The presidential candidate who
has been accused of being the “Milli Vanilli” of politics may have her public
lines so well-rehearsed that she doesn’t need to lip sync them, but behind the
façade is the unmistakable presence of the rot:
F--k off! It's enough I have to see you shit-kickers every day! I'm not
going to talk to you, too! Just do your Goddamn job and keep your mouth
shut."
"Stay the f--k back, stay the f--k back away from me! Don't come
within ten yards of me, or else! Just f--king do as I say, Okay!?"
"If you want to remain on this detail, get your f--king ass over
here and grab those bags!"
"Come on Bill, put your dick up! You can't f--k her here!”
With that kind of talk, no wonder
this white person doesn't want to encounter any of those “super-predators” on the street; they might
teach her a thing or two about what to expect when not speaking “respectfully.”
And Hillary Clinton has the gall to accuse Donald Trump of being
temperamentally “unfit” to be president? Well, he is—which only means we have
two candidates who temperamentally unfit to be president.
But then again, Hillary Clinton
is, in her own way, a “super-predator” too. The
first three of the above comments were directed at men assigned the thankless
task of serving in her security detail. The fourth comment, of course, gave her
away. The foulmouthed, insensitive and contemptuous person who Clinton is in
fact has had her public image scraped clean by the media and coated with a
varnish of carefully crafted deception and fabrication. Virtually everything
that comes out of Clinton’s mouth in public is a prefabricated false
statement—and when it is not, it is only a well-rehearsed line that has no
meaning unto itself. But people have become so accustomed to it that Clinton’s
lies are just part of the package; people pretend that it is “OK” because of
the “unfair” attacks on her, and she must be permitted to “protect” herself
with a wall of lies.
It is thus with some amusement to
hear Clinton say she is “very experienced” with men who “go off the
reservation.” There can be little doubt that for Clinton, “going off the
reservation” is something she does every day. It nauseates me every time I see
her on television giving an interview and displaying her deceit so cleverly,
knowing that everything she says is calculated right down to the last syllable,
rather than a true reflection of what she believes.
Clinton’s
contempt for people who she believes are “beneath” her—and that includes just
about everyone else—goes double for her contempt for rules and regulations that
govern ethical and lawful behavior. “Going off the reservation” obviously
applies to her sense of ethics, in evidence from the State Department’s
Inspector General’s report that found repeated evidence of Clinton’s apparent
obliviousness to rules governing the handling of classified documents, public
recordkeeping and security. On May 8, Clinton stated on CBS’ “Face the Nation” "Well,
as I have said many times ... I was absolutely permitted" to use a private
email server. But Factcheck.org tells us that according the IG, that is a
“false” statement. Save for Clinton’s diehard sycophants, everyone knows that
Clinton is lying; Factcheck’s analysis of the IG report is that everything
Clinton has said in her defense has either been an outright lie, or a shameless
twisting of facts. Factcheck also noted that:
“The
IG report said Clinton ‘had an obligation’ to discuss her email system with the
department, but it could find ‘no evidence’ that Clinton sought approval for
her unusual email arrangement. If she did, the report says her request would
have been denied by the bureaus of Diplomatic Security and Information Resource
Management.”
The
IG noted just how extensive Clinton used her mobile devices to conduct official
business on her private server. Taking account just the 30,000 emails she
agreed to release, that is an average of 20 emails every day for four years—and
that does not include the 30,000 that she illegally deleted, or so that is only
the amount she claims she deleted. We will never know the actual number, or
what those “too personal” emails actually were about.
Furthermore,
“Throughout
Secretary Clinton’s tenure, the FAM stated that normal day-to-day operations
should be conducted on an authorized AIS, yet OIG found no evidence that the
Secretary requested or obtained guidance or approval to conduct official
business via a personal email account on her private server. According to the
current CIO [chief information officer] and Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic
Security, Secretary Clinton had an obligation to discuss using her personal
email account to conduct official business with their offices, who in turn
would have attempted to provide her with approved and secured means that met
her business needs. However, according to these officials, DS [Bureau of
Diplomatic Security] and IRM [Bureau of Information Resource Management] did
not — and would not — approve her exclusive reliance on a personal email
account to conduct Department business, because of the restrictions in the FAM
and the security risks in doing so.”
The Associated Press story
following up on the IG’s report noted that Clinton’s frequent claims that she
is “willing” to speak with investigators was merely for public consumption. In
fact, she and her key aids refused to be questioned by the IG (and we can
assume, the FBI): “According to the findings, she claimed approval she didn’t
have and declined to be interviewed for the report despite saying ‘I’m more
than ready to talk to anybody anytime.’ Scrutiny of her unusual email practices
appeared to be unwelcome, despite her contention those practices were well
known and ‘fully above board.’”
It seems that only Clinton’s inner
circle of Amazons knew the extent of the dependency on keeping the outside
ignorant of their method of communication, and that other state department
officials were certainly “’Unaware of the scope or extent’ of her email
practices,” according to the IG. Not only that, but “Two employees in the
Office of Information Resources Management discussed concerns about her use of
a personal email account in separate 2010 meetings. One of the employees
stressed in one of the meetings that the information being transmitted needed
to be preserved to satisfy federal records laws…They were instructed by the
director of the department ‘never to speak of the Secretary’s personal email
system again,’ according to the report.”
During a May, 2015 press
conference, Clinton asserted that “The system we used was set up for President
Clinton’s office. And it had numerous safeguards. It was on property guarded by
the Secret Service. And there were no security breaches.” Forget the suggestion
that the first Clinton administration was engaged in illegal concealment of
public records; the IG report concluded that
“Evidence emerged of hacking
attempts, though it’s unclear whether they were successful…On Jan. 9, 2011, an
adviser to former President Bill Clinton notified the State Department’s deputy
chief of staff for operations that he had to shut down the server because he
suspected ‘someone was trying to hack us and while they did not get in i didnt
(sic) want to let them have the chance to. Later that day, he sent another
note. ‘We were attacked again so I shut (the server) down for a few min.’ The
following day the deputy chief emailed top Clinton aides and instructed them
not to email the secretary ‘anything sensitive.’” There was no evidence that
this security “suggestion” was ever taken seriously by Clinton and her
associates. The AP went to say that Clinton’s email system was so vulnerable
that “It appeared to allow users to connect openly over the internet to control
it remotely.”
Last September Clinton again
asserted that “What I did was allowed. It was allowed by the State Department.
The State Department has confirmed that.” But as noted before, Clinton was
again lying; she neither bothered to request clarification or approval for storing
classified information on her private server, nor would it have been approved
if she had. She merely took what she wanted, regardless of rules and
regulations. No one and nothing was going to tell her what she could or
couldn’t do.
Clinton has defended herself by
claiming that “other” secretaries of state used personal email accounts, but
this was again a false statement. Only Colin Powell used a personal email
account, but he did not use a personal server to deliberately conceal all
communications from public access. And yes, Clinton is running for president,
not Powell.
How can we trust someone with the
highest office in land who can’t tell a truthful word if her life depended on
it? How can we trust anyone so dull that she doesn’t know that 2,000 of the emails
she agreed to hand contained classified and above information?
Jonah Goldberg, writing in the Chicago Tribune, noted that “From the
earliest days of this scandal — and it is a scandal — Clinton has lied. Unlike
Donald Trump’s lies, which he usually vomits up spontaneously like a vesuvian
geyser, Clinton’s were carefully prepared, typed up and repeated for all the
world to hear over and over again…I would think this is an important
distinction. Neither of the candidates is worthy of the office in my eyes, but
voters might discount many of Trump’s deceits as symptoms of his glandular
personality. Much like Vice President Joe Biden, who always gets a pass for
launching errant fake-fact missiles from the offline silo that is his mouth,
Trump is often seen as entertainingly spontaneous…Meanwhile, Clinton — who
lives many time zones away from the word “entertaining” — is marketing herself
as the mature and upstanding grown-up. She does nothing spontaneously. And that
means all of her lies are premeditated.”
There can be no doubt that Bernie
Sanders has fought her tooth-and-nail to the very end because of his own
contempt for the complete fraud that Clinton is. Pundits argue if she is
“right” or “left,” but those words have no meaning when it is applied to her
political philosophy, because she has none. Clinton has only one purpose in
life, and that is to serve her own megalomania. Good god, how could this awful
person have gotten this far? Thanks a lot, Bill Clinton, for the crime of
actually marrying this person and allowing her work off your own “popularity.”
Regardless of what she believes, no one would have given her the time of day
otherwise, so odious she is in private, and deceitful in public.
No comments:
Post a Comment