“Hulu” documentary portrays Chelsea Clinton as the rock of a crumbling dynasty.
By Phil Giraldi
Hillary Clinton, who lost to Donald Trump in 2016, is highly unlikely to emerge as either the Democratic Party presidential candidate or even for the vice president’s slot, even if there is a brokered convention, but she is making clear that she will be relevant in whatever transpires. The chameleon-like Clintons have long been known for their ability to punish anyone who stands in the way of their ambition. They are so empowered because hubby Bill was essentially able to recreate the Democratic Party in his own image as a centrist, taking control of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and moving it away from its progressive and working-class roots.
The DNC continues to be a Clinton proxy to this day, and its biases were very visible in its successful effort to deny Bernie Sanders the presidential candidacy in 2016, giving that opportunity instead to a deeply flawed Hillary Clinton, who many Americans consider an unindicted felon for her self-serving carelessness with classified information. She underestimated the intelligence of the electorate, and her perception that flyover America was inhabited by “deplorables” almost certainly cost her the election when the hard-working folks she was denigrating figured it out and voted for Trump. Others would point to her war crimes, to include her role in the destruction of a non-threatening Libya when she was secretary of state, which featured her chuckling when Muammar Qaddafi was killed by a bayonet shoved up his rear end, an incident which led her to quip, “We came, we saw, he died!”
Hillary is still trying to prove that she is the kingmaker or possibly queenmaker in the Democratic Party. She is featured in a new documentary entitled appropriately enough “Hillary,” focused on her 2016 campaign, which she has been discussing on television and radio. [See related article on page 10.—Ed.] Given the platform, she has also weighed in heavily on her party’s nominee for president. The process has often been less than pretty. The documentary, of course, is full of lies and evasions about her relationship with her wandering husband and it even includes some of his more mendacious comments about why he had sex with “that woman,” Monica Lewinsky. And it completely ignores how Hillary defended her spouse by denigrating the women who dared to come forward after being raped or assaulted. So much for her feminism.
Anyone who believes in the United States and wants it to fulfill the founders’ vision of a nation and government that work hard to benefit their people should be most appalled by Hillary’s manipulation of the nomination process within her party. She worked through her surrogate Debbie Wasserman Schultz in 2016, but that year was a cakewalk compared to the present. In 2016 Hillary believed she had by right a lock on the nomination as well as on the election to president, so what she did through Wasserman Schultz was more or less carried out behind the scenes, as the DNC emails revealed. Currently, Hillary is out in the open. She has been doing her best to bring down Sanders for a second time and to promote a senile and largely inert Joe Biden, who will be easily controllable.
But far more disgraceful is what Hillary has done to Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii. Gabbard is a somewhat controversial figure, but many individuals involved in the antiwar movement have taken time to talk with her and have come away impressed.
She has stayed in the race as long as she could, announcing she was ending her campaign on March 19, despite the fact that the Democratic Party establishment, to include the Clintons, have been out to destroy her. Gabbard believes that the United States should end nearly all its wars overseas, which are a symptom of a fractured foreign and national security policy, and stayed in the race to promote that view.
Clinton’s hatred of Gabbard dates back to 2016, when Tulsi, then a vice chair for the DNC, endorsed Sanders. Gabbard did so knowing that “Clinton had a stranglehold over the Democratic Party and that crossing Clinton (who considered herself the ‘inevitable nominee’) could mean the end of her own political career.” Clinton was reportedly “extremely angry—to put it mildly” by the endorsement and had her aides send Tulsi a wave of threatening emails.
Hillary’s first major attack against candidate Gabbard in 2019 was featured in a podcast hosted by former President Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign manager David Plouffe that was recorded last fall. It came shortly after Clinton provided an assessment in an interview as part of a documentary on her 2016 failed campaign, smearing Sanders, another contender for the nomination, saying that he is “not liked” by his peers in Congress.
The comments on Gabbard came during a discussion of the upcoming election. Clinton speculated that President Donald Trump and the GOP would likely be “grooming” a potential spoiler candidate for a third-party bid to take away votes from the Democrats. She said “I’m not making any predictions, but I think they’ve got their eye on somebody who’s currently in the Democratic primary and they’re grooming her to be the third-party candidate. She’s the favorite of the Russians. They have a bunch of sites and bots and other ways of supporting her so far, and that’s assuming Jill Stein will give it up because she’s also a Russian asset.”
Clinton did not name Gabbard, but one of her spokespersons later confirmed the “Russian asset” comment referred to Gabbard. The reference to the completely respectable Stein, the Green Party candidate, was based on the oft-repeated claim by Clinton and others that Stein was being supported by Russian agents and that she took votes away from the Democratic candidate. Clinton has also suggested that Moscow is “grooming” Gabbard to run third-party and steal votes from the Democrats.
Gabbard responded to the Clinton attack with: “Thank you Hillary Clinton. You, the queen of warmongers, embodiment of corruption, and personification of the rot that has sickened the Democratic Party for so long, have finally come out from behind the curtain. From the day I announced my candidacy, there has been a concerted campaign to destroy my reputation. We wondered who was behind it and why. Now we know—it was always you, through your proxies and powerful allies in the corporate media and war machine, afraid of the threat I pose.”
Gabbard continued her campaign, though she received little media coverage. She qualified for the upcoming debate among candidates going by the existing DNC rules but was blocked from participating on March 15 in Phoenix by an abrupt and unexpected change in the guidelines for being included. The new qualifying criteria require a candidate to have earned at least 20% of the delegates awarded thus far, which means that only Biden and Sanders participated.
Gabbard was the last Democratic woman contender for the nomination, but that did not stop Hillary, who got in the proverbial last shot in an interview with CNN’s Fareed Zakaria, saying: “We no longer have a woman in the presidential race. There are a lot of reasons for that. We started off with I think six, and now have none.”
Clinton went on to praise Biden, saying “he is building a coalition like I had,” once again reinforcing the impression that when Hillary speaks it is inevitably all about herself. Her coalition consisted of the usual constituencies obsessed with their grievances and egged on by the social justice warriors. She apparently has forgotten that she lost in 2016, or possibly it is just that she can only see a vast right-wing conspiracy against her that included the Russians, Gabbard, Stein, and Sanders.
That Gabbard, a genuine peace candidate, was deliberately marginalized in the Democratic Party nomination process in spite of having considerable grassroots support does not speak well either for the party or for the system of government by corruption that prevails in the United States. Sanders, too, should be aggrieved over the way most of the remaining candidates on the eve of Super Tuesday were bribed to leave the race and turn over their delegates to Biden, enabling him to “surge.”
Gabbard has sued Hillary for $50 million for defamation due to her being labeled a Russian asset. In the suit she describes Hillary as “a cutthroat politician by any account” and claims that the former First Lady has been working to destroy Gabbard’s presidential campaign as payback for 2016. May Tulsi prevail. And one has to hope that we all have heard the last of the Clintons—but don’t count on it.
Philip Giraldi is a former CIA counter-terrorism specialist and military intelligence officer and a columnist and television commentator. He is also the executive director of the Council for the National Interest. His other articles appear on the website of “The Unz Review.”
Fiction as Fact: “Hillary” Debuts on Cable
By S.T. Patrick
Twenty-two years ago, President Bill Clinton, characteristically biting his bottom lip, banged on the podium and wagged his finger at the American people. “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky,” he insisted. Clinton was impeached that same year, though he was acquitted of perjury and obstruction of justice in a 21-day Senate trial. Now, in a new documentary series “Hillary” on Hulu (a premium online streaming service offering video content, feature-length movies, and documentaries), Clinton once again attempts to redefine his explanation for his affair with then-22-year-old intern Monica Lewinsky. The affair, as explained now, was to “manage my anxieties,” the ex-president said. “It’s not a defense; it’s an explanation. It was awful. I feel terrible,” Clinton said.
“Here’s something that will take your mind off it for a while. . . . Things I did to manage my anxieties for years.” Clinton says, “I am a totally different person than I was 20 years ago.” Keen observers of the Jeffery Epstein saga may disagree, as Clinton, over the course of six years, was listed on 26 flights aboard Epstein’s private jet, nicknamed the “Lolita Express.” The Clintons were close enough to Epstein to invite Ghislaine Maxwell, the procurer-in-chief for Epstein, to Chelsea Clinton’s wedding.
The documentary focuses on former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s rise and fall after her 2016 loss to President Donald Trump. There are moments in the four-part series that are laughable and there are moments so contrived that they are clearly fictional.
Hordes of nauseating Clintonistas are paraded before the camera to tell America how impressive Hillary is. Perhaps it’s her smile or a special glint in her eye—whatever it is, these people insist she is the most impressive person they ever met.
She does deal with her polarizing public image directly. She believes a vast majority of it comes from being a strong woman, though she feels it is unfair that she is forced to spend an hour a day getting makeup done for the public.
Some of what we learned from “Hillary” deals directly with the 2020 campaign. She said of Bernie Sanders that “nobody likes him” in Congress. “He didn’t work until he was 41 and then he got elected to something. It was all just baloney, and I feel bad that people got sucked into it.”
In the emotional zenith of the series, Hillary discusses her reaction to learning about her husband’s affair with Lewinsky. “I was just devastated,” she said. “I just could not believe it. I was just so personally hurt and I said, ‘I can’t believe this. I can’t believe you lied.’ It was—anyways—horrible. And I said, ‘If this is going to be public, you’ve got to go tell Chelsea.’ ”
The documentary does not address how Hillary felt when she found out about Bill’s prior affairs (or sexual assaults, depending on who you listen to) with Leslie Millwee, Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey, Juanita Broaddrick, Dolly Browning, Elizabeth Ward, Sally Miller, Eileen Wellstone, Carolyn Moffet, Sally Perdue, Sandra Allen James, Christy Zercher, among many others. Nor does the documentary detail the smear campaigns Hillary personally launched against those women who came forward to expose her husband’s predatory sexual nature.
The “hero” of the affair episode is Chelsea Clinton, who supposedly “kept the family together” when her mother chose to “stand by her man,” but “Hillary” serves to redefine all three Clintons.
Chelsea, the future, is refocused as the strongest of the three, “the rock,” always dependable, smart, and tough. Bill is repackaged as introspective and dependable, like someone who would be a good, sturdy “First Husband.” The key here is that Hillary is repackaged as the one thing she has the most difficult time conveying to typical Americans: that she is in fact a human being. She has been angry at the unfaithful husband, she’s cried, she’s trembled, she’s been upset, she’s worried, she’s been tough, she’s smart, she’s impressive in person, and so forth. In short, “Hillary” was a four-part campaign ad for the Clinton family.
Would Hillary be the first president to appoint her daughter to a cabinet position? This is discussed, but, last time we checked, Hillary isn’t running for anything. If you believe former Clinton advisor Dick Morris, Hillary has formulated a plan to swoop in and gain the Democratic nomination at the upcoming convention. The theory says that Bloomberg will finance the effort and that Biden will do his job and erase Sanders from contention. But when Sanders is gone, the party will have a sudden internal discussion with itself regarding Biden’s mental health. Then the convention turns to a savior. In come the Clintons, on the tail of a successful four-part public relations-bolstering campaign ad. That’s the scuttlebutt.
It’s typically Clintonian. When your actions, words, and history are so foul, turn to your friends in Hollywood to set you free. “Hillary” is a portrait of a paralyzingly political family that obsessively attempts to make America believe that their failures smell like the White House rose garden.
S.T. Patrick holds degrees in both journalism and social studies education. He spent 10 years as an educator and now hosts the “Midnight Writer News Show.” His email is [email protected]. He is also an occasional contributor to TBR history magazine and the current managing editor of Deep Truth Journal (DTJ), a new conspiracy-focused publication available from the AFP Online Store.
