Theory 2a: #Benghazi-Bimbo Connection

Posted on Comments

by Smitty

Referring to Ann Althouse’s post on the Zombie Bimbo Revival, of course the answer is Hillary. Vanity Fair also stands to gain from the notoriety, and those two own 70% of the poll. However, Monica’s story is the kind of thing that has probably been in the can for a while, waiting for its moment. It’s certainly the kind of story that would have to come out as part of the 2016 run, sure. But Althouse thinks it’s mostly to do with Rand:

If it’s in Hillary’s interest to bring back the Monica story, wouldn’t the Clintons have done that in 2008? As Marcus observes, the difference is that Rand Paul — a presumptive candidate in 2016 — “has already raised the question of whether Democrats in general, and Hillary Clinton in particular, should consort with a ‘sexual predator’ like Bill Clinton.” And Lewinsky’s new presentation stresses that she was a consenting adult, that her victimhood came as she “was made a scapegoat in order to protect his powerful position” — whatever that means — and “It’s time to burn the beret and bury the blue dress.” We’re victimizing her if we remember her in the only form we would ever have known about her. So: Conversation over! Unless you’re an abuser. Rand.

I’ll give that a “yeah, maybe”. But really, wouldn’t it seem more useful to have Monica save her mouthful for a tougher target? Should the Clintons get out the cigars so early, when anything could happen over the next two years?
No, it strikes me that, for all the Benghazi email disclosure that triggered the Select Committee seems rather sudden, that too is likely orchestrated (distract from the ObamaCare implosion?) and that Monica is just another layer of damage control. . .


I’m past caring, really. My hope is that this Tower of Babel/Corruption just collapses into itself, so that we can set about clearing away the human debris that miscalls itself our leadership.

Update: KRAUTHAMMER: HILLARY COMMENTS ON BENGHAZI ‘RIDICULOUS’ If you look at her record upside down, Benghazi was clearly her chief accomplishment as SECSTATE.

16 comments

  2. Should the Clintons get out the cigars so early, when anything could happen over the next two years?

    But they’re going to run Jeb Bush? Clear trolling operation from the establishment.

    And if they do, it’ll be definitive proof that they don’t deserve saving. Then, you’ll get out your cigars.

  7. Monica’s full of Bill shit. It was never about the sex. It was about a President lying under oath in a Federal court. And none of this excuses WJC’s visits to Epstein’s house of underage ill repute in the Bahamas. Or Hillary’s fundraiser at a gay pool party with underage drinking and illicit sex.

  8. Actually Monica’s beef is how Bill threw her under the bus and exposed her to criminal charges with his lies. And Hillary, for all her talk about feminism, had no problem stomping on Monica too.

  9. And I thought Clinton was a sleazeball for answering the question about his underwear and telling us about his old El Camino with the astroturf in back for, you know . . . .

    What’s most questionable is the Clinton apologetics. Political timing is political timing.

  11. I doubt seriously the Clintons are behind Monica coming out now, but OTOH I cannot imagine that Vanity Fair would ever publish such an article without giving them a heads-up first. And I would presume, the Clintons having no objections would also been a prerequisite to publication.

    But it’s probably just coincidence. She was probably going to “come out” again sometime, it’s been 15 years already. Why do we NEED to find some deeper meaning or motivation, or conspiracy behind it? Althouse is usually more level-headed.

    After all, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

  15. We won’t know for some time, but it does make sense politically to have it come out now with Miss Lewinsky emphasizing that ‘it was consensual’.

Comments are closed.