The Clintons’ Mainstream Media Enablers

Roger Stone The Daily Caller's Men's Fashion Editor
Font Size:

In his wobbly defense of the financial self-enrichment shenanigans in the nexus between the U.S. State Department and the Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton Foundation provided as exposed in Clinton Cash, Former Presdent Bill Clinton said “Even the guy that wrote the book apparently had to admit under questioning that, ‘We didn’t have a shred of evidence for this, we just sort of thought we would throw it out there and see if it flies.’ And it won’t fly.”  

Bill has balls. Bill knows that unlike Nixon, Hillary has erased the “shred” of evidence that surely exists. This time the mainstream media including, the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, and the Wall Street Journal, have aggressively covered the Clintons’ manipulation of these two organizations to become very, very wealthy.

Hillary’s e-mails no doubt revealed exactly how the nexus of the Clinton Foundation and the Secretary of State’s office operated.

Bill Clinton, who has made $300 million since leaving the White House, actually defended his avariciousness and said, “I gotta pay the bills.” The burgeoning scandal has taken its toll. Clinton’s claim that he never knowingly acted inappropriately is as valid as his claim, “I never had sex with that woman, Monica Lewinsky.”

The current controversy over the Clinton Foundation has reminded people of the old Hilary Clinton, the one who took the furniture, paintings and china that was government property with her when she left the White House. It conjures up the Hillary of healthcare secrecy, Whitewater, the mysterious finding of Rose Law firm documents that were “previously lost” and Waco. In 1996 as First Lady she said she “ran for cover under hostile fire shortly after her plane landed in Tuzla, Bosnia.” She got caught lying about carrying two hand held computer devices, about where her grandparents were born, even about being named after Sir Edmund Hillary.

This is Hillary the co-president, in the period when she was running much of the governmental show. We also are reminded of Hillary’s war on women, to paraphrase sexual assault victim Kathleen Willey. Women voters will be shocked when they see how many women Hillary has abused and the hollowness of her “pay equality” message becomes known. Meanwhile, the Clintons stuff their pockets with millions from brutal regimes that oppress women such as Saudi Arabia, Oman, Qatar, and the Arab Emirates. These nations deny women the most basic in human rights, woman have no free speech rights, access to education, drive a car or even showing their face and they are regularly stoned for adultery. Still Hilary takes their lucre.

An AP /GFX poll showed nearly four in 10 Democrats, and more than six in 10 independents agreed that “honest” was not the best word for her. As the 2016 election evolves, more and more of the real Hillary will be both remembered and exposed. Yet some in the mainstream press continue to shill for Camp Hillary. Despite numerous credible surveys showing more and more voters doubting the integrity and truthfulness of Hilary Clinton, the New York Times put on page one a story that declared that based on a New York Times/CBS poll Hillary Clinton had sustained no damage. Incredibly the poll only asked about Hillary Clinton among Democrats. This is of course the last place you would expect Hilary’s standings to erode. No independent or swing voters or even moderate Republicans were asked about their impressions of Hilary Clinton. This is the journalistic equivalent of push polling. Broad political assertions must be based in real data not selective sampling.

Jonathan Martin wrote this breathless piece with the bold assertion that Hilary had been untouched in the cascade of negative publicity that has dominated news in recent weeks. Interviewed by CNN’s Mike Smerconish Martin doubled down on the assertion that Hillary was unscathed. Smerconish, himself once a skilled political operative, should have called him on it but didn’t. Martin is usually a perceptive reporter.

Team Hillary even bragged about the war room that supposedly quelled any adverse impact on her presidential ambitions. Annie Karnie of the Northern Virginia-based Politico bought the same line as Martin and reported Team Hilary’s self back slapping. Days later Karnie would be spoonfed a ham-handed attempt by the Clintonistas to discredit Clinton Cash author Peter Schweitzer. Karnie would print the Clinton press release as if it was reporting.

Thus journalistic malpractice gets recycled without critical analysis. This is cheerleading, not journalism; both Martin and Karnie are doing the handiwork of the Clinton campaign.

If Lance Armstrong had quit while he was ahead, he would have exited the stage with his reputation, fame and money. When the truth of his dope use began to leak, he, like the Clintons used heavy-handed private detectives in an attempt to silence those who knew the truth. Had he never mounted a comeback he would have ridden into the sunset. But he tried to come back to glory one more time. By running in 2016 Hilary invites a full examination of private and public record made by Hilary Clinton and her husband.

No amount of public relations chicanery can hide the real Hillary, foulmouthed, entitled, greedy, and when necessary vicious. After Richard Nixon met Clinton at the White House in 1993, he summed it up. “She’s cold” he said “cold as ice.”