HRC: The Russians Did It – Amanda S. Green
As we near the end of HRC’s book, we finally get to see what she thinks about the Russians and the 2016 election. I could sum it all up with “Bad Putin, Worse Trump” but that wouldn’t make for a very interesting post. Besides, there is sooo much more there. Starting with the fact that, within four paragraphs, she blames our lack of faith in institutions like the media and academia, the Mercer family, the Koch brothers, Trump and Vladimir Putin for her loss. Again, what happens is everyone else’s fault but her own.
In 2016 our democracy was assaulted by a foreign adversary determined to mislead our people, enflame our divisions, and throw an election to its preferred candidate. (pg 326)
Standing on its own, that statement could be seen as a condemnation for what the Democratic National Committee did with regard to the Bernie Sanders campaign. Except HRC means the Russians, in particular Putin. Funny how she could sit there and dictate this with a straight face, knowing how her own campaign and the DNC leadership had done all it could to steal the nomination from Sanders and his supporters. But, as we’ve discussed before, the rules don’t apply to HRC. She is above it all, in her own mind at least.
Many Americans had lost faith in the institutions that previous generations relied on for objective information, including government, academia, and the press, leaving them vulnerable to a sophisticated misinformation campaign. (pg 326)
Gee, Hils, why have we lost faith in those so-called institutions? Could it be because they are no longer objective? It’s difficult to trust a press that is more interested in making the news instead of reporting it, a press that has shown its bias over and over again. Don’t believe me? Look at the recent headlines concerning our First Lady. As for trusting the government, you mean the government like the Obama Administration that is now under attack for the way it turned a blind eye to sexual misconduct on the Hill? Of course, you yourself are guilty of that, aren’t you, Hils? And as for academia, sorry, but I don’t want to trust the socialist leaning higher learning institutions to tell me how to help preserve the country I love so much. Nope, that’s not going to happen.
It is in this turmoil of mistrust that Putin, according to HRC, began his assault on our country, one aimed at making sure she didn’t become our next president. Why would he not want her sitting in the Oval Office, you ask. She’s happy to answer. “Our relationship has been sour for a long time. Putin doesn’t respect women and despises anyone who stands up to him, so I’m a double problem.” (pg 327) Not that she can point to anything other than criticizing some of his policies. But that, in her mind, is standing up to him.
Of course, this is also the woman who has delusions about her place in government after the 2008 election. If you ever had any doubt about it, this comment should erase it. “When President Obama and I came into office in 2009.” Think about that for a moment. On the surface, the statement seems innocent enough but then look deeper. The statement implies she was elected to office along with Obama, if not as co-president then as vice president. She wasn’t. She didn’t hold elected office and she didn’t come “into office” in that manner. She was appointed and had to be confirmed. That’s a bit different from having a mandate from the electorate. But she doesn’t see the difference, and that should worry all of us.
As does her belief that, had she remained Secretary of State, things wouldn’t have gotten worse where Putin’s concerned. In fact, she claims they went from “bad to worse” (pg 330) We’re not just talking about US relations with Russia but things inside of Russia itself. She spends several pages discussing how bad Putin is and how she could see it all. Funny, I don’t remember her spending too much time talking about what she would have done during those years. She didn’t come out and offer to help the Obama Administration deal with someone she saw as a serious world threat. No, she kept quiet and Putin only became the Devil on Earth when she needed another person to blame for her loss.
Of course, bad as Putin is, Trump is worse. Never, ever forget that or she will remind you. In fact, she writes about his “budding bromance” with Putin (pg 333). “He doesn’t just like Putin – he seems to want to be like Putin, a white authoritarian leader who could put down dissenters, repress minorities, disenfranchise voters, weaken the press and amass untold billions for himself. He dreams of Moscow on the Potomac.”
I don’t know whether to laugh or cry as I read that. She managed to get race into her attack on the President. She, who spent so much time attacking the white working class voters, basically saying they weren’t good enough to vote for her. A tactic that could also be seen as repressing a part of the electorate. And let’s not forget about her attacks on women who didn’t vote for her – repression and disenfranchising voters. She’s spent the entire book talking about how evil the media was to her and how there should be rules in place to prevent such bias in reporting. Couldn’t that be seen as weakening the press? And can anyone say “Clinton Foundation”? As for Moscow on the Hudson, hasn’t the DNC been trying to instill socialism in our land for generations?
Trump has a long-standing worldview that aligns well with Putin’s agenda. He is suspicious of American allies, doesn’t think values should play a role in foreign policy, and doesn’t seem to believe the United States should continue carrying the mantle of global leadership. . . urging America to stop defending allies who should be taking care of themselves. Trump said the world was taking advantage of the United States and laughing at us. (pp334-335)
Considering how Obama treated our allies, our real allies, and did so while Clinton was SecState, I find it ironic that she can write the above. Which allies are she talking about? The ones who share our ideals of freedom and trade? No. Absolutely not. She is more worried about those who stand with hands out, more than happy to take our money while plotting our downfall. I’ve no doubt she was one of those who decried Ambassador Haley’s speech to the United Nations, that bastion of money grabbers and anti-American sentiment. Well, to hell with them. We can’t afford to continue supporting those nations that want nothing more than to see the United States fail. I wonder, has HRC ever heard the adage, “Charity begins at home”? Perhaps it is time to turn our sights to fixing the problems here before we worry about what’s happening elsewhere.
Ah, but the blame game doesn’t end with Putin. HRC throws in WikiLeaks as well.
On July 22, WikiLeaks published about twenty thousand stolen DNC emails. It highlighted a handful of messages that included offensive comments about Bernie Sanders. (pg 339) Not once does she apologize for those offensive comments. Nor does she admit the cards had been stacked against Bernie by the DNC and members of her own campaign. Oh no, instead she complains because the leaks set off his supporters who were still upset he hadn’t won the nomination and claims the leak was to drive a wedge in the party, insuring Trump’s win.
“In my view, Assange is a hypocrite who deserves to be held accountable for his actions.” (pg 343) Am I the only one to see the irony in this statement? She wants Assange held accountable for the hacking of the DNC servers and the leaking of documents but she continues to do a song and dance to obscure her own role in the deaths of our people in Benghazi. She decries any attempt to hold her husband – or herself – responsible for Slick Willie’s sexual antics, behavior that from anyone else she would call sexual assault. She who erased how many emails off her server instead of letting someone else determine if they might have been germane to the investigation of her actions as SecState. But she wants Assange held responsible for his actions. Why? Because they weren’t what she approved of. That’s why. Go against the queen and face beheading, figuratively if not literally.
I felt physically ill to read the following: As Secretary of State, I was responsible for the safety of our officers around the world, and I knew that releasing those confidential reports put not only them in danger but also their foreign contacts. . . .(pg 344)
How dare she? How dare she! The only safety she is or has been concerned with is her own. She’s proven that time and again over the years.
HRC spends more than 40 pages laying out her case that she lost because of the Russians, because we were too foolish as voters not to see what really mattered. But she has a solution. First, we have to end “the war on truth”. Pardon me while I laugh hysterically for a moment. The thought of her recognizing the truth and not her own perverted version of it is more than a bit comic.
First, we need to get to the bottom of what really happened in 2016. (pg 370). That’s easy, Hils. You lost. You can’t admit it or accept it but you LOST and you still aren’t president. Ironic, isn’t it, that the media she’s been blaming for being so mean to her is who she wants to keep digging to make sure the “truth” comes out.
Second, we need to get serious about cyber warfare. Government and the private sector need to work together more closely to improve our defenses. (pg 370) That is one thing I can agree with her on. But I have one question for her. Why wasn’t she screaming from the highest rafters about this when she was SecState? Why didn’t she raise this concern after leaving office and before becoming a candidate? Why now? Oh, I know, because she lost and she has to find a reason why that doesn’t involve her own failings.
Third, we need to get tough with Putin. . .The Obama administration proved with crippling sanctions against Iran that this kind of pressure can force our adversaries to change course. (pg 371) That’s right, Obama’s administration was sooooo successful in dealing with our enemies. And she wants us to put what sort of sanctions on Russia? We’re to do this by strengthening NATO and helping our allies reduce their energy dependence on Russia. But she doesn’t say how – or how we’re supposed to pay for it because you know she wants the US to foot the bill.
Fourth, we need to beat back the assault on truth and reason here at home and rebuild trust in our institutions. . . Companies like Facebook, Twitter, and Google have already begun taking steps – adjusting algorithms, deactivating bot networks and partnering with fact-checkers – but they must do more. . . The mainstream media also has a responsibility to do more to debunk the lies infecting our public life and more directly hoe the liars accountable. (pg 372)
Let’s see. How have Facebook, Twitter and Google been doing? They’ve silenced conservative voices. I guess that’s a check in HRC’s column. They have no problem showing ISIS and similar groups torturing and beheading their victims but heaven help anyone posting against those groups. Another check as far as HRC is concerned. MSM – well, you know my feelings about the mainstream media and it bias. HRC doesn’t want the bias gone. She wants it strengthened and guaranteed to back her even stronger than it has before.
But that’s okay. They are “our institutions” and we, as voters, should trust them. Riiiight.
Except it is so wrong.
HRC lives in her own world, that much is clear. It’s a world I’m glad I don’t live in. It is a world where she continues to angle for power. She is not going to go gently into the night. This book, as well as her public appearances since the election, prove it. She can’t forgive the American electorate for not putting her into power. It’s our fault we denied her dream and she’s going to make us pay for it – one way or the other.
(You can find the other installments in this series at the following links: What Happened or How I Suffered for this Blog and had to Share, Grit and Gratitude, HRC Gets Caught Trying, A New Deal, A Square Deal or How She Wanted to be the Next Roosevelt, It’s All His Fault, Turning Mourning into a Movement, HRC: Idealism and Realism, HRC: Making History and HRC: Those Damn Emails.)
[I know this is hard to watch, imagine what it must be like to read the book. If you want to help finance Amanda’s liquor bill, use this address Send the woman a drink-SAH]