For previous discussions of Hillary Clinton, the Senator/politician, see:
Hillary Clinton was also motivated by her extreme dislike of people who she feels had betrayed her or her husband. During the Lewinsky affair, she was behind the attacks on Bill’s accusers. Her interactions with the Secret Service are well-documented, and she insisted that when military advisers visit the White House, they do not wear military uniforms. While campaigning for the Senate in upstate New York, she allegedly said she saw no financial gain (campaign contributions) in talking to dairy farmers.
This is exemplified in her deep distrust of any conservative who she formulated in her mind had conspired in some personal vendetta against her and Bill. She may not have invented the idea of “a vast right wing conspiracy,” but neither did she do anything to dispel the myth. Granted, some of the accusations were the creations of right wing conspiracy theorists, but it was not as if her side had no conspiracy theorists.
During the 2008 campaign, Clinton often cited a trip she had made to war-torn Bosnia in 1996 during Bill Clinton’s administration. She stated that she and daughter Chelsea had come under hostile fire upon leaving the plane, but that they both just ducked their heads and got on the waiting buses. She recounted this event several times and in personal interviews with the media. However, reporter Sharyl Atkisson had accompanied Clinton on the trip and reported, including filmed footage, that no such thing happened. Clinton later dismissed the story as being tired from the long campaign and that she may have been mistaken.
After she left the State Department and started talking about imaginary bullets on a tarmac in Bosnia, journalist Sharyl Atkisson exposed that lie. Surprisingly, or not, Sharyl Atkisson became the subject of a probe and had her phone and emails hacked. Damaging information was placed on her computer’s hard drive by someone. Could it be that Clinton had some hand in this being that Atkisson had essentially made a fool of her?
There are other examples of Hillary Clinton viciously going after political opponents or those she deemed an enemy in her mind too numerous they could fill an entire book. It is a well-known joke in political circles about the number of dead bodies left in the wake of the Clintons. Of course, this is simply the musings of the conspiracy theorists, but theories that irk Clinton nevertheless.
There is a fourth and final pattern intrinsic to Hillary Clinton behind political expediency, money, and holding grudges. One could add America’s law enforcement agencies, Congress, and investigative personnel finding no wrongdoing where it becomes obvious to even the most casual observer that there was wrongdoing.
This is the most disturbing trend: whenever caught with her hand in the cookie jar, she gets out of it. For whatever reason, Clinton has amassed a cabal of protection around her. She survived being chastised by a federal judge over her failed health reform effort with nary a scratch on her record. Her actions against Bill’s accusers are well-documented, yet she suffers no consequences. Her involvement with the Clinton Foundation is buried in the labyrinthine organization of the Foundation placing layers of deniability between her personally and any wrongdoing. She is not afraid to throw associates under the bus if it suits her immediate political goals. The so-called Bosnia sniper fire is indicative. She was caught in a red-handed lie trying to embellish her foreign policy credentials in 2007-2008. Yet, she passed that embellished debacle unscathed.
As Secretary of State, she escaped any retribution for her terrible record with Russia, in Libya, Syria or elsewhere. Most egregiously, she escaped any culpability or liability for sharing top secret memos among staff and associates on an unsecured private server, then had that server “scrubbed,” losing 30,000 emails in the process. Even more troubling, she emerged from 13 hours of testimony before Congress regarding Benghazi. Instead of being held accountable, the line most remembered from that hearing was, “What difference does it make now?”
Why anyone would want to cover for Hillary Clinton is the reason so many conspiracy theories have popped up around her. Perhaps, some of these events are just plain coincidence or maybe she has a penchant for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. But after these incidences pile up and up on each other, you have to dismiss coincidence and dumb luck and realize that something is seriously amiss here.
Even today, the twice failed presidential candidate commands an oversized voice in Democrat circles. Part of the problem is the media which, for whatever reason, has been in her corner, accepting her spin on events, characterizing criticisms as the mad imaginings of conservative media figures, or simply covering for her when they have not been placing a blanket over any negative coverage of her.
Next: A closer look at Vladimir Putin’s victims. The evidence may surprise.