especially conservative talkshow type people who are hell on wheels bound to bring hillary down before she becomes this titanic wave that sweeps into democratic office is saying you have to read daniel halper's book it's a must-read says hugh hewitt and karl rove. are conservatives going to be disappointed if you don't portray her as the wicked witch? >> guest: lacombe i can speak for conservatives but what i can speak for is myself and i wrote what i believe is a honest

account of the last 15 years. there are some good and there are some bad. the point is that these are more complex and nuanced people then partisans might suggest. i think any ideologically staunch liberal or hillary lover might not like parts of my books and likely some staunch conservatives might be disappointed in parts of my book but i think the point is that this is an actual portrayal of who they are as far as i can tell and as far as i can see. i think it's getting a good reception and i'm surprised people seem to like it and people seem to appreciate that when you take a more nuanced approach to these people you can understand them better and if your goal then is to defeat her in the next election then maybe it's helpful to actually learn about her and maybe it's actually better to have a sense of who she is and understand her in that way rather than this concoction.

>> host: let me say we live in a highly partisan times. anybody picking up this book especially on the right is going to say where is the dirt daniel? what is the dirt on hillary so let me suggest some nuggets for example. >> guest: various dirt, don't get me wrong. >> host: instead of me proposing what i read lets you go and tell me what you think is the dirt and "clinton, inc."? >> guest: i think a phonecall the betrayal of democrats. >> host: bill clinton hooking up with senator mccain during the 08 election potentially giving him a way to attack barack obama? >> guest: right. >> host: the back story there would be that if obama loses it opens the door to hillary much more quickly. >> guest: absolutely so that's one element. think another element is hillary clinton as i talked to one law school friend or there are few

but when i quote says she was an enthusiastic pot smoker in law school. that by itself might not be such a big deal. we know that bill clinton smoked, he didn't inhale supposedly but we know he smoked and we know barack obama has smoked marijuana in no other presidents have done it. maybe not a big deal but a month ago she goes on network cable news network and she says she has never done it. i think that story when it helps show if she is not always telling the truth. she plays the part of a politician. because she's this nice warm person and she's not as good of a politician. she is not good on the stump. she can't shake hands and win people over the way bill clinton does so she pretends to be a politician and she ends up lying sometimes because she is saying what she thinks people want to hear of her, not the truth. meanwhile when she does tell the truth, a month ago or so at the

start of her book to her she goes on tv and says when she left the white house she was dead broke. that's a fact. it is true, she's telling the truth. the problem is she sounds because no one -- or hillary clinton who makes $12 million a year and they have made 40 million, about $40 million in books alone in 110 million dollars in speeches alone. they have made all this money and why are we supposed to feel sorry for her so that conundrum that she's not able to tell the truth because when she does she sounds awful so it forces her to lie i think that's a problem she has to contend with. i don't think that's me. that's her problem. >> host: at its interesting that she told the truth she would -- give me another article at dirt. >> guest: back off on the word dirt. there are revelations for

example chelsea's role in clinton inc. and i talk about chelsea is in emerging force. i tell the story of a couple of aides to president clinton and one president president clinton and one hillary clinton's starting a consulting company and they decide to have a meeting with bill clinton, chelsea clinton chelsea's husband mark mcsenseki. sometime in the meeting chelsea asper equity stake in the meeting. the aides say he no, we are not going to do that. your mothers a secretary of state. this is an appropriate and we are not going to do this. i think what that show is -- story shows and these aides no longer close to bill and hillary clinton. their relationships have essentially severed. i think what it shows is there is a new force in the clinton world. there is this loyalty in the clinton world because there's knowledge that nobody is loyal, the only people that are loyal to each other are the clintons

themselves. they're only three people who cannot be replaced in the clinton world bill hillary and chelsea and everyone else is replaceable. if you cross one of them that's it. you could lose her standing despite spending a decade and a half at bill clinton's side. while it's not a silver bullet it's not meant to be. it's meant to show where the clintons are now and ever will problem. people in the clinton world are talking to me. they are talking to reporters. they know that their place is not secure in the clinton world because they know that nobody's places secure in the clinton world so again this is a problem of that they have within a company and as they seek to move it towards the 2016 election they are are going to have to contend with this and with this in some eye which i'm not sure they can. >> host: let me then now throw dirt and here's the dirt but i saw. for example talking about

"clinton, inc." in the foundation one of the ways in which they raise money was to the clinton global initiative. the story is told here that it's not only about the clinton global initiative inviting and world leaders in the very wealthy to talk and have access to president clinton and mrs. clinton but you have a situation where louis freeh the fbi director is saying he needs help from the saudis and when the word comes back you have to have the president ask for access, he sends the word along but later here's the president doesn't help in solving some of the mystery surrounding 9/11 but instead of asking for money for clinton inc.. tell me this. >> guest: louis freeh has a famously contentious relationship with bill clinton. louis freeh is the ide the fbi

director needs to take a dni -- dna example. >> host: didn't clinton appoint him? >> guest: that's a good question. i don't think so. i think it's a 10 year appointment. maybe it's five years but maybe he did. he must have because the session was before him. he must have. but regardless they -- louis freeh takes his job seriously. they want to give him a white house pass and say come and go at will and he says i'm not doing any of that. i don't want direct access to the white house. i want it logged every time i come in and out. i'm not doing this site or anybody special favors. louis freeh automatically from the get-go starts off with a contentious relationship with bill clinton. it's made worse because he is pursuing these scandals like you know like whitewater and all these scandals and engulfs the

clinton administration. by the time louis freeh wants to ask for something bill clinton is in going to do him any favors. bill clinton is only in for bill clinton so louis freeh the khobar towers bombing occurs in louis freeh is investigating it. the suspects are being held by saudi officials and louis freeh needs bill clinton to talk to saudi officials and to make sure that they cooperate with them and they can have access to the suspects. >> host: i said 9/11 but i meant khobar towers. >> guest: while the groundwork for this meeting is laid. the deputies on each level, frey is talk to the saudi counterpart in a no the conversations going to take place. by now this is the end of the clinton administration are toward the end. bill clinton in this private meeting doesn't bring up the khobar towers. he brings up a donation to his own foundation from the saudi's which he secures.

he would have had the get-go and the ability for them to say go ahead and investigate, go ahead and we are willing to cooperate. >> host: and give you access. >> guest: give you access to these suspects and stifled because clinton won't ask. >> host: instead he asked for money. how much money did he ask for? >> guest: i think he got 10 or $20 million in that task. >> host: another article at dirt as you suggest although you don't quite pin it down that bill clinton is still behaving recklessly with regard to his sexual attitudes and sexual interactions with a woman. i think the name is julie or something like this. what do you know? 's. >> guest: bill clinton, a lesson on recklessness is a word from bill clinton. bill clinton is reckless in his entire life certainly his entire political life and with bill clinton in its recklessness that gets into the white house and the first place. again we talk about shame

earlier and i think recklessness is required by any politician in a way because you need to stand up and try to win people over and it's the stakes are so high and you can humiliate yourself on such a grand scale that any politician needs to be reckless to some degree that bill clinton being dill -- bill clinton takes it to the extreme. his recklessness is something that haunts him in arkansas. he pounds his 92 presidential campaign. obviously. >> host: we are talking about sex here. >> guest: we are talking about sex, that's correct but on many different levels. >> host: what do you mean by that? >> guest: it's not just the sex. he would do stuff in the oval office, do things like wild campaigns. it's not just wondering. it's not just philandering is reckless. it's that he would take such risk at certain times that would

come back to hurry on this is a guy who understands politics and understand how these things manifest themselves in how they hurt him. >> host: so now you think he still having affairs? >> guest: yes. >> host: and how do you know this? is there evidence? >> guest: no, this is well vetted. this book is well vetted by my -- by lawyers. this is not just supposition. bill clinton and the 2008 campaign, aides advised him to not bring his mistress on the campaign trip. they didn't think it would be good politics for a spouse to bring a mistress on the campaign trail. and a rare act of discretion he decided not to do that normally he's fairly indiscreet and normally this is a common occurrence for president clinton. one aide told me that bill clinton is a political genius and like all geniuses whether an artist or whatnot you have a flaw.

for bill clinton his flaw is women. so i think that sums it up. >> host: you are saying one specific woman he has been having a long-term relationship with. >> guest: i think there are multiple. i am the book i talk about one specific one but more broadly there are more. >> host: what did you learn about mrs. clinton's reaction to this? >> guest: this is a common question. what is hillary clinton say about this and in the general consensus is she probably doesn't know and almost certainly doesn't want to know. hillary clinton realizes that bill clinton has this flaw. this is a new to her. she has been humiliated on the national stage by bill clinton. she understands how he works and how he operates and she doesn't want to know the details. the way the clinton world works is bill clinton has his own

column. he has his own staff and secret service detail. that's completely separate from hillary clinton who has her own chief of staff and u.s. are on staff and secret service detail. chile -- chelsea clinton a little smaller has her own staff and her own column. there is separation within the clinton inc. to keep these people separate. secret service details especially they have two of them can communicate back and forth and they know when somebody is coming and somebody is going. he don't have to worry about someone dropping in on you and it's less likely with that the secret service driving around. that's basically how it is with clinton inc.. >> host: another piece of dirt is a suggestion that clinton actually raped someone? >> guest: i think what you are referring to her what i call the monica files. the monaco fought -- the monica files are essentially a detailed list of various media request

that there's also a file that her representatives had on bill clinton that they wanted to use against bill clinton the monica lewinsky would let them so the point of the story is not to suggest that but to suggest that they had this tranche, this file but they could've used against bill clinton that monica lewinsky was too in love with bill clinton to want to work against him and to politically naïve to try to hurt him in that way. they could have thrown out these allegations. >> host: do you think it's true? >> guest: it has been reported on before in it. in other books, at least -- they believe it -- believed it was true. monaco wouldn't pull the trigger. she didn't want to engage them in that way and i think that

short a -- sort of shows and this is the one theme throughout the book is the clintons have benefited greatly by who their enemies are. they have also benefited greatly on the people who have been embarrassed by them. monica lewinsky is a great example. she was a young intern. you know, she engaged in an affair at the white house with president clinton. when it all blew up in her face and became public knowledge she didn't seek to try to hurt him. she didn't try to destroy bill clinton despite the fact that they are working against her and trying to destroy her. that's the point of that story. to put it into the context that monica lewinsky had this arsenal. they decided not to fire on it because of the way she was and they a vice benefited that they

haven't come across the file. >> host: recently in "vanity fair" she had didn't exactly fire the clintons. not at all. let's move on to dirt about mrs. clinton. the dirt on mrs. clinton i guess you could start with the recent talk about the head injury and people suggesting she suffered brain damage and all this famously. i don't see any evidence of that but you suggest that either it could be that she might've had a stroke or more curiously -- he may have been drinking and fallen down. >> guest: two things. when i was reporting this book i would talk to the aids and would say whether one of the reasons hillary might not run and without fail the number one reason was held. everyone close to her thanks health is an issue and she's almost 70. it's not crazy. it was an issue for john mccain and it's an issue for any president. even ronald reagan it was an issue for him but he was able to

turn it to his favor. the point is health is an issue because people want to have faith in their commander-in-chief that they are up to the task and is not just an issue for critics like karl rove or other people who i have talked about. it's her own people recognize her health might not be what it is. the most common malady i kept here was stroke. her health records are public. she will have to probably release them at some point but even bill clinton said she needed six months to recover. it was such a big problem. >> host: was it related to drinking? >> guest: no, the point is not related to drinking. the point about drinking was i quote one known hillary clinton eight or 198 as commenting that perhaps it was about drinking so the point about drinking is

actually show how clinton haters as i said clinton benefited greatly by who their adversaries are. this is a perfect example because it shows how clinton haters will take one colonel of truth and that there were jokes, there were jokes that she drinks or pictures of her partying in colombia with their staff and barack obama made a joke about her drunk texting and things like that. the point there was to show these wild-eyed republicans get too wild-eyed and eight pounds and they put forward these theories without any evidence to support it. the point was not that she was drinking but people believed we were automatically wanting to jump that she was drinking so that is what i tried to do. >> host: it comes across as there's a possibility that she

was drunk and fell on her head. another piece of dirt with regard to her is the relationship with vince foster and of course you have seen in tabloid suggestions that chelsea is not even the child of bill clinton but now you have here a very close intimate relationship between foster and mrs. clinton. >> guest: as i say she will have to answer for things like that some charges that will come about. people swear to me that they had a relationship. >> host: a sexual relationship. >> guest: they have seen them kissing and by the way it's been other books. that has been reported on before for the last 20 years. i don't actually believe that. the point was to show, i know for a fact i was told that these things happen. these are issues that she has to contend with.

all these rumors constantly swirled around her. i'm not perpetuating these rumors. i merely showing that these are rumors that exists, that she would have to deal with in any 2016 run. >> host: but given who you are daniel what's the truth? >> guest: well i wasn't there. >> host: in terms of their reporting, what have you been able to confirm in terms of both vince foster and webb hubbell and of course foster on a much larger scale commits suicide and everybody is wondering what happened. >> guest: hillary clinton talks about how they had a cordial relationship. people have like i said people i have talked to, they say i saw them kissing. i don't know, i mean i don't know.

in a way it doesn't seem in character but in a way it's sort of constantly described to her and how -- i mean are you just supposed to discounted automatically because credible sources are telling you these things and are you supposed to say perhaps -- at the contention when you write books like this and try to frame these people and try to understand who they are. you come across things that are sometimes unbelievable and you don't believe them right away. you try to do due diligence and that's what i try to do here. i'm not saying they have done anything that they haven't done. what i'm saying is people will ask questions about these things which are slightly different. >> host: in another episode and this piece of dirt involves mrs. clinton and bill clinton. you have been putting pressure on a reporter david shuster. what happened here? >> guest: david shuster is a

liberal talking head -- tackin tacking -- talking heads on "msnbc." he's somewhat critical of the clintons and like basically everybody else on the network like chris matthews. david shuster is hosting his own show or guest hosting for someone one night and he asked the guests a question. he says and the question is about chelsea clinton and her involvement in the campaign and he wants to know. she's calling up superdelegates trying to get them on board to support the campaign and support her mother's campaign over barack obama's campaign. the question that arises is david shuster asks his guess is she being out? >> host: chelsea clinton the child. >> guest: being out by the parents for their own benefit.

whatever. >> host: by having her make calls? >> guest: right, the clintons go ballistic. the clintons are furious. the clintons are offended and hillary was said to be crying when she hears about this. that is what aides who saw her told me so david shuster doesn't think much of it. he doesn't think it's such a bad thing and he eventually gets called and to talk to the suits at "msnbc" about the conduct because they are hearing complaints. he decides to apologize and he goes on tv and apologizes. that's apparently not enough to satisfy the clintons. they are upset that he's on tv. he tries to convince the suits at "msnbc" that hillary clinton is just using this, using him in his example as a way to better her campaign and to show that she's a victim because there is

various polling throughout tillery's history that when she's the victim she does well. monica lewinsky for her poll numbers. shuster is making this argument on "msnbc." they are not hearing anything about it. hillary clinton meanwhile is threatening to cancel the debate on "msnbc" the democratic debate that they are scheduled to hold in a couple of weeks. "msnbc" doesn't do well in the ratings. they know they need this debate. so shuster is in trouble. also what is happening is david shuster is getting complained about to the "msnbc" parent companies. their parent company as ge, general electric said the board members from ge are receiving phonecalls from the clinton world, from clinton inc. and they are saying you know you have to get this guy off the air. you have to do something about it. they called the ceo jeffrey m. mount who calls up the present

of "msnbc" and says why the hell this guy on calling chelsea clinton a prostitute? now you work at a station. you hear complaints for things you say on tv probably every single day that not many people who complain go directly to the top, not just talking about the ceo of fox. we are talking about the ceo of whoever the parent company etc. etc.. nobody is calling rupert murdoch to complain about some talking head but that's what's happening here. he is given -- shuster is given a two-week paid suspension from the network and it hurt his career. it hurt his career and he no longer works at "msnbc." partly attributed to that because it hurt his standing at the network.

>> host: so this is a powerful couple with lots of connections, former president, former first lady former secretary of state that the picture you are painting is one of involvement also with money. let's go back to the clinton inc. part. 214 million last year was the wealth of the clinton foundation. how much of the clintons weren't? >> guest: that's a tough question to pin down. this is what we know. we know they have been -- made $40 million in books. he writes a 50 million-dollar book and she writes an eight mean -- 8 million-dollar book and a 40 million-dollar book and he has written a couple of other books. we know they have made at least $40 million off of books. we know based on reports that they have made over $110 million on speeches alone. some of bill clinton's speeches demand $750,000.

so we know that's $150 million. we know they owned two homes that aren't worth anything like that better worth around $5 million apiece. we know there are other consulting fees that are paid to them so i think a reasonable estimation is probably about $150 million. that's reasonable. >> host: that's their personal wealth separate from clinton and? >> guest: that's correct. the book is basically you can't really separate everything because it's all combined to talk together but it is not in the foundation bank account. >> host: that is 150 in their bank account and 214 or so in the foundation bank account? >> guest: something like that. that's the revenue from last year but i think they had money in the bank so it's more than that.

you are talking about a multi-million dollar organization. you are talking about people who when they leave the white house normally they are broke. i talked to an aide who went with them from house to house as they were looking to buy a home because they wanted to buy a home in new york so hillary could run for senate in new york. the aides said she was amazed when the clintons walked into an old 70's, and they were like oh i love the shag rug in these ornaments. these are people who haven't looked in her own house since the 70s. they have been on the public dime for that many years, for almost two decades with a the short time when bill clinton lost election in the early 80s as governor. not only were they poor, they didn't understand how people lived. they lived in this bubble for so long. they had a secret service detail and they still do and in a way they never left the bubble but

the aide was struck by how embarrassed she was. don't complement these things in front of the reporters. the reporters don't want to hear anything like this so it shows how they were stuck in this time capsule and how they have to fight their way out. it also shows public service space. the clintons have shown that public service can pay extraordinarily well and be incredibly lucrative. if you want to be rich, don't go into business. go into politics. you too can become a 100 million air thanks to people like the clintons who have redefined the way politics works. >> host: let's look at another angle of clinton inc. that you describe in the book which is all of the people who serve the clintons. he mentioned three i think primarily, james carville, paul begala, rahm emanuel the mayor of chicago and in a secondary role you have people like maggie williams, ama abedin and cheryl

mills and even lanny davis. and one fascinating story about these people is you talk about two who were key lieutenants have been pushed out. that's bill richardson and george stephanopoulos. whether you tell those stories? >> guest: george stephanopoulos was president clinton's communication direct director. >> host: stephanopoulos made host of -- >> guest: he wrote a pretty good memoir and it really gives you a flavor unlike most of these political memoirs is as good and i think fairly honest and fairly revealing about the inner workings of the clinton white house but it didn't do him any favors among bill clinton who was personally mortified and

embarrassed that he would write something like this and reveal the clinton white house was a normatively chaotic. they feared bimbo eruptions. dick morris, stephanopoulos says they would leave for the day having agreed to a plan, some sort of strategy for the campaign and bill clinton would have said okay this is what we are doing and said the opposite. stephanopoulos was like what happened here? what went on and it would turn out that bill clinton was talking to dick morris. they were having private phone conversations and that stephanopoulos was imparted. that's his prerogative but i don't think stephanopoulos and appreciated it and he wrote that in this book. that annoyed bill clinton. bill clinton until the story, bill clinton at the horse racetrack and he's in front of a big group of people, some republicans.

bon jovi with their and governor bob ehrlich and a number of others. he tells the story of stepanov was finding out about gennifer flowers and he shocked that bill clinton is bringing up gennifer flowers that he's bringing up gennifer flowers says he can knock stephanopoulos in front of these people. he makes stephanopoulos look like a fool. he got on the floor in the fetal position and basically started crying. bill clinton is telling the story and everyone is just, how is he just throwing his aid under the bus like back? it's because he didn't like the guy and he took it out on him and he made sure, because bill clinton wants to be loved by everybody except the people who cross him. >> host: you tell a story there was a reunion and stephanopoulos is not invited to any of their reunions and then with richardson it's also the

case, richardson is quoted in your book as he wants clinton's forgiveness but doesn't feel like you'll ever get it. >> guest: yeah. bill richardson as governor of new mexico. he was then president clinton's cabinet. he becomes the governor of new mexico and he runs in 2008 but that doesn't do so well. he doesn't resonate for many reasons but for his own reasons he doesn't resonate well with the voters and the sin out of the race. he is a hispanic governor of new mexico. he is a clinton guy so clinton assumes he can win him over and he can endorse hillary because this is in the battle between barack obama and hillary clinton. i think richardson, bill clinton goes out to new mexico to watch the super bowl with bill richardson and he's going to put

the ask on there. he's not going to leave without endorsement by richardson doesn't buzz -- budget but decides later to endorse barack obama. he is not one over by hillary clinton. instead he looks at the poll numbers and realizes hillary is not going to win and barack obama is and he'd rather throw his lot at the winter than the loser. richardson makes one himself and he is dead to the clintons. the clintons are not happy and they embarrass him in public and go after him in public. it's a remarkable story. >> host: i think here what we have is, if you are part of a conservative concerned about hillary is a powerful force coming in 2016 and you read daniel halper's book you say now i have these pieces potentially of perspective about that past.

as i said this comes in the summer where people are saying there are all these books and everyone's trying to attack hillary. the most famous is this book "blood feud" at klein's book about the obama's and the clintons. what is your take is the author of this book on that? >> guest: i haven't read it. i don't really want to comment on books that i haven't read. i have seen some press reports and i don't know anything about it other than what's out there. i don't have insight into that but hillary clinton's book, she also came out with a book in her book is what i call a 600 page press release. it's $35 you can go read her take on what she wants you to think of her. i don't think it's very accurate picture of who she is. it's not that, it's worked over to not get her any problems in the future.

it's just a boring book and i think many reviewers have agreed with me. i think while there are a number of people and there's hillary clinton's book which is a 600 page press release. there's also another book previously they came out in february. that was also about hillary clinton's time as secretary of state but that book was written by a former staffer for debbie wasserman schultz the head of the democratic national party. if you want to read more interesting and sometimes critical and sometimes flattering but nuanced i would turn to mine. i think it's in a string -- interesting book that tells a more complete story and i'm excited about it. >> host: i understand. you think in some ways that your book bill would disqualify her? >> guest: no, no. it's not meant to. i never rode it to bring her down. the title is i think revealing

in that way. it's not she must be stopped or the country is going to hell. this is a book that shows who she is, what they are and what they they have been up to and perhaps where they are headed and some of the pitfalls that might lie ahead. this is a reported book. i talked to senators, talk to former cabinet members. i talked to democratic and republican presidents. talk to congressman and i have talked to aids. i've talked to critics and i've talked to friends. i talked as many people as i could and i tried to tell their stories about the clintons. this is not sort of just me reading press reports and putting them together. this is a thoroughly reported book. >> host: what does it mean talking about the inner circle of lieutenants, about the clinton world? going into the campaign what can we expect? it sounds like it's a very

hermetically sealed universe. clinton and part of clinton inc. being hillary clinton's 2016 campaign. how do these two relate? at one point you are talking about for example chelsea clinton as the campaign manager, the royal child. >> guest: right. >> host: she is now at the point where she could run a presidential campaign? >> guest: i tried to describe it like this. you have a family business and we know how family businesses tend to work. they tend to be in charge by the family and everyone else's auxiliary. clinton inc. is very much a family business. if you are in the family not only is your place secure for life but you are always there and always in charge. when a daughter or a son comes into a family business they are allowed usually and certainly in this case to tell aids or staff

members how to work, how the work should be done. this is what's going on here. she comes in and because of her own ambitions in her own reasons she is a destructive force in clinton inc. and that's something they are trying to contend with because, its complex but basically her parents aren't able to say no to her. chelsea's parents -- chelsea is the one thing they been true to their whole lives. they love chelsea dearly and obviously they love her daughter. she starts demanding things and they aren't able to save no. with bill clinton as a father-daughter relationship where the father has been caught previously cheating on the mother. i think it creates a guilt complex within the father to where he can't say no to her. likewise i think hillary has a guilt complex within her where she feels guilty that she wasn't

always there for the raising of chelsea clinton and it manifests itself in the sense that she's not able to really say no. although she does more than bill apparently. i think that's sort of a remarkable situation where you have this third emerging the ceo and what it means for the 2016 campaign i contend is that she is effectively going to be in charge. she will have just as much say as the candidate because if you are the campaign manager and chelsea clinton cause you up and says we want you to do this, he were not going to say is that coming from you or is that coming from your mom? you're just going to do it. that makes her effectively in charge. aides have suggested to me that it doesn't bode well for her campaign because she doesn't know what she's doing. she doesn't have the experience. running a campaign is remarkably hard.

you are basically creating a multi-million dollar organization separate from clinton inc. in a way but obviously complex. that spans 50 states. that is hectic and fast-moving. she's never done anything like that before. there's no sign within her that she would be any good added to effectively be in charge. it could be detrimental for a hillary clinton's 2016 run. >> host: she is pregnant so having a baby i think that would be something that would preoccupy her. >> guest: i don't know how. there are nannies but i don't know how that would work exactly. this is a concern that i discovered in reporting this book. these are not my concerns looking at it. these are things i learned from the aides who have a handle on how things operate in the clinton world. sure the pregnancy might change things for some of the dynamics obviously but i'm sure things will work through. >> host: you know --

>> guest: there are women who raise children work so i don't see why chelsea wouldn't be able to be one herself so i think she would be just fine. >> host: for all this talk about the clintons and the idea that is a partnership as much as a marriage and clinton ain't dandy ambition and the power and all the rest, there's this moment where you are talking to joe lieberman and the senator and he says he's overhearing a conversation between the two of them. >> guest: that they sound remarkably happy to talk to one another one. >> host: and he says they call each other sweetheart. >> guest: they call each other sweetheart and they are very tender to each other. one of the questions frequently asked in doing this book is, is there love in a relationship and yeah there's a lot of love in a relationship. it's ultimately a business partnership.

one friend told me it worked a little bit like this. i said the same thing coming is famously unfaithful to her and yet she stands by her man constantly. how does that work? he said it like this. they both love the same thing. hillary clinton loves and adores bill clinton. she thinks the world of him and bill clinton loves and adores bill clinton and he thinks the world of him. that's how he described it and i think that's how the relationship pretty much works. >> host: so you are the editor of on line and weekly standard. and so the question would be as part of conservative media in america, people looking out the book, do you think there is a case built here by daniel help bring? >> guest: that's not the case i'm making. i don't know whether after reading this book someone might

decide there's no way they would vote for hillary clinton. people are smart enough to make their own decisions as to who they should vote for and i don't want to go around asking people who they would vote for. my contention is this is an amazing story from ashes to where they are today and that's what i'm trying to tell. this amazing story. people will conclude what they want to conclude. i can't control that by what i can control is a story i've told. >> host: but is not the case and i think this is what has come through here today on "after words" that you are not a clinton hater. >> guest: i'm a young guy. you can see me right now, i'm a young guy. i grew up reading about the clintons in my parent's "new york times" subscription in "newsweek" and i grew up in the car on the way to school.

my mother had npr on and we would listen to npr. that is how i learned about the clintons. i am not a clinton hater of the 90s. that's not how i approach the book at all. i approach the book is a reporter looking for a story trying to figure out what happened here and trying to tell that story. obviously i'm conservative. i work at "the weekly standard." i come at it from the center-right but i make the case that was an advantage in covering the subject and certainly not a disadvantage. because well when i reached out to people they knew where i was coming from first of all. every reporter has a bias. i've told you you mind. you know where i'm coming from. it's also an advantage and that i think a lot of reporters write with a concern about access. they write, whatever they are covering whether it's congress or the clintons or any topic, whether it's business you write with a the concerned access. if you write something that is

too critical of your subject, that's it. you are not going to get another interview with them or that's it, it will make your job a lot harder. so i think with me, it's not as though i had to worry about my invitation to the holiday party at the white house. i didn't think i was ever going to come from the clinton white house and i'm sure it won't. that's okay, i i can live with that but i think other reporters are concerned about it and i think it affects their reporting in a negative way. >> host: in fact you say james carville's office called you at one point and you did not get access to mrs. clinton. >> guest: i'm not going to say who i spoke to. >> host: there's a possibility you spoke directly with mrs. clinton? >> guest: anything is possible of course. look i spoke to a lot of people. this is one of the questions i

raised at the beginning of the book. i think it takes me the whole book to answer is why would somebody talk to me in the first place? >> right m., a conservative and in some ways their reporting has borne out certain criticism of the clintons but in some ways it hasn't. why would somebody talk to me? the short answer is basically because there is a lot of disloyalty in the clinton world because clinton loyalty no longer exists. there is no clinton loyalty anymore and ultimately that's bad for clinton. it shows a weakness in clinton inc. and it shows that they are all in it for themselves and eventually they will have to realize they have to come eventually begin to realize that they need to help benefit themselves and not benefit the greater corporation. ..

>> >>