From Jonathan Bernstein at BloombergView:
We know one thing for sure about the wave of Clinton-related scandals over the years: People will go to any lengths to spot them and use them as fresh “proof” that Hillary and Bill Clinton are corrupt.
Take, for example, a Wall Street Journal article that alleged … well, it’s not entirely clear what it alleged. It tries to make something of a set of facts. One, Hillary and Bill Clinton have been close to Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe. Two, McAuliffe recruited Dr. Jill McCabe to run for a Virginia state senate seat in 2015 and was responsible for raising most of the money for her campaign. Three, McCabe’s husband was a senior FBI official, who, after the campaign, was promoted to deputy director and wound up involved in the investigation of Clinton’s e-mails.
What does that add up to?
While I don’t think there is a lot to this particular story, that doesn’t discount the validity of the myriad (FAR more than two) other scandals that have embroiled the Clintons over the decades. To hear Jonathan Bernstein tell it, this is simply a result of a non-ideological “transactional” political style that dear ol’ Bill and Hillary have governed by for years. In Mr. Bernstein’s partisan world there is NEVER any fire where smoke is found. (At least not when it comes to the Clintons.)
Not even when Hillary is under FBI investigation for her email and national security debacle is there any fire. Not even when Bill has a highly irregular and unethical secret impromptu meeting on the airport tarmac with the Attorney General just days before the FBI announces whether they will recommend an indictment or not. Nope nothing to see here, all of you silly conspiracy theorists. Now if they had been Republicans… well then we know that would be a different story. Right?!
TP,
I would suppose you also believe Hillary killed Vince Foster before she “founded ISIS”? 😉
Fire! Fire, everywhere! Lock her up!!
Are you aware….Like Clinton, the Bush White House used a private email server owned by the Republican National Committee? Shall we “lock him up”, too? If not, IOKIYAR applies.
What “national security debacle” are you referring to? Were top secrets given to enemies? If not, how is that a debacle?
Does the AG work for Bill Clinton? No. What authority did Bill have to exert over the AG? None.
Did you know the FBI director Comey was the United States Deputy Attorney General serving in George W. Bush’s administration? Are you asserting the Republican Director was ordered by Bill Clinton, through Lynch, to let Hillary off the hook?
What evidence do you have to support this conspiracy theory? How is her “crime” different from Bush’s use of private email server?
Also what specific law did Hillary break? I’ve asked you several times, and you have not responded.
Why is that? Are your beliefs impervious to reason and beyond question?
I can cite evasions and falsehoods from Hillary, but they would be based on reported and verifiable facts. I’m no fan of hers, but I do want to base my opinion on reality instead of far Right dogma.
Why not go “all Trump” and call the “nasty woman” the “devil”?
No wonder the far Right still thinks Obama is a Marxist Muslim. They will believe anything they are told by their authoritarian leaders. “Nukular” aluminum tubes, “biological labs” and Saddam in cahoots with al-Qaeda are still facts to the true believers.
ISIS was spawned by the civil war in Iraq that was sparked by Bush’s war of aggression.
Now THAT is what I call a national security debacle. Now the lunatic Right believes Trump telling them Obama “founded ISIS”. Demonization,and hate, to the highest degree.
Show us something other than the same, decades old, partisan demonization if you can. Show us you can see out of the bubble.
Although you share many of Trumps false beliefs, I have hope for you. At least you can see Trump as the dangerous liar, creep, and ignoramus he is. Climate change is not a Chinese hoax, nor a conspiracy of evil climate scientists. One day the lies will fall away. But it will be too late.
Perhaps you may find the curiosity to examine more of those beliefs.