That's not "one scenario," that's a series of worst-case scenarios, none of which has any necessary connection to the next.
The only "new" thing you've brought to the table is that Hillary Clinton gets elected ... and then what? Would she be effective?
Methinks his point is that a particular election outcome will greatly increase the chance of the other events.
“Civilization” exists only insofar as people cooperate, which usually happens only because great personal harm will promptly follow if they don’t. Given a leader expressing no semblance of what is usually called “strength” (i.e.: enforcement instad of empathy), the expected result is collapse of borders, welfare and security.
Bush responded to 9/11 by overthrowing two governments.
How would Hillary respond?