Posted on 03/04/2015 1:44:44 PM PST by Kaslin
RUSH: Ladies and gentlemen, I'm sitting here, and I am genuinely intrigued at what appears to be a firing squad being put together aimed at Hillary Diane Rodham, otherwise known as Hillary Rodham Clinton. That's her e-mail address at clintonemail.com, HDR, Hillary Diane Rodham. No mention, no relationship, no mention whatsoever of her husband, Bill.
Hillarydianerodham22@clintonemail.com is her e-mail address. People are trying to figure out, "What does the 22 mean?"
At any rate, it's stunning, the New York Times, the Associated Press, the New Republic, Politico, it is unprecedented. I'd never seen it, the Drive-By Media, the left-wing media, the State-Controlled Media is forming a firing squad aimed at Hillary Clinton over this.
Now, one of the things that it could possibly mean -- and this goes against the grain of every ounce of conventional wisdom. What it could possibly mean is they don't want her to begin with. They resent her being forced on them. They resent the idea that the presidency is hers again, just like it was in 2008, just because. If she weren't married to a guy named Bill Clinton, it is probably safe to say nobody would have ever heard of her. Now, that may be a mean thing to say or it may sound like it's a mean thing to say, but as you know I'm the one who tried to rescue her campaign in 2008.
So before you start throwing darts at me, just recall my efforts on Mrs. Clinton's behalf. And it may be necessary again, folks, it may be necessary to save her again, because when you've got the New York Times and the AP, and Ron Fournier, the National Journal, when you've got the New Republic, when you've got Politico aiming at you over this e-mail business, it is clear, it is abundantly clear that this woman presents a problem. There's a story already in the Drive-Bys here today that maybe Algore would throw his hat back in the ring if Mrs. Clinton bows out. That is a story in Politico magazine: "What if Hillary Bows Out?"
Man. So let's try to put this in perspective. What we're looking at here, ladies and gentlemen, is an actual War on a Woman. And this War on a Woman is being conducted by the mainstream media, the Drive-By Media, and who knows however many Democrats behind the scenes who are providing un-sourced opinion, fact, whatever, to back up these news stories. The left is engaged in a War on a Woman. It ought to be despicable. It ought to be unacceptable.
First, let's look at the timeline. Let's try to keep in perspective what has happened here, and going back some years. First, they used a young, inexperienced, community organizing, chain-smoking man of color to kick Hillary to the curb in 2008. In 2008 it was a coronation, remember? In 2008 it was going to be hers to lose. In 2008 it was the Democrat Party paying her back for all she had done, subordinating herself to her husband, subordinating herself to the party in order to maintain her husband and his political viability and keep him in office.
So 2008 was the payback. The presidency was to be hers. And the first chance the Democrat Party powers-that-be had to get rid of her, they took it, in the name of Barack Hussein O, a young, inexperienced, community organizing, chain-smoking man of color.
And now, just a few short years later, another presidential cycle later, they are using every major media outlet in America to pile on this feeble, aging woman known as Hillary Clinton. Is nothing sacred to these misogynists? Have they no sense of decency? They're gonna do it again? They're gonna pile on the woman again? The Democrat Party mounting another war on the same woman again?
I mean, come on. Just because Hillary Clinton subverted government laws and government servers while working for the government, exposed herself to blackmail, and was obviously engaging in things that she didn't want anybody to know about or ever to be able to find out about, what difference does that make? Just because Hillary Clinton set up her own private computer server in her home protected by the Secret Service, what difference does it make? Just because Hillary took what looked to be millions of dollars of bribes from foreign governments for her and her daughter's and her husband's foundation, what difference does it make?
Just because Hillary left her ambassador unprotected in Benghazi, left for dead, even though she knew about it four minutes after it started, what difference does it make now? Just because Hillary lied about a video, saying that the video caused the terrorist attack that led to the death of the ambassador and watch a hapless nobody video maker thrown into jail to take the blame for her lack of action, what difference that make now?
We're talking 2016, the next Democrat president. What does any of this matter now? In the normal ebb and flow of events, none of this would matter. The media would be trying to sweep all of this stuff under the rug. The media would be telling us none of this stuff matters. Just because her husband spent countless hours with a playboy pedophile flying all over the world, what difference does that make now? Just because Hillary ruined innocent women's lives to protect her husband who sexually assaulted those women, what difference does that make now? Don't tell me.
My point here, folks, is don't tell me all of this does not factor in to the flood of bad press coming in about Hillary Diane Rodham. My point is, I don't think this is just about these e-mails. I don't think this is just about her private e-mail server and the fact that she was subverting federal law and she's trying to skirt around the Federal Records Act. I don't think that everybody's up in arms over the fact that Hillary was trying to conduct business, government business in private and keep forever hidden whatever it was she was doing. That alone is not enough, in my humble opinion, to warrant what has become another relentless War on a Woman.
The Drive-By Media, Democrat Party apparatus piling on this aging woman, presumptive Democrat nominee again on the verge of her ascension to that throne. None of this should make any difference. It's a Clinton that we're talking about. None of this should matter. Scandal never attaches itself to Clinton. Scandal never affects the Clintons. No negative story, no negative press, no matter what it has been about the Clintons ever sticks to 'em. It never matters. They overcome it and the media usually destroys the people making the allegations.
Now all of a sudden the same apparatus that usually turns its aim on Republicans and conservatives and anybody else taking aim at the Clintons is in fact taking aim at the Clintons and joining traditional Clinton foes in the process. Because, folks, none of this should matter. Hillary's damn near royalty, and look what the left-wing media is doing. I mean, it's amazing no matter where you go. This is the story today that's occupying their attention. Well, that and the Supreme Court case, but that's not even a close second. It's in there, but it's stunning, no matter where you go, there is a full-fledged left-wing pile on.
Now, I know some of you might be saying -- and I know there are a lot of cynics in the audience, and this has been something in the past that has been true. There is the possibility that all of this is orchestrated, all of this pile-on, all of this attention, all of this negativism aiming at Hillary, with the hope that she survives it so that in later days, in later months, the media can say, "Hey, we vetted her. Hey, we looked at everything. Hey, we didn't look at the other way. This woman survived every onslaught we had. She survived every investigation that we engaged in."
I know there are cynics in the audience who think that's what's going on. This is simply the Drive-Bys and all the Democrat Party apparatus doing their version of a vet, doing their version of full-fledged candidate investigation and she'll come out of it in flying colors looking like a rose with clear sailing the rest of the way. But something tells me that's not what's going on in this instance. Stories about the Democrat bench and how weak it is, don't forget there are a lot of Democrats that want Elizabeth Warren. Don't forget there are a lot of progressives, a lot of radicals, a lot of lunatics on the left that do not like Mrs. Clinton.
There are even some people in the Drive-By Media Stack of Stuff here that hope Algore would throw his hat back in the ring. So it's clear right before our eyes, the media and certain elements of the Democrat Party apparatus are conducting a war on Hillary Clinton and they are trying to hold her accountable for things that, in the past, would not have even mattered to a Clinton -- Bill or Hillary.
News flash!...The whack left does not want Hillary. Not “progressive” enough.
Started many months ago with Terry Gross interview.
Not the reason.
They know she’s unelectable.
People like Algore don’t use their own money to campaign.
That was a Ross Perot thing, not a loony lib like Al.
It won’t be long before they figure out that this clinteonemail stuff was just another attack by the vast right-wing conspiracy and Hillary didn’t know anything about it, because when it comes to the interwebs tech and stuff, she’s just dumb. Brilliant about everything else however!
Bobalu, it’s almost dinnertime in Corpus Christi. Did you have to? There goes my appetite.
Her mind was J E L L O.
And I'm not talking about Michael Moore. Not here in River City....
I'll talking about Moore's spiritual brother - the one and only - AL (rolls eyes and sighs - then bullies hotel masseuse - YES! That One!) Gore!
I believe the proper phrase is “AlGore might throw his fat ass into the ring”.
I think the 22 is the number of years since she has been with a man.
"More than old enough to drink." Her first fake ID at Wellesley had her being 22 years old, which started her path toward lushdom. /rumor
HF
Al Gore... what a dud muffin.
Graphic captures his stature perfectly. Good one...
Rush may be right here, but how many times have we seen really bad stuff come out 1.5 year before an election, only to be (supposedly) vetted (by the Left) and her (or her husband) exonerated so that it won’t be an issue before the election?
To me, this is more rope-a-dope.
I hope Rush is right, but I wouldn’t count on it.
By rights she should be toast. She is their darling IMO. The Left doesn’t work against itself. It is not trying to moderate. She’s their go to girl IMO.
This is a 2016 (political) flu shot and nothing more IMO.
The Left is taking aim at Hillary? Do they need any rotten fruit? I could help out.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
