Hillary Clinton: Democrats' Worst “Nixon”

Two-faced Hillary Clinton is a Washington insider, a coddled elitist who has always ignored “the rules.” Whether it's law, ethics, morality and truth, nothing is an impediment to her own interests and presidential ambitions. History has repeated demonstrated that this habitual liar will say, do and promise anything—and pathologically deny everything—to return to the White House. On the eve of the 2016 presidential election, the fix is in in ways Richard “Watergate” Nixon could not imagine.

There's never been proof that Mr. Nixon was behind the DNC break in or burglary, but there is no doubt that Hillary Clinton ordered various unsecured “Clintonmail.com” private computer servers. Her corrupt purpose: to hide her pay for play influence peddling at the State Department in exchange for donations to the 2 billion dollar slush fund that is her and Bill's “charitable” Clinton Family Foundation. That self-serving corruption violates Title 18 U.S. Code Section 201 that carries with it a measly two years in prison.

Indeed, now exonerated former governor Bob McDonnell (R-VA) and his wife were prosecuted for receiving “gifts from political friends.” Even though there was no evidence of Clintonesque favors granted, when it comes to Republicans even a whiff of wrongdoing is ruinous. Yet, blatant lawbreaking (read: Server-gate) and quid pro quo politics (read: Charity-gate) are standard operating procedures for the Clintons. Who else has gotten away with making a 153 million in six figure “speeches” for campaign contributors? Is it not wrong that more than half of non-government people who met with Mrs. Clinton at the State Department were Foundation donors? One could fill the Encyclopaedia Britannica with the Clintons' evasions and lies.

Naturally, money-grubbing Hillary didn't want her soft “extortion” exposed to government oversight (or the American electorate). Yet, unauthorized storing and transmitting classified American secrets—which Mrs. Clinton did for personal convenience—is treason. Her crimes make Mr. Nixon's wrongdoing laughably quaint by comparison. Specifically, Mrs. Clinton has violated Title 18 U.S. Code Section 793. As 110 emails were found, that's ten years for each separate offense or 1,100 years in the slammer. That's over a millennium in the big house—not more years in the White House.

The peak of this Mount Everest of Clintonian corruption is the reality the Hillary's been hacked at least five times by bad actors (technically “unknown parties”). This reality was leaked to Bret Baier of Fox News by patriotic underlings in the FBI disgusted with their wishy-washy weasel of a Director James Comey. From the FBI to the DOJ to Obama's White House, all have repeatedly ignored—and abetted—clear criminality: every political calculation is designed to keep corrupt Democrats in power at grave detriment to the country.

At least Richard Nixon had the decency to resign rather than do further damage. He's small potatoes compared to Hillary Clinton. With her, America gets a shameless 21^st century Benedict Arnold: a person absolutely unfit for local dogcatcher let alone the next U.S. president.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Halloween “Hillary” In High School Hoot

The purpose of education is to prepare students for the world. This is true at every level including high school. Like college, U.S. high schools are microcosms of American society. Therefore, it's singularly appropriate that Halloween caricatures of a highly contentious presidential election would make a comical appearance within schoolhouse walls.

That high school was Robert E. Lee in Staunton, Va., and the adults in question were look-alikes: principal Mark Rowicki as Trump and secretary Stephanie Corbett as Clinton. As wearing a suit is standard fare for any administrator, Trump's Reaganesque slogan “Make America Great Again” cap and campaign button were the tipoffs. Yet, the “controversy” involves Ms. Corbett's portrayal of the Democratic nominee back under FBI investigation for criminal wrongdoing (read: Server-gate and Charity-gate). She donned a short blond wig, an orange prison jumpsuit with a waist chain and padlock. For good measure, Ms. Corbett proudly wore a “Department of Justice” name tag reading Hillary R. Clinton.

Only deluded liberals—with eyes squeezed shut and hands petulantly pressed over ears—entirely ignore the reality of Hillary Clinton's lawbreaking and corruption. They are the ones who refuse to see truth (or the humor of a Halloween prank). Repressive progressives slickly conceal their fascist impulses in the fictional assertion that a “political agenda” has been pushed on impressionable teenagers. Their complaint is quite some Halloween trick!

Well, First Amendment expression be damned! As the next president's decisions (read: the selection of perhaps up to 3 future Supreme Court justices) will directly affect their generation the school has the duty to educate these future voters as to the “two characters” currently vying for the presidency. The best choice on Election Day is crystal clear: the one not represented in Halloween orange prisoner's garb.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Weiner's Zipper-gate Is Clinton Karma

What is it with the toxic intersection of Bill and Hillary Clinton scandals, sex and interns?

Back in the '90s, the most famous instance was Bill's adulterous affair with then 22-year-old intern Monica Lewinsky. His lies led to charges of perjury and obstruction of justice. That scandal resulted in impeachment, but an abetting Democrat-controlled Senate saved Slick Willie.

Today, it's murky characters in crooked Hillary's orbit: her Girl Friday Huma Abedin (originally Hillary's intern, now a top aide) and Huma's estranged hubby, disgraced former Congressman Anthony Weiner (D-NY). Apparently, a tangential child pornography FBI investigation into super-freak (sexting; selfie sending) Mr. Weiner has uncovered Abedin's 650,000 previously unknown emails on a shared computer. Are Hillary Clinton's 48,000 deleted emails and/or more classified information (read: Server-gate) among them? That's anyone's guess (including Abedin's who reportedly told intimates she has no idea how they got there) and the results, if any, won't be known until well after Election Day.

At least Bill Clinton got caught in flagrante delicto when he was already in office. While his wife desperately claws at the Oval Office door, Hillary Clinton's corruption precedes her—and would doggedly follow her into the presidency. Imagine what greater influence she could peddle—to political sycophants and foreign powers alike—and what impressionable interns he could covet! The mind boggles at such nightmarish scenarios.

If elected, Hillary's scandals and lawbreaking are the perfect storm to sink our currently badly floundering country. In addition to these ever-present clouds of suspicion, this habitual liar will deliver the economic morass and racial polarization of an Obama third term. America needs neither the domestic malaise nor the international humiliation of another weak progressive Democrat.

It's reasonable to infer that Huma Weiner (a.k.a. Abedin) is at the nexus of corrupt (Hillary) Clinton everything. For more than three years of Mrs. Clinton's term as Secretary of State Abedin was her deputy chief of staff. Then Huma resigned from that formal role becoming a “special government employee” (and how!) taking simultaneous paying gigs for the “charitable” Clinton Foundation, and international consulting firm Teneo Holdings (founded by a Bill Clinton long-time personal aide). At present, Abedin's currently vice chairman of Clinton's presidential campaign. Thus, there's no doubt Hillary's criminality is back under FBI scrutiny—and Huma's in the know.

Director James Comey's unexpected announcement is a ray of light surfacing in the final days of the presidential contest. All ironically facilitated via two shady personas, a matching set of wieners named Weiner: her emails, his perversion. (What a poetic mirror for their scandal-embroiled Clinton counterparts!) For Comey's eleventh hour disclosure, a stirring, scandal fatigued nation will be grateful for a fresh start: a Donald Trump victory on November 8th.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog
http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446
http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/
http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Puppet Hillary's Blame Game

During the 3^rd presidential debate Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton laughably claimed that self-made billionaire, Donald Trump—a political outsider—was a puppet rather than herself:

“He'd [Vladimir Putin] rather have a puppet as president of the United States.”

“No puppet, no puppet… You're the puppet,” was Mr. Trump's honest reply.

Excuse me, but which scandal embroiled candidate made a dirty U.S. uranium deal with Russia? Which same one blatantly broke American law and fostered potential espionage? As with everything two-faced Hillary says the truth opposes her own words and deeds. Via Charity-gate, Mrs. Clinton did the former; with Server-gate she did the latter. Thus, at the debate she falsely accused Trump of her own crimes. This behavior is classical psychological projection: her own deep-seeded guilt blamed on her innocent political opponent.

Beyond a worthless apology, Hillary's blame game never includes herself. Mr. Trump's call to Russia to release her illegally destroyed emails (if they have them) isn't espionage. He has nothing to do with what was left unprotected or has likely been stolen. First, wasn't it Hillary who intentionally had unauthorized, private servers set up in the first place as Secretary of State? Second, wasn't it Mrs. Clinton responsibility to follow the law forbidding such extraneous storage of classified information? Third, since she knowingly ignored the rules, doesn't she own the consequences of hackers and potentially “interfering” foreign governments in next month's election?

Hillary has aided Russia, the foreign government she now publicly demonizes. In reality if anyone is a hypothetical puppet of Putin's, it's Hillary Clinton not Donald Trump. Specifically, her State Department approved the Uranium One deal which insanely ceded Russia control of 20% of American produced uranium for a fat donation to her pay for play sham of a charity, the Clinton Foundation. (That's the highly prized “yellow cake” used in nuclear weapons.) What's to stop the Kremlin from sharing the extra supply with their Middle East allies, the nuclear ambitious Iranian Imams? You know, the same bearded fellows who finessed a toothless, Obama-approved nuclear deal that virtually guarantees them the bomb within the next decade? The answer to all of the above is nothing at all.

Moreover, if the Soviets do have her destroyed emails, Mr. Putin has a treasure trove of top secret material with which to blackmail the normally paranoid and self-obsessed Hillary. Therefore, Mrs. Clinton would waste critical years in office (vital to the continued solvency of America) looking only to save her own skin. Indeed, the next president must contend with the escalating, unsustainable 19.7T debt. (That sounds like a wheelhouse challenge to a businessman, and job creator, like Donald Trump.)

Yet, Hillary's not up to that, or anything constructive. Crooked Hillary will be embroiled in ever worsening scandals, and future Nixon style cover-ups. Just like her impeached hubby Bill, she'll remain in an endless cycle of political damage control. Recall, her already well-established track record of incompetence and lawlessness. While the country seizes in a hellish Clinton Administration death spiral, how would this divisive rabble-rouser lead—except disastrously—over a social and economic cliff?

It doesn't take a dummy to know who's better for America's future. If ventriloquists were Wall Street bankers, speechifying “Hillary six figures” would be their open borders, amnesty-promising marionette. Brassy Donald Trump should not be confused with any of that. Unlike the shifty one percenters who finance Mrs. Clinton's corrupt candidacy, Donald Trump's a captain of industry who can't be bought. He already has all of the fame, wealth and power anyone could want. America needs his tell-it-like-it-is 'can-do' optimism—not an elitist figurehead for foreign and domestic special interest groups, and corporate masters.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Two-Faced Hillary's Scarlet “C”

“No man for any considerable period can wear one face to himself and another to the multitude, without finally getting bewildered as to which may be the true.” – from The Scarlet Letter by Nathaniel Hawthorne, featured in “Primal Fear” (1996)

“I'm kind of far removed from the struggles of the middle class because [of] the life I've lived and the economic, you know, fortunes that my husband and I now enjoy. And I am not taking a position on any policy, but I do think there is a growing sense of anxiety and even anger in the country over the feeling that the game is rigged.” – Hillary Clinton's remarks to Goldman-Black Rock, February 4, 2014

The game has been rigged, of course, by Hillary Clinton. If she's anything, she's the anti-Lincoln: an amoral, big government fascist willing to tear America apart to assure her own presidential ambitions. Released WikiLeaks's emails have revealed that Mrs. Clinton is perfectly fine with “both a public and a private position” related to, for example, fat-cat bankers on Wall Street. During the second presidential town hall debate, a questioner wanted to know whether “it is okay for politicians to be two-faced.” Shamelessly, “Big Sister” Hillary invoked Honest Abe to mitigate her own clear criminality (read: Server-gate). Would Abraham Lincoln have traded influence for personal enrichment as she has: $238 million in “personal earnings,” and a 2 billion dollar slush fund from their “charitable” foundation? The answer is never. Mr. Lincoln, unlike the grifters Clinton, was not for sale.

As past is prologue, power-obsessed, money-grubbing Hillary stands for nothing, save herself. Indeed, she is utterly bereft of any benevolent principles whatsoever. Despite an avalanche of damning evidence, what will it take for the American electorate to wake up to the reality of this amoral, two-faced creature? Specifically, in a bid to secure Bernie Sanders voters for herself, she reversed her position (from pro to against) on the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Likewise, during the sham of a Democratic primary she came out against her “gold standard” Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) which she had previously supported as Secretary of State.

The Hillary rabbit hole goes deeper, and gets worse. Per WikiLeaks, Mrs. Clinton does want open trade and open borders. In a private speech to Brazil bank Banco Itau in 2013, she reportedly said:

“My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders, some time in the future with energy that is as green and sustainable as we can get it, powering growth and opportunity for every person in the hemisphere.”

Given the ever-present threat of radical Islamic terrorism—and the underclass of illegal aliens bring all manners of their violence and problems with them—who but insane Democrats want unsecured borders?

They don't care one whit for displaced migrants or legal immigration. They want new bodies to populate their poverty plantation. A permanent, illegal underclass fits Hillary's personal ends nicely. Likewise, Bernie Sanders's economic fantasy of free college education for millennial votes. These are simply riffs from LBJ's political playbook. He established his good-sounding public sham, his so-called “War on Poverty.” To this day, politicians have wasted 22 trillion, but the poverty rate has not improved since the policy was announced in 1964. Privately, LBJ admitted his actual agenda: “I’ll Have Those N*ggers Voting Democrat For The Next 200 Years!” The overarching political strategy here is identical: pack the country with government-dependent Democratic voters to keep progressives in power in perpetuity.

Unfortunately, the re-election of failed, scandal-prone Barack Obama in 2012 conclusively demonstrated that anything is possible in American politics. All one needs is a sycophantic MSM to hammer a propagandist narrative. In Mrs. Clinton's case on offer is an empty resume—a track record of lies, corruption and failure—and the triviality of her gender. It's absolutely unacceptable for any presidential candidate to wear one face in public and another in private. Even Hillary's campaign chairman John Podesta acknowledged that she often “says things that are untrue.” More to the point, the late New York Times columnist William Safire called Mrs. Clinton “a congenital liar” decades ago. Recall that the purpose of any U.S. president is to follow the Constitution—and represent the will and best interests of the American people. Every lie, every evasion, every lawbreaking scandal is the fallout from Hillary's elitist arrogance and her self-centered political calculations.  

WikiLeaks has also disclosed that Mr. Podesta wrote: “I know she [Hillary] has begun to hate everyday Americans.” The feeling is mutual in many clear-thinking quarters of the country. They would certainly forgive shamed Hester Prynne her adultery, but not deplorable Hillary; a scot-free con who proudly wears her corruption like a Scarlet C.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog
http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446
http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/
http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

FBI's Comey: A Weasel Among Rats

“You can call us wrong, but don't call us weasels. We are not weasels.” – FBI Director James Comey at a congressional hearing on September 28, 2016

Sigmund Freud would have a field day with Mr. Comey's psyche. Dr. Freud would say he protests too much. Why does the FBI Director compare himself—and the now perhaps forever tarnished organization he heads—to a pack of weasels? Guilty subconsciousness perhaps, Herr Doctor?

Recall, the FBI's motto is Fidelity, Bravery and Integrity. Once important American ideals, today reduced to a bumper sticker slogan. Consider the bureau's former principled reputation of incorruptibility: of holding the powerful to account without fear or favor. Men like Eliot “untouchable” Ness who risked life and limb to combat criminally rather than condone it as James Comey clearly has. How else does one explain his actions of last January, of laying out an unambiguous case of multifaceted Clintonian law breaking, only to ultimately sit on his hands and close the investigations?

To add insult to injury, Mr. Comey foolishly took the political heat for his public pronouncements. Yet, the fix was in before that. Specifically, when spouse Bill Clinton had an “unplanned” chinwag with Attorney General Lynch. Both in different private planes which by “sheer coincidence” crossed paths on the same tarmac in Phoenix. So the nation's top prosecutor meeting privately with the spouse (an ex-president) whose wife is the prime subject of a then looming criminal indictment isn't a colossal conflict of interest? Moreover, is it any surprise that just days after that infamous meeting AG Lynch announced that Hillary would face no criminal charges?

So, one supposes during their 20 to 25 minute exchange, Mrs. Lynch and Mr. Clinton only chitchatted about the grand kids as was claimed? Seriously? That's the same malarkey as Mrs. Clinton's yoga routines and Chelsea's wedding plans that she claimed populated her private servers. Those unsecured, illegal devices likely hacked by bad actors in which Mr. Comey stated 110 emails were classified—and 48,000 (read: 33,000 originally reported and an additional 15,000 recently uncovered) were destroyed.

By ignoring the law—and the evidence—Mr. Comey wrongly recommended non-prosecution. He laughable claimed he didn't want to interfere in the upcoming election, but he has done precisely that—and not on the side of the angels. How is any presidential candidate known by reputation to be a habitual liar—an immoral and greedy person mired in 40 years of infamy—good for the country? If the email scandal wasn't malfeasance enough, there is the Clinton Foundation “charity”: a pay-for-play scheme involving high-level political favors in exchange a personal Clinton slush fund (while Mrs. Clinton was Secretary of State). The 238 million the Clintons have “earned” after being “dead broke” 15 years ago doesn't even factor in the 2 billion dollar foundation they control. By his own Freudian omission, Mr. Comey's a weasel, but the crooked Clintons are far worse: unapologetic rats who make Richard “Watergate” Nixon look, by comparison, like a church mouse.

Experience repeatedly demonstrates that honesty and the 'for sale' Clintons have never coincided. They should be on the verge of the big house, not the White House. What on earth is going on here? How can the superficial irrelevancy of identity politics—this time in the trivial form of an empty skirt by a corrupt wearer—obscure this obvious truth? One wonders, is this propagandist Germany of 1933 or freedom-loving America of 2016? How can such an ignoble character enjoy such mindless support—and have a 50/50 shot at becoming the next U.S. president?

In any case, Mr. Nixon was drummed out of the nation's highest office for his law breaking. He certain didn't go in the door dogged by a well-established track record of villainy as Hillary Clinton hopes to. That, too, is a vital distinction. Yet, the Mrs. Pig Pen of American politics has only one unpredictable barrier to overcome if she can: outsider Donald Trump.

In the final analysis, political power without a guiding morality—and/or respect for law—is inherently corrupt. This dynamic encapsulates the disastrous Obama years (soon mercifully to be in the rear view mirror), James Comey's “weaselly” words of last week, and the titanic mistake of electing another corrupt Clinton to the Oval Office in November.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog
http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446
http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/
http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Clinton's For-Profit “Bill U”

“Greed... is good.” – Michael Douglas as corporate raider Gordon Gekko in “Wall Street” (1987)

“A lot of these private-education guys, they’re looking to get into events [a State Department dinner] like this one. 'The discussion itself is irrelevant. . . . It gets you very high-level contacts, and it gets you to the right people.'” – Sam Pitroda, a higher-education expert representing a policy commission from India

Laureate International Universities paid Bill Clinton an obscene $17.6 million as their front man consultant and “honorary chancellor.” Despite a largely undefined (and perhaps non-existent?) role, Mr. Clinton's lucrative five year contract ended conveniently two weeks before the wife launched her latest campaign for U.S. president. Back in 2009, Hillary Clinton wrote “... Bill likes [founder, businessman Doug Becker] a lot.” Well, turns out Mr. Clinton has 17.6 million reasons for that.

Per their tax returns, Laureate runs 80 educational institutions the world over. Notably, four of its six U.S. colleges are on a U.S. Education Department watch list for fiscal monkey business. Specifically, debt-ridden students complained Laureate's flagship U.S. school, Walden University, is essentially a slow-roll online diploma mill delivering substandard programs and degrees. Naturally, this murkiness was of no concern to Bill Clinton. (One assumes all payments to him have cleared.) Yet, how does this latest example of Clintonian sleaziness not fall under the umbrella of payment for high-level access? In other words, the pay-to-play basis of the $2 billion dollar sham that is the “charitable” Clinton Family Foundation?

Even the sycophantic Washington Post acknowledged that the Clintons “mixed” their public and private dealings. They reported:

“[Doug] Becker, for example, donated to Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign and last year donated $2,700 to her current effort. Laureate has given between $1 million and $5 million to the Clinton Foundation, according to the charity’s website … Laureate portrayed its association with the Clintons as a symbol of its legitimacy rather than the result of a business deal.”

Only to the crooked does the word 'legitimacy' and the surname Clinton harmoniously coexist. Likewise, faceless—and blind—ethics officials in wifey's then State Department saw no conflict of interest. (Barack Obama laughably granted oversight to Mrs. Clinton on such matters.) “Clinton Cash” author Peter Schweizer noted an increase in USAID funding of $55 million to the International Youth Federation—a sister organization run by selfsame Laureate founder Doug Becker—while Mrs. Clinton was Secretary of State. Why does not a single Democrat in government publicly acknowledge a problem with any of this?

At least some House Republicans see clear wrongdoing. Last July, sixty-four requested investigations by the Internal Revenue Service, FBI and Federal Trade Commission into “possible” corruption between Laureate and the Clintons. However, given closed-eyed dupes like FBI Director James Comey—and the current administration still at the helm—there's no chance another investigation will happen.

Interestingly, The Post further reported that Laureate was bought out in 2007 by George Soros (and partners) for $3.8 billion. What these “journalists” left out about trouble-making billionaire Soros is his domestic funding of the anarchist Black Lives Matter death cult. What a corrupt click, these incestuous and moneyed progressives. With paid-off politicians, is it any wonder why America is in chaos—with a mountainous 19.5T debt? That's not a problem for the uber-rich Clintons: currently worth $238 million. Moreover, besides wrongdoing in common, Barack Obama aims to be the first ex-president billionaire. Mr. Clinton may beat him to that pot o' gold.

Roger Stone of “Daily Caller” in his exposé called “Trump U Is Nothing Compared To Laureate Education” put the matter plainly:

“New York State law requires specific approvals for an entity to hold itself out as being a university. In this case CGI [Clinton Global Initiate](a fraud) created CGI University (a fraud) in league with Laureate, a fraud. Laureate is a highly leveraged failing investment whose principal beneficiaries are Wall Street fat cats and billionaires, and [at the center is] William Jefferson Clinton.”

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog

http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Radioactive Hillary

It's as easy as yellow cake—highly prized uranium—to know which U.S. presidential candidate Vladimir Putin supports. Despite the MSM tall tale, that's not unpredictable, tough guy Donald Trump. If the Russians want to interfere in America's presidential contest, it's clearly in their country's best interest to support the one they can readily push around: lying, corrupt Hillary Clinton.

Unlike Donald Trump, Mrs. Clinton has a well-established history of bartering high level government favors to specifically benefit the USSR. Therefore, Mr. Putin knows Hillary can be cheaply bought. As Mr. Obama's former Secretary of State, Mrs. Clinton rubber stamped the Uranium One “deal” in which 20% of U.S. domestic uranium production was ceded to Kremlin control. Per a bombshell New York Times article back in April of last year, Canadian records show that Uranium One's chairman made four donations totaling $2.35 million to Mrs. Clinton's sham of a charity. A real windfall for the Soviets! If that payoff's not blatant enough, Bill Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with government ties promoting Uranium One stock.

That's Putin's big carrot to dangle before greedy, immoral Hillary anytime he wants something. After all, formerly “dead broke”—now part of the 100 million dollar club in less than 15 years—Mrs. Clinton has repeatedly demonstrated as long as she's living as large as the billionaire class she aspires to, what does she care for the 93 million unemployed fellow citizens (read: the “little people”) left to foot the ruling elites' escalating spending, the nation's $19.4 trillion debt?

If the carrot mysteriously doesn't work, there remains for Mr. Putin a Trump card. A big stick: manipulation and blackmail. Recall Server-gate, Hillary Clinton's unsecured personal servers chock full of highly classified material and American secrets. Does anyone seriously believe that foreign powers like the Russians or the Chinese have not stolen those 33,000 deleted emails, and would not use that information against her (and us)? Donald Trump certainly thinks so.

Despite her repeated, pathological denials of any wrongdoing, she has committed treasonous acts more than once. As a true-life Orwellian Big Brother figure, Barack Obama not only doesn't hold her accountable for her clear law-breaking, but also he laughably promotes her as “most qualified” to proceed him. Thus, solely for personal gain—an ever growing slush fund accumulated via her bogus charity—Mrs. Clinton has permitted the foundational material used to make nuclear bombs to be monopolized by Russia? To further this nefarious equation, as the Soviets have business relationships with Iran—the greatest state sponsor of ISIS and radical Islamic terrorism—does it really take a nuclear scientist to connect all of these dangerous dots? What's to stop Russia from sharing its cache of American-acquired uranium with Iranian Imams (with their burgeoning nuclear ambitions and their desire to bend the will of the world to Islam)? Precisely nothing.

Hillary Clinton is a menace of the highest order. Make no mistake, she belongs in the big house not the White House. Seriously, should she be given free access to the “blank check” treasury—and the entire latitude of the U.S. government? Is branding—the irrelevancy of her husband's name—and the superficiality of her gender enough to reward this amoral creature with the keys to the kingdom? America doesn't need another polarizing, anti-American president. Likewise someone who promises a virtual Obama third term and a continuation of his eight disastrous years.

People complain about Donald Trump's unfiltered speech, but wholly ignore what Hillary has actually done? In the final analysis, what any person does is more important than what any person says. Given First Amendment protections of unpopular or controversial speech, no statement should disqualify any candidate from being president. Yet, based upon Mrs. Clinton concrete track record of unequivocal poor judgment and criminal misbehavior, she's not qualified to be dogcatcher. This is the truth despite her empty resume of impressive titles and her uncanny, Clintonian ability to slither out of multiple scandals.

Self-serving she has no love for America. Because of her lies, her unchecked lawlessness and her complete absence of moral fiber, she's a toxic candidate. Indeed, she's as dangerous and as destructive as the foreign hands now holding the radioactive uranium she sold access to. One can scarcely imagine the untold damage wrought on our country by this immoral influence-peddler from the Oval Office. Speaking of branding, the presidential ballot should come with a warning: the skull and crossbones symbol next to Hillary Clinton's name.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog
http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446
http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/
http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

Democrat’s Micky-D’s politics (An analysis of anti-American Progressivism)

There once was an innocent time when children actually clamored for McDonald’s food before the multinational juggernaut of a fast food chain had to advertise the superficial slogan “I’m lovin’ it” to obscure the fact that the food is not of a particularly healthful quality.  That is a precise analogy for today's Democrats and the deleterious effect their anti-Capitalistic policies have on America. 

The very small clown car of four “same well” politicians includes (interchangeably): one shrew, one socialist, one buffoon and one empty suit.  Indeed, all the so-called contenders for the Democratic nomination sing from the same hymnal of “good sounding” vote-pandering appeals designed to woo the unemployed (and part-timers via Obamacare), the stupefied (the low-information voter via MSM) and the socially alienated masses (the Occupy movement and more recently Ferguson, MO and Baltimore, MD violently rioting “no justice, no peace; hands up, don't shoot” city-burning anarchists) for that Pavlovian lever pull.  (Full disclosure: that 'D' in the voting booth now stands not for Democrat, but for “dupe.”)  For example, which one of the quartet recently said: “Powerful, wealthy special interests here at home have used our government to create, in our own country, an economy that is leaving a majority of our people behind.”  (The answer: failed Maryland governor and former mayor of the racial powder keg city Baltimore, MD.)  Certainly, the ever spunky Mr. O'Malley—a former outspoken advocate of madam's first unsuccessful presidential bid in 2008—could not possibly be referring to his dear friend Hillary Clinton (the former “dead broke and in debt” resident of the White House) who via the Charity-gate corruption scandal has parleyed her high level governmental influence as Obama’s first Secretary of State into the rarified air of the uber-rich: the 100 million dollar club of the huge carbon footprint private jets and gas-guzzling limousines.  She, the “queen of money-grubbing green” (and per the Secret Service, a potty-mouthed “queen of mean”), can afford a blasé, a modern day Marie-Antoinette ‘let-them-eat-cake’ persona, because she’s not one of the 93 million able-bodied, but idle citizens—desperate for gainful, full time employment with or without health insurance—who would scarcely dream of her Grey Poupon lifestyle, let alone pay the rent. 

Even taking a family of four to McDonald’s would be a luxury for the rest us.  What difference, at this point, does it make?  A great deal actually if any one of these progressive keystone cops are put in charge of “the land of the free” going forward.  Mr. Obama, Mrs. Clinton and the other stagehands—place-holders to promote the fiction that the Democratic nomination is a contest rather than a fait accompli—are cut from the same rabble-rousing (“There is only the fight...”) Sal Alinsky mold.  Their ilk foment and prey upon the despair of the masses in order to get elected (as in Hillary’s case in 2016) or reelected (in Obama’s in 2012).  Given the last six years, I have serious doubts that any of them—collectively—could successfully run a child’s lemonade stand.  Besides taxing and regulating the hell out of it, of course.

By contrast, the Republicans are drawing a diverse field of non-professional politician contenders like Fiorina [the private sector]; Carson and Paul [former medical doctors] and one minister (and former TV personality) [Huckabee] as well as a cadre of truly substantive and up-and-coming political leaders [Ted Cruz; Marco Rubio] and the yet undeclared, but accomplished Scott Walker and family dynasty scion, Jeb Bush.  Throw a dart: any one of them would be a vastly superior choice to Hillary.

Progressivism belies a more critical and deeper-seeded issue that warrants a needed cultural discussion.  To my mind that political philosophy is an anti-American pathology infusing the ranks and the leadership of the Democratic party.  As President Ronald Reagan said, “I didn’t leave the Democratic Party.  It left me.”  Democrats have come so far off the boil that one of their most popular and beloved standard-bearers JFK, who at the time of his 1960s presidency advocated pro-business tax cuts (“By removing tax roadblocks to new jobs and new growth”), a strong military and anti-Communism (there would be no throwing of his metaphorical arms around the dictator Fidel Castro in a loving Obama embrace) would be considered, at minimum, a moderate Republican and fiscal conservative.  Specifically, Kennedy expressed his cherished Catholicism in faith-based speeches.  He was staunchly pro-Capitalist: free trade, strong dollar, low taxes and low deficits.  And, to illustrate the cavernous divide between Mr. Kennedy and today’s mainstream Democrats most tellingly, the 35th U.S. president was pro-individual responsibility.  The Party would show Mr. Kennedy the door on the basis of that final position alone.

In an alternative universe can anyone with a straight face imagine Mr. Obama as a Kennedy-Democrat uttering his famously patriotic and selfless words: “Ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for you country?”  Not hardly.  As the last six years clearly demonstrates, Obama’s temperament (“the fundamental transformation of America”) shows absolutely no reverence for the American ideal Kennedy valued.  JFK was a unifier and a stark defender of the United States; Obama is a weak kneed apologist who publicly condemns his own country to the glee, no doubt, of America’s geo-political foes. 

One of my favorite, personal colloquialisms is “just because there’s a MacDonald’s on every corner doesn’t mean it’s [a] good [thing].”  The MSM, everywhere too, continues to slickly promote the very people and policies antithetic to a healthily functioning America.  It is time for rank-and-file Americans to reject the Left’s ‘whack-a-mole’ game of divisive victimhood-politics.  In the mold of a youthful, federal government-slashing version of Reagan, we should elect an outspoken pro-American and fiscal conservative.  Perhaps a strict Constitutionalist like Ted Cruz paired with a hands-on practical reformer like Scott Walker is a team worth clamoring for. 

I’m lovin’ it.

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/

Hillary breaks silence, offers platitude cake

To quote she who would be president in 2016—and has been skirting press questions for almost a month with a wink and a smile—Hillary Clinton was finally shamed into answering a few of the press' questions by Fox News reporter Ed Henry.  Her imperious, smirking response: “Yeah, maybe when I finish talking to the people here.  How’s that?  I might, I’ll have to ponder it.”  Then, pretending to write on a notepad, she added, “I’ll put it on my list for due consideration.”  In this, Mrs. Clinton finally deigned—under her own terms—to break her self-imposed silence.  This attitude parallels Server-gate (modern day Nixonian document shredding): her destruction of 33,000 emails—half of those created on her private server as Secretary of State—that she now infers is government property.  Indeed, for she who wants to sit in the big chair in the Oval Office, how can the American people objectively get a complete picture of her performance in that previous role with 50 percent of the picture forever obscured? 

Continuing to ignore the shrieking, chest-pounding 300 pound gorilla in the corner, Mrs. Clinton steadfastly refuses to finally address her own dismal record of veracity considering the still unanswered questions regarding Benghazi, the before mentioned Server-gate, and the most recent in a long list of Clintonian scandals, the multi-faceted Charity-gate.  Regarding the latter, she offered vague platitudes: “I am so proud of the foundation.  I'm proud of the work that it has done and is doing… I'll let the American people make their own judgments.”  Shadowed in this Clintonian malfeasance is the fact of 1,100 foreign donors mysteriously not reported by the Clinton Foundation; her and Bill's supposed family charity.  That little nugget comes literally right on the heels of Peter Schweizer's exposé of the Hillary Clinton-Bill Clinton fiscal shell game, "Clinton Cash," of bartering favorable U.S. government treatment through the State Department she headed (her role) to the mostly foreign donors who gave exorbitant, six-figure speaking fees to Bill (his role) or otherwise donated large sums of money to the charity á la George Stephanopoulos.

For any clarity at all, one must look to the Hillary speech the fourth estate has dubbed 'Bonds of Trust' for any indication of where she stands: "From Ferguson to Staten Island to Baltimore, the patterns have become unmistakable and undeniable." Yet, while she hypocritically pontificates upon broken trust between the black community and the police she completely ignores her own severe lack of honesty and forthrightness when it comes to explaining her own behavior and actions to the American people.

It is interesting dynamic when a politician with her own severe trustworthiness deficit lectures the rest of us on trust: "We must urgently begin to rebuild the bonds of trust and respect among Americans.  Between police and citizens, yes, but also across society, restoring trust in our politics, our press, our markets, between and among neighbors, and even people with whom we disagree politically."  So desperate is she to distract—and point the finger away from her own lack of character—that she, in essence, panders to the violent street mob and further galvanizes a volatile situation by demonizing the cops á la Obama.  Her and Obama's Saul Alinsky-style political smoke screens have a direct correlation to the tear gas in the street: this is what happens when those charged with safeguarding the country use the bully pulpit to foment anti-American sentiment and tear society apart along racial lines.

Apparently Mrs. Clinton, who like her husband before her, is inartfully combining the Clintonian mantra of "say anything to get elected" with the Obama brand of destructive, divisive Democratic politics of "never letting a crisis go to waste" for personal and political gain.  Through her Orwellian words, she claims the intention to unite, but in actually she desires the opposite: to polarize and divide.  She knows all too well that an unhappy populace votes Democrat.  Remember her and Bill's single greatest character flaw from which all their lies, greed and hubris stem: their obsessive self-serving power-seeking.

Her blasé, disingenuous Marie Antoinette 'let-them-eat-cake' persona demonstrates that she—who seeks to lead the rest of us—owes nothing.  In this, her silence bellows stentorian that she is unfit to be the next president of the United States.

Re. Saul Alinsky: In 1969, Hillary Rodham wrote a 92-page senior thesis for Wellesley College titled "There Is Only the Fight . . . ": An Analysis of the Alinsky Model. The subject was famed radical community organizer Saul Alinsky.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog
http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446

http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/
http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976

In Hillary’s Orwellian circle of trust

To quote she who would be president in 2016, in a speech the press has dubbed 'Bonds of Trust:' "From Ferguson to Staten Island to Baltimore, the patterns have become unmistakable and undeniable." Yet, while she hypocritically pontificates upon broken trust between the black community and the police she completely ignores her own severe lack of honesty and forthrightness when it comes to explaining her own behavior and actions to the American people.

Ignoring the shrieking, chest-pounding 300 pound gorilla in the corner, Mrs. Clinton refuses to finally address her own dismal record of veracity considering the still unanswered questions regarding Benghazi, Server-gate (modern day Nixonian document shredding) and the most recent in a long list of Clintonian scandals, the multi-faceted Charity-gate.  This week's latest revelation of Clintonian malfeasance includes 1,100 foreign donors who were mysteriously not reported by the Clinton Foundation; her and Bill's supposed family charity.  That little nugget comes literally right on the heels of Peter Schweizer's expose of the Hillary Clinton-Bill Clinton fiscal shell game, "Clinton Cash," of bartering favorable U.S. government treatment through the State Department she headed (her role) to the mostly foreign donors who gave exorbitant, six-figure speaking fees to Bill (his role) or otherwise donated large sums of money to the charity.

It is interesting dynamic when a politician with her own severe trustworthiness deficit lectures the rest of us on trust: "We must urgently begin to rebuild the bonds of trust and respect among Americans. Between police and citizens, yes, but also across society, restoring trust in our politics, our press, our markets, between and among neighbors, and even people with whom we disagree politically."  So desperate is she to distract—and point the finger away from her own lack of character—that she, in essence, panders to the violent street mob and further galvanizes a volatile situation by demonizing the cops a la Obama.  Her and Obama's Saul Alinsky-style political smoke screens have a direct correlation to the tear gas in the street: this is what happens when those charged with safeguarding the country use the bully pulpit to foment anti-American sentiment and tear society apart along racial lines.

Apparently Mrs. Clinton, who like her husband before her, is inartfully combining the Clintonian mantra of "say anything to get elected" with the Obama brand of destructive, divisive Democratic politics of "never letting a crisis go to waste" for personal and political gain.  Through her Orwellian words, she claims the intention to unite, but in actually she desires the opposite: to polarize and divide.  She knows all too well that an unhappy populace votes Democrat.  Remember her and Bill's single greatest character flaw from which all their lies, greed and hubris stem: their obsessive self-serving power-seeking.

The first one strapped with the body cameras she now advocates should be Mrs. Clinton herself.  So the rest of us can monitor her.  A lie detector should closely follow.  If she can't pass that test then she has no business being the next president of the United States.

Re. Saul Alinsky: In 1969, Hillary Rodham wrote a 92-page senior thesis for Wellesley College titled "There Is Only the Fight . . . ": An Analysis of the Alinsky Model. The subject was famed radical community organizer Saul Alinsky.

Twitter: @DavidHunterblog
http://patriotpost.us/commentators/446
http://www.americanthinker.com/author/david_l_hunter/
http://canadafreepress.com/members/74987/DavidLHunter/976