- 1 Hillary Rodham ClintonIssues: 2nd Amendment - Hillarycare - It takes a Village - SecState Ethics: Alinsky - Watergate - Whitewater - Troopergate - IRS-gate - Filegate - Associates - Huma & Weinergate - Bill - Chelsea - Pardongate - Vandals - Benghazi - Emailgate - Liar Greed: Cattlegate - Travelgate - Chinagate - Lincolngate - Lootergate (2001) - Lootergate (2012) - Giftgate - Clinton Foundation Gasslighting: Go-Away - Rape Victim - Bimbo squad - Birthers - Russian Hackers - Nuclear Response Time - Quotes
- 2 Issues
- 3 Ethics
- 3.1 Saul Alinsky acolyte (1971)
- 3.2 Allegedly Fired from Watergate (1974)
- 3.3 Whitewater Scandal (1980-1990's)
- 3.4 Troopergate (1980-1993)
- 3.5 IRS-gate (1993)
- 3.6 Filegate (1993)
- 3.7 Allies & Appointments (1993-)
- 3.8 Huma & Weinergate
- 3.9 Bill Clinton
- 3.10 Chelsea Clinton
- 3.11 Pardongate (2001)
- 3.12 Whitehouse Vandals (2001)
- 3.13 Benghazi
- 3.14 Emailgate
- 3.15 Bitch and Liar
- 4 Greed
- 5 Gasslighting
- 6 Conclusion
- 7 References
Issues: 2nd Amendment - Hillarycare - It takes a Village - SecState
Ethics: Alinsky - Watergate - Whitewater - Troopergate - IRS-gate - Filegate - Associates - Huma & Weinergate - Bill - Chelsea - Pardongate - Vandals - Benghazi - Emailgate - Liar
Greed: Cattlegate - Travelgate - Chinagate - Lincolngate - Lootergate (2001) - Lootergate (2012) - Giftgate - Clinton Foundation
Gasslighting: Go-Away - Rape Victim - Bimbo squad - Birthers - Russian Hackers - Nuclear Response Time - Quotes
Greed: Cattlegate - Travelgate - Chinagate - Lincolngate - Lootergate (2001) - Lootergate (2012) - Giftgate - Clinton Foundation
Gasslighting: Go-Away - Rape Victim - Bimbo squad - Birthers - Russian Hackers - Nuclear Response Time - Quotes
Here's a brief summary of Hillary's scandals (with links to more on each of them). This isn't meant as a balanced piece to show what good she's accomplished as a politicians or person (that would be a much shorter list), the intent is just to show the pattern of scandals that her detractors recognized and her proponents ignore. If you want the pro-Hillary spin just listen to her, the NYT, CNN or MSNBC, they carry her water for her.
When Bill Clinton was president he gave his wife some make-work projects to help with, to consistently disastrous results. The first was "Hillarycare". There's debate whether she was just doing Bill's bidding (and offering him cover), or she was the great negotiator she pretended, but it was a disaster. It also was clear what her motives and mode of operation was: secret negotiations to make government bigger, crony kickbacks, and a shrill reaction at other people's shrill reaction at being dictated to and cut out of the loop. A foretelling pattern?
Hillary took authority over health care reform: she started secret closed meetings, that polarized the public and industry against her. She threatened to "demonize" anyone that was resisting these efforts, but despite a democratic controlled congress, she couldn't their own party to bring anything she suggested up to a vote. Even Mitchell's compromise bill effort (unifying all the efforts the democrats had fragmented into) couldn't get a majority, let alone a filibuster proof one.
This fiasco cost the American taxpayers about $13 million in cost for studies, promotion, and other efforts, and made healthcare reform a 3rd rail of politics for 15 years. And there was litigation around Hillary's violations of the openness in government laws. And it as such a disaster that it contributed to the Republicans taking over the house in 1994.
In 1996 She "wrote" and published "It Takes a Village" a kids book / primer on socialism and her leftist ideology and the Law of Jante. Ignoring the questionable propriety of wives of Presidents getting fat publishing contracts for idiotic children books because their Husbands are elected to office, it was offensively insightful into her leftist indoctrination. (e.g. the optics were really, really bad, because she was accidentally open to how she thinks).
The book was really written by Ghost Writer Barbara Feinman, who later complained because Hillary not only didn't give her any credit, but when found out, downplayed her contributions and was involved in delaying Barbara's payment.
Being cheap/greedy, taking credit for other people's work, exposing her true radicalism, duplicity, and offending many people that worked with her, seemed to be a re-occuring theme around Hillary -- but it was always everyone else's fault.
This is a plethora of crimes, fuck-ups and general assholishness around her brief tenure as secretary of state. Her biggest accomplishment was:
- Offering a mis-translated reset button to the Russians mistranslated as "Overcharged"
- Giving up Nuclear deterrents in Poland and Czech and got nothing in return except the invasion of Crimea and Ukraine (along with shooting down civilian aircraft, and invading Syria).
- Hillary/State Department fought for 2 years to keep Boko Haram off the terrorist watch list, despite the Justice Department, the FBI, the CIA, and over a dozen senators and congressmen all pleading with State to add them. Then in the Chibok schoolgirl kidnapping happend and things went to hell. And there's some evidence being done on whether Hillary was paid by a Nigerian Land Developer (through the Clinton Foundation) to delay adding them to the list (I kid thee not).
Then she re-arranged some bureaucracies, and left in disgrace when her botched administration contributed to the Benghazi debacle (where ignoring please for security/help lead to the deaths of 4 people, and then they mislead the public for weeks on the cause). Which lead to a multi-year cover-up (and obstruction of anything resembling an investigation), which exposed she illegally deleted emails, from an illegal private email server, that was illegally storing top secret material, that was illegally having their classification headers removed. (Most likely, to illegally retransmit them to someone else).
Born 1947.10.26 in Chicago, Illinois. She was a nice covnservative republican until 1968 and Wellesley College, when she meets radical activist and community organization Saul Alinsky and becomes an acolyte. She wrote her senior thesis about her idol, “There Is Only the Fight: An Analysis of the Alinsky Model.”
Now our teenage idols shouldn't held against us, 40 years later, unless we never admit they were misguided mistakes (which she's never done), and they keep influencing us (as they appear to have done). Many of Saul's "rules for radicals" (lying, cheating, false flag efforts, dirty tricks, rhetoric, blaming the other side, and so on) seem to keep happening in and around Hillary, over and over again, all while evidence disappears, and people around her are found to be corrupt and go to prison... which are either all pure coincidences and frame jobs (according to her supporters), or she's just following the game plan she learned as an impressionable teen.
Appointed to Staff of House Judiciary Committee during Watergate. She was "fired" for corrupt and unethical behavior according to Dan Calbrese and Jerry Zeifman (lifelong democrat in charge of the house investigation).
According to Zeifman, "She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer, she conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the Committee, and the rules of confidentiality." Specifically, that she was one of a few individuals trying to deny President Nixon legal counsel and hid/removed evidence (legal files and implied they should be lost). And other things like that.
Ziefman was then smeared by the Hilary campaign machine, WaPo and Snopes, for technically not being able to "fire her" (as she wasn't a direct report to his committee, so he could only recommend she be removed and not "fire" her), and all her unethical behavior might have been at the suggestion of her bosses. But even if true (she was "just following orders"), that doesn't change the ethics/liability according to the bar or common decency. Nor that the pattern of her getting in the middle of scandals, being accused of questionable ethics by those closest to her, and "losing evidence" seemed to follow her through her life.
As does her defenses efforts of her and her supporters trying to get people lost in the weeds of technicalities and to ignore the bigger picture/pattern: a small scandal reveals other bigger scandals/questionable behavior, then someone close to her takes the fall, and we move on to the next scandal around her, while she or someone else to blames the "vast right wing conspiracy" for all of it. (For the record, that "vast right wing conspiracy", is a quote she plagiarized and took credit for, another pattern).
This was a complex mess starting in 1980, and going through the 1990's. Basically the Clintons got in a land deal with James McDougal (and wife Susan) to borrow money and build vacation homes in the Ozark Mountains. As governor, Bill Clinton had some influence to peddle (and he'd also assigned McDougal to key position in government), while McDougal bought a savings and loan (Madison Guaranty), who then used funds in ways that benefited the Clintons (kickbacks to campaign fund, private loans, insider lending, and so on). Just Arkansas old-boys quid-pro-quo stuff.
After the failure of the S&L, federal regulators removed McDougal for "improper practices" and the bank collapsed, the property sold off, with McDougal getting charged with fraud. The Federal Resolution Trust Corp. investigation sent a referral to the Justice Dept. naming the Clintons as "potential beneficiaries" of illegal activities. A few years later Vince Foster filed 3 years of delinquent tax returns they had "accidentally" forgot to file correctly-- then commits "suicide" in a park after this is being investigated. The Whitehouse interfered with federal investigators and raided his office before letting them in (causing allegations of "files being removed").
Of course there was also Troopergate, where Bill Clinton allegedly used Arkansas state police assigned to his security detail, to keep an eye out for Hillary or ferry women in and out of the Governors mansion for him (as well as keep track of his sexual scoring system). While Hillary was using state troopers to take her to clandestine meetings with Vince Foster at a resort (for an alleged affair). Most of the media ignored the story, as they didn't want to harm their change-agent du jour, but then this lead to Paula Jones and many others, and even they couldn't ignore that much salaciousness.
Despite 4 different troopers corroborating the stories (multiple Women coming forward or being discovered, including Paula Jones and Jennifer Flowers), and writer David Brock documenting many details of times, dates, with corroborating witnesses, he later apologized to Bill Clinton for breaking the story. The troopers had gotten paid for telling their stories, and he considered that a violation of journalistic ethics. Of course, most of the accounts still appear to be true statements, even if the means of getting the info was a little slimier than Brock was comfortable with.
The White House acknowledged that during four months in late 1993 it wrongly collected FBI background reports on hundreds, including prominent Republicans, and there was many audits of these same folks.
Director of personnel security and Clinton appointee and friend, Craig Livingstone, later takes responsibility. But some of the targeted include:
- Heritage Foundation, the National Rifle Association, Concerned Women of America, Citizens Against Government Waste, National Review, American Spectator (which was burglarized three times), the National Center for Public Policy Research, the American Policy Center, American Cause, Citizens for Honest Government, Progress and Freedom Foundation, David Horowitz’s Center for the Study of Popular Culture, and the Western Journalism Center. Clinton enemies Gennifer Flowers, Liz Ward Gracen, Paula Jones, Juanita Broaddrick and Whitehouse Travel folks (later involved in travelgate) Billy Dale and attorney Kent Masterson Brown.
Oops. Sorry. Washington Times tried to see if any of these repeated audits happened to any Liberal public policy organizations during the same time, and they couldn't find any.
Most people that got in trouble with abusing the IRS to witch-hunting political enemies, might have been deterred from anything that looked bad again. But not those Clinton's. Hillary was allowed to recommend a close Clinton friend, Craig Livingstone, for the position of Director of White House security. Then Livingstone was investigated for the improper access of about 900 FBI files of Clinton enemies (Filegate) and the widespread use of drugs by White House staff, suddenly Hillary and the president denied even knowing Livingstone, and of course, denied knowledge of drug use in the White House. Following this debacle, the FBI closed its White House Liaison Office after more than thirty years of service to seven presidents.
Basically, Craig was using his "Security" role to have the FBI investigate anyone they suspected of being an adversary (and the IRS conincidentally audited a highly overlapped list). This included Linda Tripp and Kathleen Willey, and many G.O.P. files. Hillary of course blamed Craig for a simple "bureaucratic SNAFU". And after a few investigations that claimed the same thing -- only Republicans or enemies of the Clintons were targeted, but it was a bureaucratic SNAFU and there was no intent. For some reasons, people familiar with the Clintons were still dubious. But alas, lost documents, forgetting relationships, knowing nothing about what was going on under their watch, that just happens to target Clinton's political enemies. They might be innocent, but there sure seems to be a pattern.
You'd think that Alinsky, Cattlegate, Whitewater, Travelgate might by red-flags that Hillary has a lousy record for picking allies. But Bill was giving Hillary make-work when he became President (to give the impression that the First Lady mattered, or keeping her busy while he hit on interns), thus the task of finding allies and appointments fell to her. How did she do?
- Her first female attorney general pick: Zoe Baird, was a disaster with Nannygate (hiring illegal immigrants) and failed to pay taxes.
- Her second try was another Democrat bundler: Kimba Wood, who also got implicated with Nannygate as well, but at least she paid taxes, and withdrew as well.
- Her third pick was Janet Reno, who Bill described as “my worst mistake."
- For head of the Civil Rights Commission she chose "Quota Queen" Lani Guinier, so radical that her name had to be withdrawn in disgrace.
- For Justice Department she chose former law partners Web Hubbell; who got indicted for conspiracy, tax evasion and mail fraud.
- For White House Counsel she chose Vince Foster, during the onslaught of scandals and pressure from the WhiteHouse, he committed suicide.
- Finally William Kennedy was picked for the Treasury Department... but his Rose Law Firm Partners Vince Foster and Web Hubbell's careers (and lives) ended so poorly, that he turned tail and fled back to Little Rock.
Then we get into her later friends like Huma and her husband Anthony Wiener, Manchester Bomber's Dad, and literally hundreds of people caught in felonies and other scandals.
Basically, if Hillary considers you: you should run, swim and fly to get as far away as you can. It isn't going to end pretty.
Of course few think that Hillary is directly responsible for Huma and Carlos Danger's clusterfuck of a relationship. On the other hand, if the left is fond of trudging up the rare scumbag with distant associations to a Republican Administration like they love to do. Then the goose-gander rules apply. Judge by one standard. And Hillary's closest confidant (second daughter) is a lot closer to shit-shows like this (not to mention all the bodies dropping around her) than anything President Tangerine has. So pick a standard and let's all live by it.
We know that Huma violated ethics by tripple dipping (and Hillary administration had said it was OK). We know that Huma was destroying public property, with Hillary's tract approval. And we know she lied about both. Let's see, liar that was breaking laws to keep Hillary from being held accountable: like a Daughter to he indeed
There's an argument to be made that Hillary isn't responsible for her husband, and to a point that's true. But who you hang around with, are attracted to (and attract), let alone marry and stay married to, also says something about you. So you can't completely separate the Clintons. And while Bill Clinton would deserve an article longer than this one. Certainly things like Bill's dozen or so adventures on pedophile island riding the Lolita express (with Jeffrey Epstein), or Mena scandal, all seem like fair game. Hillary either knowingly looks the other way, or is a blind idiot that shouldn't be in charge of anything, but it's hard to argue that she's competent but unaware, or aware and a moral person with any standards.
While you aren't responsible for your kids (or your parents), and I don't hold Hillary responsible for who her daughter marries (beyond it shows that bad judgement seems to run in the family). The problem is the double standard. Imagine if one of Bush's daughters had married an Investment Banker at Golman Sachs, who was the son of a major banking felon and fraud, while he was running for office? The Press would have had a field day. With Hillary, it's crickets.
And don't get me started, imagine if Barbara or Jenna Bush's first job out of college paid like $400K a year starting salary, then she does part time work at NBC for $600K/year as a "consultant": which works out to $26,724/minute of airtime, and used the Clinton Foundation as a slush fund. Oh, and don't forget $65,000 speaking fees for 20 minutes, because her parents are famous. She rocketed to $30M in net worth by 36. Nothing sounds suspicious there with the chip off the old block.
Most Presidents pardon people over the course of their Presidencies. Clinton waited until his last day in office then pardoned 140 corrupt Democrat/Clinton Supporters (456 commuted in total). Again, it's not just that the scale is beyond whatever we've seen before, but it's the scope -- that there were so many blatant conflicts of interest. These weren't ambiguous maybe they weren't guilty. It was basically if you donated to Democrats/Clinton's or were radical lefties, then your crimes were forgiven. You can go through some of the rest on your own, but it was quite a cast of characters, and while there were one or two pardons that raised eyebrows in the past (Ford's Nixon pardon comes to mind), no one does questionable choices like the Clintons.
While some partisan sources (FakeNews) will try to spin it as minor “pranks” , reflecting the Clinton Administration’s classlessness, the GAO’s understatements of the severity admitting that they did widespread vandalism to the WhiteHouse totally $13-14K in total damages — things like glue on desk drawers, profane signs, graffiti and insults on voice mail, destroying 62 computer keyboards and 26 cell phones, massive cleaning bills and stealing or breaking doorknobs, medallions, office signs and the large presidential seal.
Of course when the allegations went public, the Democrats tried to spin it that it wasn't THAT bad, and it was tacky of the Republicans to whine about it and make felonious destruction of public property look like anything bad
Like many things Hillary is involved in, at best she showed gross incompetence, and worst: criminal malfeasance -- always with a side of lies, sub-scandals, and opacity. There's so many scandals in Benghazi: (1) The incompetence of State by ignoring pleas for more security (2) The lies to the public that it was about a "video" (3) the lies that someone didn't block coming to their aid while under attack (4) the obstruction of justice on the investigation (5) the collusion between the Obama DOJ and the Clintons during the investigation (6) This started emailgate. Not to mention the whole why was the U.S. helping Muslim Brotherhood to destabilize Libya, in the first place (as they'd done in Egypt). So it was part of a wider fuck up of foreign policy.
Look bad things happen. If the administration had owned the mistake, no problem. But they lied, obstructed and still hold the position, "what difference does it make?" if you get multiple state department people killed, don't do everything to help them while they're under fire, and then lie and obstruct about it for years? Well, it's one of many things that contributed to her electoral loss. I think that's a difference that it made. But after decades of telling us that Russians would be our friends if we just disarmed for them, now she blames her electoral loss on Russian (conspiring with the Republicans).
After criticizing Bush and Secretary State Colin Powell for using a public email service while in office (they were using the separate emails for campaign communication, because the law implied they were not supposed to be using federal machines for that), and after she was warned by Congress in 2012 against using a private email account for government business, after Petraeus got fired for handling secure documents in a less than perfect way, instead of using the government-mandated process/servers, Hillary chose to setup her own private email, left it unsecured, deleted 30,000 emails without any auditing, said she gave all job pertinent emails to state, it illegally had top secret emails on it, she claimed she set it up only for the convenience of not carrying two devices, and so on. We know she lied about every one of those claims. All of which were crimes or violations of agreements. Yet, apologists persist to this day in implying she did nothing wrong (or at least criminally wrong). That's demonstrably false.
There's all the scandals that she got caught lying in (after accusing the other side of lying). And there are many more stories of her being an angry shrew that yelled a lot, and threw things, and the Whitehouse staff didn't like her, at all. (These stories kept coming out). In polls, more people believe in Bigfoot (14%) than Hillary being honest (11%). (Really).
I don't mind a tough-minded President or candidate (or even a "bitchy" one, at times). But there's a difference between occasionally coming down on people, and just being nasty to be around (and only way to persuade people is by intimidation/title). There seems to be a reason that so many close to her, tell the same story about her being nasty, and corrupt and a liar. Books have been written calling her, 'the Lady Macbeth of Little Rock", her household cook in Littlerock said, "The devil’s in that woman". While anecdotes aren't proof, when there are so many, over so many years, you have to be an idiot to assume they're ALL false, right? Is everyone out to get this poor innocent altruist saint?
Without any experience, as a first time Cattle Futures trader (and wife of Governor), she gets a 9,987% return on investment in a few months, after, according to her, "reading the Wall Street Journal" (a paper that doesn't talk about Cattle Futures). With results like that, she decides to never trade stocks/commodities again. Suspicious?
So we're to believe that under the guidance of a few "friends" (her account being run by a lawyer for state poultry interests, through a disreputable broker) she turns $6,300 investment into $100K (a nice even number) in a few months, with shoddy and lost records, questionable trades, not enough money in her account to cover some of the $1.5M positions she bought/sold in the same day (anyone else would have had margin calls), and other eyebrow raising anomalies. Then her two partners in this (Bone and Refco) were suspended and fined respectively for improper records keeping. But nothing to see here, move along -- we're not supposed to question her integrity, or think that this might have been a payoff?
Clinton friend Harry Thompson (and his TRM charter company) had wanted to do some charter business with the WhiteHouse Travel office, but was rebuffed (they were a relatively new company, and their only client the year before had been the Clinton Campaign).
- Hillary got involved, spread some lies about the travel office, she pressured the FBI to investigate them, and 7 people were fired (and smeared in the Press) because of it.
- The investigations into the fired staff resulted in one employee (Billy Dale) being charged with mixing personal and White House funds, and a jury acquitted him of any crime (in less than two hours). So he got audited by the IRS (completely coincidentally, I'm sure). Nothing came of that either.
- Then with the help of Bill Clinton's 25 year old cousin (Catherine Cornelius), Clinton cronies WWT (World Wide Travel) took over the business, and Harry Thompson's TRM got a $500K no-bid contract.
At least this one caused a media field day, on the abuse of FBI, investigation, firing, cronies and so on. WWT was so embarrassed they stepped down (and let American Express take over the business). And it lead to NYT writer, William Safire to describe Hillary Clinton as "a congenital liar". (When the NYT speaks truth about a Clinton, you know it's bad).
The Clinton-Gore campaign in 1996 allegedly took bribes from Chinese banks and their government (to help their dwindling poll numbers). The Chinese embassy siphon funds into the DNC with the help of Secretary of Commerce Ron Brown (died in a plane crash), and at Hillary’s instruction, reportedly sold seats on department trade missions to China.
Democrats "willfully impeded" the investigation, and the DOJ was incompetent or criminal according to the FBI Director Freeh and other agents who later testified before Congress in late 1999 that Justice Department prosecutors impeded their inquiry.
In the end, since the Clintons were never fully prosecuted or excoriated by the Press/Public, this idea of selling foreign favors for money, was scaled up, converted into a charity and became the Clinton Foundation,.
Then there was the the Lincoln Bedroom in the Whitehouse was being rented to high donors/contributors like it was AirBNB. While technically not illegal, it was certainly unsavory and showed a pattern in lack of decorum and tact that no other administration had had the gall to do before. It certainly showed that there was no monument, historical property, or government building owned by the American people that the Clinton administration wouldn't rent for their own personal advancement.
Former Clinton adviser Dick Morris not only has said he'd leave the country, if she was elected President (that's how much the people that know her, respect her), but he alleged in a New York Post article that the former first lady failed to report many dresses, and purses and jewelry that she (or Chelsea) was gifted while First Lady.
Clinton aides defended her by claiming some of the gifts were before innaugeration (so don't technically count, even if it's still ethically questionable). After he shined light on the issues, others were either declared, or given to the national archives. At least they are now. Though there's no evidence she would have done that otherwise.
After leaving the White House, Hillary was forced to return an estimated $190,000 in White House furniture, china, and artwork that she had taken. Again, there's a lot of "weeds" as to whether gifts were given to them personally or the Whitehouse, and how big personal gifts are allowed to be (this far exceeds acceptable norms). But the end result is always that nothing like this ever happened to any President before. Including other Southern White Trash Hicks like the founder of the Democrats: Andrew Jackson. No one but the Clinton's have the lack of tact to try something like this. (At least on this scale).
After leaving the state Department FBI documents claim Clinton took furniture from State Dept. To quote: “Early in Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state, she and her staff were observed removing lamps and furniture from the State Department which were transported to her residence in Washington, D.C.”. This one is more disputed. The State Department claims those were her items, but why was she moving things out (instead of in) early in her tenure? And there doesn't appear to have ever been an investigation. Also remember the State Dept. has a sketchy history on prosecuting anyone in their department for major crimes, let alone furniture theft, going back to McCarthy era and the creation of the agency. It's not their money, so why do they care? Since Hillary has a (D) after her name, it does't appear the Newspapers wanted to know (or investigated). If she was a Republican, there would have been a lot more noise made.
There was so much sliminess around the Clinton Foundation, conflicts of interest, and campaign contribution improprieties, and "pay to play", it's many scandals in one. They say you can judge a person by the company they keep, well what does this say about the Clinton's? The idea is that they created a "philanthropic" organization, in their name. In practice, they created a special interest that can benefit them and their campaign directly, and skirt campaign rules. She parked her top staff over there when she's not running (to keep them employed and preparing), then when she's campaigning again, she has a whole staff and organization ready to go. Most of her staff is getting wrapped up in scandals, while the organization is misplacing millions, paying for a lavish lifestyle, and foreign entities are getting deals passed right after they contribute massive amount to the Clinton Foundation. And people can donate to Hillary indirectly, in ways that they can't to her campaign. But no conflict of interest there. Instead her followers are ranting about Trump's tax returns.
To her and her campaign, this is what "Going high, while the other side goes low" looks like. Their campaigns ran dirty, nasty, and made the issue "the other side". She has a long history of starting rumors, slurring her opponents, and attacking anyone who has evidence or accusations of her wrongdoing. And that's a lot of people. Either much of the world has been out to get them for no reason (the "vast right-wing conspiracy"), or the Clinton's were really nasty people.
Hillary Clinton fires back at critics: No one told a man who lost an election to shut up. Of course that shows that she's clueless, abrasive, ignorant of history, and context is that everyone else was not as venomous and divisive a loser (or winner) as she has been. No one has cared about her genitalia in a long time -- but her perpetual victimhood is annoying as fuck.
Early into her career Hillary was appointed as public defender in a rape case, and made the centerpiece of her defense attacking the 12-year old victim's credibility (eventhough there wasn't a shred of evidence that the victim had any sort of history of making false claims). Going on to claim the victim wanted it by implying that the girl often fantasized and sought out "older men" like Taylor. She omitted this aspect of the case from her 2003 book, "Living History." (Not being nice, and having selective memory of her actions/history seems to be a pattern).
Worst of all, was in a 1980 interview she admits she knew the guy was guilty, but is joking and laughing about it and how she manipulated the situation to get her guilty client a reduced punishment for child rape. (While she claims to be a champion of women's rights, especially sexual assault victims... unless they're victims of her clients or husband).
Now her job was to defend the client, so I don't begrudge her doing her job. But lawyers know that their ethics doesn't require them to do things they don't believe; like attack the credibility of a 12 year old rape victim, or present evidence/ideas that they know are false. There are white, black and grey areas, and she seems to have a pattern of wading neck deep into the grays (at best).
Hillary is a hero to Women's liberation, unless you were one of her Husbands rape or assault victims.
That list includes: Juanita Broaddrick, Dolly Kyle Browning, Gennifer Flowers, Kathleen Willey, Paula Jones, Monica Lewisnski. Connie Hamz , Bobbie Ann Williams, Sally Perdue, Eileen Wellstone, Sandra Allen James, Christy Zercher, University of Arkansas Student, 22 Year old Yale Student, Lencola Sullivan, Elizabeth Ward-Gracen, Becky Brown, Helen Dowdy, Kathy Ferguson, Susie Whitacre, just to name a few that came forward and complained. And as we know with predators, there's like a lot more that have not, or were bullied by Hillary into silence.
Birth of Birthers
Amongst the top most classifications are Special Access Program (SAP) and the “need-to-know” (NTK) classification that includes only a few top cabinet officials like the Secretary of State. These contain things like the nuclear response times, that have been completely classified and foreign enemies would always have to make educated guesses on how fast we could possibly get missiles in the air. Not any more. Thanks to Hillary trying to win political points, she blurted out one of the nations highest secrets ("There’s about four minutes between the order being given and the people responsible for launching nuclear weapons to do so”). And the results are that many security officials and the Pentagon are once again pissed are her incompetence with classified information.
Does this really matter? Probably not much. They could approximate and guess at the amount, it's just nice to have hard confirmation of your intelligence. But this was a far bigger deal than talking to the Russians about cooperating on terror, and mentioning what the newspapers had already published about how terrorists were trying to create laptop-bombs to target airplanes. And the FakeNews media had a field day with the latter and Trump. So if that's our standard of guilt, then Hillary should be in Leavenworth. (I've yet to find a standard of behavior applied to Trump that doesn't make Hillary worse, she's just more cagey about it).
Hillary's book was a spiteful, divisive, finger-pointing-fest. It was everyone else's fault but her. Of course, she had some fake apologies like, I should have campaigned harder, or how it was her fault because the others didn't understand how brilliant she was, and so on. But it was as tone deaf as her campaign.
I don't care if people like her, or want to vote for/against her. But I do care whether people will tell the truth about her or not. Whether you agree with the accusations or not, Hillary has had scandal after scandal, usually being well on the wrong side of ethical -- but often with enough plausible deniability, that she's escaped conviction.
Her ex-friends and ex-confidants (or ex-staff), all tell similar stories of a nasty, lying, hot tempered and power hungry person. As a politician, she's flip-flopped on just about every major position -- or at least publicly. She been secretive (deleting federal emails off illegal private email servers, avoiding Press), paranoid (vast right wing conspiracy), who has abused the power of her office many times. She's pro-war (spoke for war in Iraq both under Bill and GWB, Kosovo, Bosnia, Afghanistan, Egypt, Lybia) and pro-corporatism as long as there was some conflict of interest that benefited her. Against gay marriage. Constantly has ethical problems (lobbying, whitewater, campaign finance, special interests, K Street associations, etc). Her biggest accomplishment as Senator was, helped co-write a part of NCLB (No Child Left Behind). Then turned on Bush after supporting it, and blamed the Republicans for passing it and claimed it was an unfunded mandate. And as a secretary of state, she left a swath of destruction and incompetence behind her, and still struggles to answer the question what good her tenure did.
To believe her supporters -- you have to believe that everyone really is out to get her. All the people that were her confidants and left were jealous and made up stories, that there was a vast right wing conspiracy by her and the Press that seemed to reluctant to investigate them (until the stories were broke wide open by another event), that all the people who call her a liar are liars, that the hoards of people that went to prison around her were taking advantage of her trusting nature, and that she didn't know anything about any of them, but that she isn't gullible or a bad judge of character, and that everything she failed to execute well on (Nixon Investigation, Secretary of State, Wife, First Lady, Philanthropist, Author, Legislator, ISP, Real Estate Investor) were all the failings of someone else. And feel sorry for her, because her one true calling (Cattle Futures Investor) was something that she only did that one time in her life, and Bill and her political lifestyle preventer her from doing her one true calling.
To believe her detractors -- you have to believe that while there's probably some political motivations in some of the releases, that she and her husband more are less are what everyone who spoke out about them, said they were. Scummy, two faced, politicians -- with Bill interested in notching his bedpost like a rabid beaver, while Hillary was interested in power to be queen-bitch over all the minions of earth.
So I wouldn't mind there being a Woman President. I'd just want one with a better record, and someone the world would take more seriously than Cruella Rodham de Vil crossed with Felonious Gru. But as her loyal fans always say about her wrongdoings or incompetence, “what difference does it make?”
- Overcharged: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jun/3/russian-fm-sergey-lavrov-failed-reset-was-inventio/
- Boko Haram:
- Fact Checks:
- Can't find anything at all: http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Audit-clears-Clinton-staff-of-vandalism-No-2920188.php
- DNC complaining about Bush for pointing out it happened at all: http://articles.latimes.com/2001/jun/03/news/mn-5996
- Left Unsecured: http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/235493-clinton-email-lacked-encryption-certificate-for-three-months
- Shrew: http://rare.us/rare-forum/david-blaine-must-be-some-sort-of-trickster-god-to-do-these-things/
- Video: http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/220099/hillary_camp_freaking_out_as_this_video_goes_viral_no_way_to_stop_it_now/
List of Clinton Meme's: mostly Hillary, but some Bill and Monica thrown in. From fairness in the media, to who wore it better (dress for the job you want), to various Bill scandals: something for everyone.
This is not to claim a giant conspiracy by the Clintons, or that I buy in that they (or their allies) are having people "whacked" like a mafiaso movie. Heck, if I believed that, I probably wouldn't dedicate time to listing all of the Clinton's scandals, as I'm not suicidal. This is just to point out that being a friend of the Clinton's doesn't seem to be good for your health. And those idiots playing 6 degrees of separation with Trump-Russia ties either think Hillary Clinton is having all these people killed, or are flaming hypocrites (between it only takes 1 degree of separation for more suspicious behavior on their side).