The Clinton Campaign Is Cold Cocked

A special reward for front page of the year goes to The New York Post. Whoever thought up “Dickileaks” deserves a promotion and a raise.

 

This morning the political world is trying to recover from what seems to be a cataclysmic event. The FBI has reopened the Hillary Clinton email investigation.

Ever since Director James Comey chose not to recommend an indictment, we have been seeing a drip, drip, drip from Wikileaks. But, yesterday Comey decided that he was not going to sacrifice his reputation for Hillary Clinton.

Comey addressed his letter to both Republicans and Democrats. The Clinton campaign came out to lie about even that. Beginning with her Hillaryness herself they said that it was only sent to Republicans. They are spinning as fast as they can.

Why did he do it? Perhaps it had something to do with the following revelation, one that made it appear that the lead investigator of the original FBI investigation had been corrupted by money.

The Wall Street Journal explained:

This week we learned that Virginia GovernorTerry McAuliffe steered more than $675,000 to the political campaign of the wife of FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe, who oversaw the Clinton investigation in the FBI’s Washington D.C. field office. Mr. McAuliffe is a longtime Clinton friend who is under FBI investigation himself over campaign finances.

Today, the story is all over the press. It is on the front page of the New York Times. Chris Matthews spent an hour on it last night. Every news report has been leading with it.

Apparently, the effort to protect Hillary, and, in their minds to protect the nation from Donald Trump, had reached a tipping point. The media seems to have decided not to go the way of Anthony Weiner and Bill Clinton.

Note the analysis by journalist Carl Bernstein, hardly a shill for the radical right:

Well, there's no question that the e-mails have always been the greatest threat to her candidacy for president, that her conduct in regard to the e-mails is really indefensible and if there was going to be more information that came out, it was the one thing, as I said on the air last night, actually that could really perhaps affect this election. 

We don't know what this means yet except that it's a real bombshell. And it is unthinkable that the Director of the FBI would take this action lightly, that he would put this letter forth to the Congress of the United States saying there is more information out there about classified e-mails and call it to the attention of congress unless it was something requiring serious investigation. So that's where we are...

Is it a certainty that we won't learn before the election? I'm not sure it's a certainty we won't learn before the election. 

One thing is, it's possible that Hillary Clinton might want to on her own initiative talk to the FBI and find out what she can, and if she chooses to let the American people know what she thinks or knows is going on. People need to hear from her...

I think if she has information available to her from the FBI or any other source as to her knowledge of what these e-mails might be, hopefully she will let us know what they are and what is under discussion here. 

Right now we're all talking in a vacuum but I want to add here that in the last, oh, 36, 48 hours, there has been an undercurrent of kind of speculative discussion among some national security people that something might surface in the next few days about e-mails, and I think the expectation in this chatter -- and I took it as just chatter but informed chatter, to some extent -- was that it would relate to another round of WikiLeaks e-mails, which our Justice Department people seem to be saying is not the case, but there has been some noise in the national security community the last day or two of this kind of possibility of some kind of revelation. 

If Bernstein is correct—and his sources are significantly better than mine—then there is a there there. And Hillary is in trouble. She is in such serious trouble that only one person can save her now…. I will leave it to you to guess who.

Her campaign was on a glide path to victory and she was, dare we say it, cold cocked. It has been damaged by Hillary’s inability to deal with men. Or better, with her failure to choose better men, for herself or for her BFF.

Hillary and Huma have an exceptionally close relationship. When they travel on the campaign plane they share a cabin from which everyone else is excluded. When they stay at a hotel they share a suite. The Washington Post recently said that they were celebrating their twenty year “anniversary.” It does not take too much imagination to figure it all out.

Make of it what you wish, but it seems obvious and self-evident that these women have contracted marriages for the sake of appearances. Theirs have been marriages of convenience, political arrangements.

Surely, the marriage of Huma Abedin and Anthony Weiner was engineered by both Clintons in order to protect the Hillary/Huma relationship. In exchange Weiner would have received Clinton support for his own political ambitions. One notes also that Abedin’s family belongs to the Muslim Brotherhood and suspicions about a Hillary/Huma relationship would have been, by the rules pertaining in that organization, a capital offense.

So, Bill Maher suggested, in so many words, that Hillary had been cold cocked:

Anthony Weiner is under investigation for sexting with a underage girl across state lines, so the FBI seized all his computers. He is married—or was married—to Huma Abedin, who is Hillary Clinton’s aide, and they were using the same computer. Which begs my first question: Why is Huma using Anthony’s computer? If there’s one thing she didn’t want to go near, it would be his computer. So… Hillary’s emails are intermingled with Anthony Weiner’s sexting? No wonder she had her server wiped! I’d have had it boiled.

And he continued to make a salient point:

So once again, Hillary’s political fortunes are driven by out of control cocks. Right? This poor woman. I mean, first it was her husband’s, then it was Donald Trump’s, and now it’s Anthony Weiner’s. Or what she calls it: My basket of deplorable horndogs.

Poor little rich woman would be more accurate. Besides, does anyone really think that it’s an accident that Hillary Clinton attracts men who have unsavory and even criminal sexual proclivities?

One notes, in passing, because Maher did, and for what it’s worth, that Donald Trump, in a previous life, was a great friend and supporter of Hillary Clinton.

Be that as it may, it takes a certain kind of man to enter into the kinds of marital arrangements that Bill Clinton and Anthony Weiner contracted. However much these men consented to sell their honor for political power, they must also have been concerned with how it would look to the outside world.

Let’s say that Weiner was Huma’s beard, not an implausible supposition, might he not want to show the world that he was perfectly virile? Like his mentor Bill, the question was not just about getting a little on the side, or even of having a mistress. Both men needed to show the world that their arrangements did not affect their virility and potency. Thus, they needed to advertise and saw an advantage in being caught.

How does it happen that men who get too close to Hillary’s orbit tend to engage in bad sexual behavior? Does her influence cause them to sacrifice their dignity and their self-respect? And to overcome their sense of shame.

Perhaps, FBI Director Comey, a man who previously had had a spotless reputation, did not want to continue to sacrifice his good name for the greater good (or bad) of Hillary? Perhaps we saw in his case, in a situation that happily had nothing to do with sex, how a good man can become corrupted, or can appear to have been corrupted by the Clintons. And, Comey decided that he could not tolerate seeing his reputation and his life’s work compromised by Hillary.

Take note of the fact that Hillary, as opposed to a Margaret Thatcher, is mostly surrounded by women. True enough, there are a couple of men on her team, but her team is mostly made up of women. Thatcher, in contrast, always surrounded herself with men.

Perhaps this suggests that no men are sufficiently competent to be part of the Hillary team. Or else, that the presence of men makes the Hillary team uncomfortable. Or else, that no man with any sense of manly honor would ever want to get close to a group of women that resembles a coven.