The Clintonistas have liberals drop some salacious rumors. It percolates for a while in the blogosphere. Then it creeps into right-wing talk radio. Then a few MSM types finally talk about it. Once everyone on the right and a few in the center are screaming for answers...
BAM! Hillary gives a "how-dare-you" speech, with genrous helpings of "you're just afraid of a powerful woman" and "I'm a victim." After the speech, her handlers show photos of Huma with her new fiancee with the talking points, "how could you say she's a lesbian", "you're just Islamophobic," and "you're sexist."
Voila! Hillary's detractors are humiliated, no one dares circulate any more rumors (even true ones) about Hillary's suspect proclivities (or even Bill's escapades) for a couple of years.
To quote Sean Connery in Red October, "let's give this one a wide berth."
I'm not worried about a Clintonian trap.
I'm worried about a Wahhabi trap.
This girl's resume just screams "Saudi Intelligence".
Or, worse yet, Al Qaeda intelligence.
Beautiful, wealthy, sexy, composed, unflappable, femme-fatale is the classic profile of a mole.
Agreed. Either it is Clintonian duplicity, as you believe, or an attempt by other Democrats who probably rightly see Hillary Clinton's presidential nomination as a disaster waiting to happen and are trying to derail the Clinton Express. For one matter, there is no love lost between the Clintons and the Kennedy family. Additionally, Al Gore has been alienated from the Clintons. Besides, we have our own problems with sex scandals, like Larry Craig and Rudy Giuliani. Best to let this play out without Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, the older conservative talkers, and the conservative Internet making noise about it, at least during primary season.
Then they sue us - take away our right to offer opinions on the net - while shaking down the outraged folks in the "Kingdom".
Take us down and get cash from the Saudis - sounds like a clinton twofer. Who knows, maybe the Clintons will shoot Tim Russert... (check an earlier thread)
BAM! Hillary gives a "how-dare-you" speech, with genrous helpings of "you're just afraid of a powerful woman" and "I'm a victim." After the speech, her handlers show photos of Huma with her new fiancee with the talking points, "how could you say she's a lesbian", "you're just Islamophobic," and "you're sexist."
Voila! Hillary's detractors are humiliated, no one dares circulate any more rumors (even true ones) about Hillary's suspect proclivities (or even Bill's escapades) for a couple of years.
To quote Sean Connery in Red October, "let's give this one a wide berth."
Good analysis, but this isn't the first time something like this has come up and been ignored by the news media. Columnist Steve Adubato had a show on Sundays on WABC radio in New York for a while. He discussed New Jersey Governor Jim McGreevey after McGreevey's sexual escapades with Golan Cipel forced an investigation. Adubato said that he, as well as plenty of other local reporters, knew that McGreevey was gay and had numerous lovers, but they kept quiet about it. This was supposed to be due to "respect" for homosexuals, although McGreevey was cheating on his wife at the time, and a person who trolls bars for sex partners is generally not a good choice for chief executive regardless of sexual orientation.
Many still think Cipel was feeding DHS information to Mossad. He claimed an IDF background, and Mossad is one of the most ruthless intelligence agencies in the world. Their spies have been caught in this country before.
If Mrs. Clinton is having a gay love affair with a staffer of foriegn allegiance, it needs to be put out for general information. It already happened this was in very recent history.
I think you are spot-on with this post.