We’ve finally arrived! The last debate before the Iowa Caucus, and no Trump! As many are no doubt aware, the Don skipped the Des Moines debate, citing unfair treatment by Megan Kelley, who was set to moderate the debate, as the cause. Whether it was that or just wanting to rest on his laurels, Trump didn’t show, and the result was that the debate was surprisingly topical! Also, reports suggest that ratings didn’t drop for not having Trump at the center, and I’m sure that displeases him. Here’s my brief summation of the main stage debate.
Ted Cruz – Ted had a good showing. He got the Trump jokes out of the way rather quickly (some worked, some didn’t), and proceeded with a sans-Trump debate. His high point was when he was confronted with why Cruz didn’t support ethanol subsidies like his colleagues. Cruz, in a courageous move, with Iowa on the line and the Iowa Governor who discourages Cruz support big on camera, didn’t back down and even redoubled his assertion that there should be no government subsidies for anyone. Honestly, how often does that happen in a Presidential race? I hope such guts pays off in votes. His low point was when he tried to force a turn when the moderator spoke his name; he needs to stop doing that. Overall, Cruz did well, spoke with passion and optimism, and he at least didn’t lose any supporters if not gained some. We’ll find out Monday.
Marco Rubio – Marco also had a good night. Marco was lucid, if dour, but always on his toes. His high point was either when he wondered aloud if a President Hillary would pardon herself or that Bernie Sanders, as a Socialist, would make a good President… of Sweden! His low point was a toss-up between his exchange with Bush defending his immigration stance or his interchange with himself (via video) explaining how he twice switched regarding amnesty. Cruz was likewise challenged, but really did a better job of making his case. Nevertheless, Rubio did well, but as many have noted, he needs to cheer up a bit!
Ben Carson – Ben did his thing. He had no real stand out moments, but nothing objectionable, either. I don’t think he did anything to advance himself.
Chris Christie – Chris got to remind everyone that he was a former Federal Prosecutor… again. He also tried to play hall-monitor to the tête-à-têtes of other candidates… again! He did add that he would prosecute Hillary Clinton, but it wasn’t abundantly clear that he meant in court rather than the court of public opinion in a debate situation. Chris was kind of meh, and he didn’t help himself in Iowa, but he may have held his own in New Hampshire.
Jeb Bush – Jeb had his best debate yet. He was still a little stumbly, but he got the better of Marco, his current chief rival, in an exchange on amnesty. His performance supposedly has helped him in NH, but probably not in Iowa.
John Kasich – There are some times when I think John is in a debate all by himself, almost as if we’ve stepped into another dimension when the camera points to him. He seems to have been doing well in the polls in NH, but I don’t see that he helped himself last night; I have nothing else to say about him.
Rand Paul – Rand was back. He spoke well, as usual, but he really didn’t have any high or low points. I’m sure it wasn’t his goal, but I think he helped Cruz more than he did himself. Cruz, as the stage’s front-runner could stand back and let Rand be his attack dog and make his case for him. Even when Rand attacked Cruz, it didn’t really amount to much. In spite of having his very vocal supporters in the audience cheering him on, I don’t think Rand aided his campaign.
The winner of this debate was clearly Ted Cruz. However, I will admit that this was not his strongest debate, but he managed to score a few points beyond his fumbles, more than anyone else, and he also learned to take a knee when was proper. Second place I would have to award to Marco Rubio. He definitely helped himself, possibly in both Iowa and New Hampshire.
Next time is certain to be a smaller stage as some will have dropped out by then. Who it will be isn’t certain, but I could make a good guess. Jim Gilmore, who returned to the undercard debate, will most likely disappear again. Huckabee and Santorum are pretty much done, since the pair committed political suicide together by going to Trump’s alternate event and appearing on stage with the orange one, a tacit endorsement from the both. Also, Rand may be gone by next debate. Now, on to the Iowa Caucus!
(Bill Whittle just put out a video in a similar vein to what you are about to read (linked below). It was so good, I thought I’d do my own take on it, with my own two cents worth, also because I’ve had a similar idea rattling around in my head for some time. However, Bill’s take is more conciliatory, whereas mine is more of an ultimatum. Here it is.)
Dear Trump Supporters,
I don’t believe that your candidate will be the nominee. Additionally, the polls currently maintain that he can’t win against Hillary in a general. However, I can’t deny that he’s the front runner and has a shot at it. Additionally, I suspect that no one can pry you from your candidate, but for his own sake, to make him more electable, do you think you could try to push him in a more Conservative direction? Remember, he wants the job; it’s not his for the taking, much as he may posture. So if he wants solid across the board Republican support to beat the Democrats, I say, “Let’s make a beautiful deal.” Before He becomes the nominee, cajole Trump to promise that:
– He will act to end or restrict abortion. He says he’s now pro-life; demand that he talk about what that means and what actions he will take. For instance, will the Judges he selects favor life or not?
-He will select only conservative, strict constructionist judges to the Supreme Court. Many times in recent years we’ve come so close to losing first and second amendment rights by the High Court; it will only take one more appointment to tip us into the abyss. I like that Trump says that he prefers Clarence Thomas, but I don’t know what he means by saying that, and it’s not the only confusing word he’s had on the matter. Have Trump to commit to this original intent leaning judges and stop saying that he’ll put his pro-partial-birth-abortion favoring sister on the Court.
-He will respect the Constitution, the rule of law, and the separation of powers. Trump’s been virtually silent in this area, with only a few mentions about the President’s illegal executive orders. Demand that he commit to limited government. We don’t need a right-wing Obama. Return power to the states and individuals, and undo the last 8 years of imbalance.
-He will respect private property rights and return Federal lands back to the states. I’m not talking about National Parks here, but large swaths of land that should be taken away from the Bureau of Land Management and returned to State authorities. Ted Cruz favors passing legislation that would prevent the Feds from owning 50% or more of a State, as a start. Get Trump to reverse himself on this issue and suggest something similar. Also, get him to promise that he will pursue legislation that will protect private property owners from the EPA (or other federal entities) and entrepreneurs who would buy influence with government to take the property of private citizens and give it to business. Trump’s attempt to take some old lady’s house for a Casino limo parking lot through eminent domain was disgraceful, and I’m glad that he failed. Trump needs to learn that he serves the people and not the other way around. We’ve had enough self-serving narcissists in the White House.
-He will enact meaningful immigration reform. It’s great that Trump wants to build a wall, but he also favors “touch-back,” meaning that he’ll deport aliens and then bring them right back to the USA. That does nothing for the guy who can’t find a job because of massive illegal competition. Furthermore, it’s wasteful of federal funds, cruel to the illegal alien, and counters Trump’s previous stated goals. Get him to secure the border, and then enforce existing laws.
-He will not initiate socialized medicine. In addition to being an expenditure that this bankrupt government can’t possibly pay, this sort of program has failed every time it has been tried. It results in low quality care, rationing, and long waits for treatment. It’s so bad that in Canada, their own supreme court ruled against it and allowed for a secondary paid system so that people don’t have to die waiting for treatment. Get “Mr. Businessman” to repeal Obamacare and agree to a free-market solution that gives consumers choice, has transparency in pricing, and allows for interstate competition.
-He will pass a balanced-budget amendment and start paying off our near $20 trillion debt. If we don’t get a handle on this, we may lose the dollar as the world’s default currency, and then meet the same fate as Greece. Ted Cruz has suggested using Federal natural resources to pay this down, as land holdings amount to roughly the same amount as what we owe. Trump needs to develop a similar plan to deal with this issue. Additionally, he better be ready to handle the $120 trillion in unfunded mandates that will be due soon. This is truly an existential crisis for this government; this can must not be kicked down the road again.
-He will not institute a wealth tax. Again, this goes to private property rights. After a person has paid taxes on their earned income, why should they have to pay another nickel of it, let alone the 14% that Trump has suggested? I know hating the rich is as popular as it’s ever been, but you have to ask yourself what this might do to the economy, in so punishing success. This is so Progressive, not even Hillary has suggested it.
-He will not grant government monopolies and be more hands-off regarding the private sector. Get Trump to stop picking winners and losers in the economy! He needs to abandon his plans to expand ethanol subsidies. Why should I be forced by government to destroy my car’s engine with corrosive ethanol, and also have to pay Iowa for the privilege? Not only is it bad for the environment, burning three gallons of gasoline to make 4 gallons of ethanol, but ethanol should have to stand on its own, just like every other product. I know his support of this issue buys him a lot of votes in Iowa and curries the favor of the GOP establishment, but it is in no way the position of someone who believes in the free market. Don’t get me started on tariffs!
If you are successful in all this, press your luck in trying to get him to act like an adult, stop calling women “Bimbos”and the like, stop carrying on childish twitter wars (he’s running for President, for crying out loud!), and show some respect for the political process that the founders and our traditions have established. Trump should act like the leader of the free world that he wants to be, not a wise guy.
If in reading this, you, as a Trump follower, have discovered some things about your candidate that make you question your support of him, then I would just remind you that there are other candidates that are true conservatives and can win, such as Senator Ted Cruz. If, however, you are still a “Trump or nothing” voter, you would do well to consider the following: If Trump does become the GOP candidate, and if he wants to win in the general election, then he’s going to need support from conservatives; he’s going to need to appeal to some principles higher than just… Trump. If you can get him to agree to all of this, maybe, conservatives might vote for him instead of staying home on election night.
Yesterday, January 21st,2015 , Mark Levin dropped a bombshell on his radio show audience, saying that word had reached him that a representative from one of the Republican campaigns for President was investigating him in an effort to shut him up. Next, Levin went ahead and spilled the beans about the theoretical dirt that might have been held over his head. It seems that Levin is engaged to a woman whose adult son works for the Cruz for President campaign. Levin stated his belief that this wasn’t anybody’s business and downplayed the insinuation that his fiancé’s son’s political affiliations have had an effect on Levin’s views, stressing that he didn’t care which campaign the young man worked for. However, even though Levin maintained his intellectual independence, he also openly admitted his own connection to the Junior Senator from Texas, in that Levin had “supported Ted Cruz for a long time” and had also encouraged the likes of “Sarah Palin” to support Cruz in his US Senate race a few years back. 1 Levin went on, vowing never to be silenced and also to disclose the identity of the campaign that was responsible, even offering a $5,000 reward for verifiable tips.
Lately on Levin’s show, Levin has been very critical of Presidential candidate Donald Trump, primarily concerning his Campaign’s personal attacks on Ted Cruz, going so far as to describe them as “Nixonian”. 2 If Levin’s allegations are true, considering the fact that the Don has lately been the popular talk show host’s person of negative interest, suspicion could fall on Trump. Certainly, Trump hasn’t been averse to using creative means to encourage the silence of others. Earlier this week, Trump made threats of legal action to reporters when he was confronted with his use of junk bonds to finance a deal that ultimately went south, and even though he previously repudiated their use. 3 Trump reportedly said in response to this line of inquiry, “If you write this one, I’m suing you.” 3 Nevertheless, it could be still another campaign that is unhappy with Levin’s recent positive coverage of Cruz, wanting for that to halt. In that case, Cruz’s immediate inferior, the Rubio campaign, coveting a number two slot in Iowa or in New Hampshire and desirous that a prominent talk show like Levin’s stop giving Cruz positive coverage, would be next in line after Trump to benefit should Cruz falter.
If it is indeed verified that the Trump campaign, rather than the Rubio campaign or one from the other candidates for President, has been engaged in a silencing campaign of one of his harshest critics in the media, that would certainly go a long way in supporting Levin’s allegation that the Trump Campaign is engaged in the politics of personal destruction in the mold of Richard Nixon, and it leaves one to wonder who else might be on Trump’s enemies list.
(In part one, this article covered Hillary’s lack of accomplishments and corruption as qualities that make her unsuitable for office. In part two, the case is built upon with even more evidence that suggest President Hillary could be a huge mistake for America.)
Hillary is an Authoritarian
In an episode of the comedy series, It’s Always Sunny In Philadelphia, a billiard room discussion about female politicians was depicted between a tall, blonde character and a short, pudgy character played by Danny DeVito. When Hillary was cited as a positive example of women in politics, DeVito reacted with the word “Awful!” When questioned why, he replied, “Hates freedom.” 1 It is difficult to find truer and shorter words to sum-up Hillary’s politics. Although Hillary isn’t the first politician to attempt a bargain between a people and their ruling body in that they give up their freedom and will in return be taken care of, she has certainly been a very vocal proponent of this kind of pact. In the real world it’s called a protection racket, but in politics it’s called socialism. Every solution that Hillary envisions for perceived or real problems that the country faces invariably require amassing more power and money in government and less freedom in the states, localities, and individuals citizens. After all, the dichotomy of liberty and government is a game of Tug-of-War, a zero-sum-gain where one side only makes advances when the other side relinquishes. In this game, progressives like Hillary will only be satisfied when the people are over the line and face down in the filth. Ultimately, Hillary believes she knows better than you, so you better just do what she says.
While Hillary is usually very lawyerly in how she parses words, making it hard to pin her down at times, her authoritarian views are well known, even among her supporters, who laud this as a positive for the left. Matt Yglesias, formerly of the left-wing digest Vox, praised HRC by saying, “…Clinton is clearly more comfortable than the average person with violating norms and operating in legal gray areas.” 2 He also added, “Committed Democrats and liberal-leaning interest groups are facing a reality in which any policy gains they achieve are going to come through the profligate use of executive authority, and Clinton is almost uniquely suited to deliver the goods. More than almost anyone else around, she knows where the levers of power lie, and she is comfortable pulling them, procedural niceties be damned.” 2 The very thing that our system was designed to reduce (e.g. tyranny, corruption) is the very thing that the left praises Clinton for knowing how to circumvent. Hillary will, if elected, continue to amass power in the executive, making congress redundant along with due process and other rights. And from the horse’s mouth, here are some brief quotes that display Hillary’s Marxist authoritarian side:
“We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.” 3
“We just can’t trust the American people to make those types of choices…. Government has to make those choices for people” 4
“I am a fan of the social policies that you find in Europe” 4
If you ask an average Joe, what he would most trust to make decisions for his life: government or himself, nine times out of ten, Joe would answer himself. He might be o.k. with government making decisions for others, those idiots need sorting out anyway, but for him, he would be confident that no higher authority is needed for most things. However, the lure of gaining perceived benefits in exchange for freedom, as long as the loss is little perceptible, is attractive, and many people when faced with a subtler choice of placing someone else in charge of their life might actually say “Sure, take my freedom. I wasn’t using the darn thing, anyway!” Most of Hillary’s policies fall under what might be termed the nanny state, which is a sort of benevolent dictatorship, if you can imagine that not being a contradiction. Ultimately, what she offers is government taking away your ability to make your own choices, funding programs with money that it doesn’t have, programs that it isn’t constitutionally authorized to start, doing things that the American people could better do for themselves. Among her priorities are fixing the tax code to punish short-term profits, 4 pre-school and child care programs on a federal level, 4 more laws forcing more paid sick/family leave, 4 and more equal pay legislation. 4 Sounds pretty good, until you realize that every one of these programs will have written in them new rules for us, taking away our choice to decide what we want, with the inevitable corrupting hand of government making things inferior in quality and more expensive, just like every other thing it touches. And speaking of expense, the cost of all of this will ultimately be passed down to us, in terms of taxes, hours cut, jobs slashed, and more expensive goods. The wealthy aren’t going to pay for it. I know there’s a perception, like Tom Waites sang, we “Can always find a millionaire to shovel all the coal”, 5 but the fact of the matter is, besides their business’s usual practice of passing added costs on to the consumer, the wealthy’s vast fortunes offer them the ability to be mobile, much as states like California found when they instituted their millionaire taxes, 6 the rich just moved to Texas or Florida. And don’t be mistaken, the rich can still move to Ireland, take their wealth with them, and Hillary will let them, after she receives a fat donation (of course), like the ones she’s received from Trump over the years. 7 The point is that the economy under Obama is struggling in one of the worst recoveries ever. 16 to 20 cents of every dollar is borrowed, 8 we are over 18 trillion dollars in debt, 9 actual economic growth is an anemic 2%, 10 we have a high level of business-stifling/killing regulations from the federal government that demonstrably impedes growth, 11 and we still have 120 trillion dollars in unfunded mandates that are coming due. 9 The question isn’t whether or not we can afford new Hillary programs, the question is whether or not we’ll be able to keep what we have and not have our economy collapse, just like the social democracies of Europe currently are doing. This, however, is not Hillary’s concern. Once she has power, just like with every other Democrat program, the results are unimportant and can be dishonestly presented to the public, if need be. The question is will your freedom be worth a few new benefits, benefits that will ultimately cost you money, hours, your job, or that of your neighbor’s. I would hope that people would see through what is ultimately a naked and risky example of vote buying. However, in the long term, the inability to handle our spending represents an existential crisis, that if not dealt with, could be the end of the country as we know it, and it is doubtful that a President Hillary would respond to an economic collapse with reversing herself and giving back freedom. No, she’s more likely to follow Greece’s example, seizing emergency powers, and then seizing what’s left of our retirement funds and bank accounts to shore up the debt. 12 The precedent has already been set abroad, and don’t be sure that it won’t happen here.
Hillary has Proven Incompetent in Foreign Policy
In the 2008 race for the Democrat nomination for President, when Hillary wasn’t
challenging Obama’s citizenship, she was airing an ad about the disasters that a President would inevitably face, making the case that Obama was too inexperienced to know what to do if he got a “3 a.m. phone call”. 13 While that was certainly true, although I would add that his warped ideology was the greater threat, Hillary, as Obama’s Secretary of State, received a 3 a.m. phone call of her own, this one from her own state department’s ambassador desperately pleading for help, and she did nothing. She didn’t send a rescue mission; in fact, spun-up assets on site and nearby were either ignored in their seeking permission to save the Ambassador or they were given a stand-down order. 14 She let them die, claiming that it wasn’t a terrorist attack but an out of hand protest, and all to safe-guard Obama’s reelection slogan of how he had defeated terrorism, and to also save her own future Presidential prospects. 15 Lybia was supposed to be the crowning jewel in her one tangible foreign policy achievement, 16 but her efforts to overthrow the neutered dictator of Libya did not create a world safe for democracy, but rather it made a low-threat country into a terrorist quagmire. 17 Similarly in Egypt and Syria, her instincts were always proven to be wrong, with Hillary and Obama always backing the wrong horse, such as the terrorist group known as the Muslim Brotherhood. 18 Her famous failed “reset” of relations with a Russia 19 that had just taken over parts of Georgia resulted in an emboldened Vladimir Putin taking over part of the Ukraine as well. In fact, she did so poorly as SOS, that the result of her leadership is heightened conflict across the Middle East, saber rattling in Asia, and the deterioration of the relatively stable countries of Iraq and Afghanistan that George W. Bush had handed over to Obama and Clinton, whose peoples have now seen much of their gains lost amid the resurgence of the Taliban and the formation of ISIS. It is no great mystery why Hillary doesn’t campaign on her foreign policy achievements with any level of great detail, because only a buffoon would believe that she helped make the world safer, and that she should be trusted again after such a less than stellar performance, being proven wrong every step of the way.
Hillary is a Liar
What list of sins making the case that Hillary Clinton is unfit for office would be complete without touching upon her penchant for prevarication? Seriously, one could fill books with the staggering volume of fibs, white lies, falsehoods, dishonesties, deceptions, denigrations, defamations, fabrications, mendacities, and lest we forget, lies, that pour effortlessly from Hillary’s lips. Hillary Clinton was once referred to by New York Times Columnist Westbrook Pegler, as a “congenital liar”. 20Truer words about her have seldom been said, and it’s not that she just does the pandering and stretching of the truth that most politicians have a propensity to do, her lies are mind boggling, ranging from the grandiose to the ridiculous. She’s told lies of simple pandering, like when she claimed to be named after Sir Edmund Hillary, even though she was born before Sir Edmund became famous; 21 she’s told lies for self-aggrandizement, like claiming that she “ran for cover under hostile fire shortly after her plane landed in Tuzla, Bosnia”, while video records refute this; 21 she’s told credulity straining lies, such as when she told one interviewer that she hadn’t been subpoenaed to testify before congress, regarding her emails, when it was common knowledge that she had been subpoenaed; 22 and she’s told despicable lies to the family members of those that died in Benghazi, indicating that the raid was the responsibility of someone who made a YouTube video when she knew it was a terrorist attack timed to coincide with the 911 anniversary. 23 It is impossible to document all of Hillary’s public lies, or as she may call it “speaking”, but here are a few gems:
Hillary claimed her daughter, Chelsea, had been exercising around the Twin Towers on 911, when she had actually been staying at a friend’s apartment. 24
Hillary claimed that the huge returns she’d made in futures was, rather than a case of business wishing to curry favor with the her politician husband, because she learned financial skills in The Wall Street Journal, even though it didn’t cover the market at that time. 25
Hillary claimed that she had no knowledge that her brothers were being financially compensated to get certain people pardoned by President Clinton. 26
Hillary pled ignorance to stealing White House property 25 when she and Bill moved out. 27
Hillary claimed she and Bill were broke after their time in the White House, even though she her finances told another story. 28
Hillary claimed that the gun industry was “the only business in America that is wholly protected from any kind of liability”, which is untrue. 29
So there it is. The Devil you know, Hillary Clinton, very clearly not better than the devil you don’t, but certainly interesting (like an exotic disease) and unique in America. In fact, I don’t think I would be going too far to say that Hillary Clinton is very much like American royalty; and what I mean by royalty is that she lives above the law, governs with regard to few if any restraints, and may not be averse to chopping off the heads of those that get in her way. All her life, her greatest accomplishments have not been in protecting freedom, or in defending the weak, or in advancing any particular ideology. No. She is accomplished only in how often she has advanced and enriched herself by subverting justice and beating the system she now wants to control. However, it is only fair to note that we, the USA, have been complicit in making her the most indulged, privileged, entitled human being to plod the earth. She didn’t elect herself, did she? If elected, it stands to reason that she will continue, and even one up, her corrupt ways and her lawlessness. What would dissuade her, if she’s made it this far? While it is possible, probable even, that Hillary will miss out on her Presidential ambitions as her poll numbers ebb and the likelihood of her being indicted grows, but much like that cockroach that you can’t seem to kill, you should never count a Clinton out until it is so. So please, if you value honesty, if you value the rule of law, if you value the stability of your country, even if you only value your own bank account, don’t, please don’t, vote for Hillary!
As Obama goes on his end of the imperium tour to convince us that bad is good, down is up, and left is right, remember that the awesome thing about a bad President is that he makes the good President that follows look even better, as this new executive heals the country.
Obama’s progressive solutions (progressive like melanoma, as Andrew Klavan would put it) have given us anemic economic growth, stagnant wages, higher health care costs, record joblessness, a government that can force us to buy a commercial product, and a criminally naïve foreign policy that is leaving the US in greater danger and a world in turmoil. Although this is all true, realize that once the clean up starts, you’ll find that many things made awful with Obama’s help will come back quickly, almost as if it wants to recover. All it needs is the removal the Progressive jack boot of government from its neck. With some very simple solutions, the next GOP President will come off looking truly amazing as the country comes roaring back.
So don’t worry. As the good book says, “Weeping may tarry for the night, but joy comes with the morning” (Psalm 30:5b). America’s flirtation with monarchy will soon be over, and our beloved Republic, that was always there, will reemerge to throw of its fetters and breathe the free air again… soon.
2016 is finally upon us. We’ve made our resolutions, perhaps we’ve started our taxes for the previous year, and quite probably we’ve turned our thoughts to which candidate for President we will ultimately throw our support behind, because it is indeed an election year. For many, this may seem a choice of evils in which some might decide it is better to support the devil you know rather than the devil you don’t. In a future article, I plan on laying out a case for whom I think will make the best President out of those currently running for that august office, but before I light a candle I thought I’d take a moment to curse the darkness; and darkness… thy name is Hillary. Please join me as we explore a few of the many reasons that should disqualify Hillary as a serious candidate for anything, in “The Devil You Know – The Hillary Candidacy.”
Hillary Has No Accomplishments
Hillary is an intriguing character in politics. If you can say little else for her, this is true. And while she’s more Lady Macbeth than Mother Theresa, she is no less fascinating. One interesting thing about her is that, although she is known far and wide and has been a public servant of sorts for decades, many would be hard pressed, if asked, to add one major
positive accomplishment to her that could be objectively acknowledged, even when posed to her most devoted of supporters. Certainly, she is a reliable progressive (if you can accept that as an accomplishment), at least when ideals don’t get in the way of her personal empowerment. For example, consider the multiple times that, rather than go to the defense of violated women as you’d think her feminist principles would demand, she attempted to intimidate and silence all the women that brought allegations of sexual abuse and rape against her husband. * I will admit, however, that this particular hypocrisy doesn’t seem to resonate with the Democrat rank and file, nor matter to liberal media pundits such as Joy Behar, who seem fine with a rapist-in-chief, as long as they’re a progressive rapist. **
Typically, when asked to point to an example of a Hillary triumph, the faithful might respond with “She was First Lady,” “She was a Senator,” or “She was Secretary of State.” However, all these positions should be vehicles of her accomplishments, not accomplishments in themselves, and nearly all of her rivals have similar titles to point to that would make them just as qualified, if having titles were all it took.
Continuing, the flummoxed supporter might turn to identity politics in order to make Hillary accomplished, saying that if elected, Hillary would be the first woman President, but again, being female is not an accomplishment and says little about the person or what they would do as President; for that, you are forced to scour her record in a desperate attempt to find some evidence that Hillary is more than an entitled and self-obsessed politician who is merely marking time until she can ascend to the Executive, having time or patience for little else. This task is problematic. When she was a Senator for eight years, she only authored three bills that became law, spending the rest of her legislative efforts in the Senate being a tag-along to the labors of others. *** And as Secretary of State, aside from leaked pictures of her boozing it up abroad as one of the most jet-settingest SOSs in American history, **** she has little to show for it but a world on fire, catastrophe wherever she has laid a hand. Egypt, Russia, Libya, Syria, Iran are all examples of foreign policy failures held equally by Obama and Hillary. To find a Hillary accomplishment you have to think small, such as citing a speech she made about women while in China, or have to look way back through very thick rose-colored glasses to the Senate or her time as First Lady, exhuming some of those moldering old bones. ***** This begs the question, besides her gender and name recognition, what advantage is there to a Hillary Presidency that we might not have in more accomplished candidates? Ultimately, all Hillary has are accumulated titles and fame, with little in the way of key positive successes.
Hillary is Corrupt
Before I get too far into this, let me be clear: Hillary Clinton belongs in prison. One need not go down the rabbit hole of wild-eyed conspiracy theories to know this; all that is needed is to read the public records and news articles written at the time: the court rulings against her for improper and illegal activities, her felonious associates, and her shady dealings are all there. She, more than any politician in recent memory embodies a selfishness that transcends all other concerns, including any political belief or cause that she may subscribe to. There is no principle too dear to abandon, nor comrade too loyal to cast off if it helps Hillary achieve her goals. Wherever she goes, her wake leaves the fetid stench of putrefaction. She is the Nixon of our times; the quintessence of corruption.
Anyone who’s even taken a casual interest in her political life has to be at least a little taken aback by how many times she has courted scandal, and perhaps how many more times she’s come out of it virtually unscathed, while all around her political allies and friends end up as convicted felons or otherwise hammered by the courts for their illegal activities (i.e. Gov. Jim Guy Tucker, the McDougals, etc.). ****** Occasionally, some are rewarded for their loyalty and silence (Susan McDougal received an end-of-term pardon), ******* but those that cross her, like Jim McDougal, who agreed to testify against the Clintons, end up conveniently dead before they can do any damage. ******** And speaking of corpses, let’s not forget Vince Foster, who, after handling Hillary’s taxes in one of her many scandals, committed “suicide,” leaving behind a torn suicide note that was deemed a forgery. *********
The appearance of impropriety hangs on Hillary like Coleridge’s albatross, but because of her willing accomplices in the media who don’t report it or under-report it when compared to GOP scandals, most of America knows little of HRC’s dark side. Of course, Hillary blames a “vast right-wing conspiracy,” ********** a phrase coined by her few months before her husband not only settled a sexual harassment suit for nearly one million dollars, *********** a tacit admission of guilt, but was also disbarred from practicing law ************ and impeached for perjury and obstruction of justice in that case. ************* However, if you don’t don your tin-foil hat and hold Hillary to be merely the innocent target of evil powers, then you are left with the inescapable conclusion that she’s either massively corrupt or the unluckiest woman in politics, so thick is the cloud of venality around her.
This article won’t contain all of the legal judgements against the Clintons; their dealings with, their pardons of, and their acceptance of donations from terrorists, drug-dealers, spies, and foreign representatives. If you want to view a 20 minute video summation of Hillary’s dirty deeds, follow the link at the end of the article, ************** but first, here is a short list from her recent history:
Possible selling of influence as Secretary of State. ***************
Using 94% of donations to The Clinton Foundation for uses other than charity. ****************
Calling for an investigation into a corporation that lapsed in donations to the Clintons. *****************
Removing classified documents from the State Department, a violation of the Espionage Act and Federal Records Act. ******************
Maintaining a private e-mail server containing over 1300 of the fore-mentioned classified government documents, ******************* with each instance being a violation of the Espionage Act and Federal Records Act. ******************
Obstruction of justice in attempting to destroy evidence of wrong-doing by wiping the fore-mentioned server, a violation of the Title 18 United States Code Section 2071. ******************
Many of these charges, if she would be convicted of them, are felonies, carrying a sentence that includes years of confinement in a federal prison and, in the case of her email activities, a barring from seeking future public office. ******************* It is a sad fact that the current Democrat occupant of the White House and his politicized Justice Department seem reluctant to take any legal action against HRC; one assumes that in addition to not wanting hasten his party’s expulsion from power, HRC might know where some of Obama’s bodies are buried. However, with the FBI criminal investigation coming to a close, and with rumblings that the FBI might revolt against Obama, as they did against Nixon during Watergate, if Obama fails to file charges against Hillary in a criminal case that is about to reach critical mass (so great is the evidence against her). ******************** With the charges to possibly come within 60 days, Hillary may yet find the justice that she has so long eluded.