Category: Hillary Clinton

Greetings, My Fellow ‘Deplorables’!

Posted on Comments

 

Speaking at an “LGBT for Hillary” gala in New York where the headliner was Barbra Streisand and the guests included millionaire entertainment industry moguls Barry Diller and Harvey Weinstein, Hillary Clinton made it clear she hates me, and she hates you, too:

The Democratic presidential nominee sparked an uproar late Friday when she described Trump’s supporters at a fundraiser.
“To just be grossly generalistic, you can put half of Trump supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables,” Clinton said. “Right? Racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic, you name it.”
She added, “And unfortunately, there are people like that and he has lifted them up. He has given voice to their websites that used to only have 11,000 people, now have 11 million. He tweets and retweets offensive, hateful, mean-spirited rhetoric.”
Clinton then said some of these people were “irredeemable” and “not America.” . . .
“Isn’t it disgraceful that Hillary Clinton makes the worst mistake of the political season and instead of owning up to this grotesque attack on American voters, she tries to turn it around with a pathetic rehash of the words and insults used in her failing campaign?” Trump said in a statement. “For the first time in a long while, her true feelings came out, showing bigotry and hatred for millions of Americans.”
Trump’s running mate, Mike Pence, forcefully condemned Clinton “in the strongest possible terms” Saturday at the Values Voter Summit in Washington.
“The truth of the matter is that the men and women who support Donald Trump’s campaign are hard-working Americans, farmers, coal miners, teachers, veterans, members of our law enforcement community, members of every class of this country, who know that we can make America great again,” Pence said.
“Let me just say, from the bottom of my heart, Hillary, they are not a basket of anything,” Pence continued. “They are Americans and they deserve your respect.”

There are two kinds of people in America, according to Mrs. Clinton: Democrats and “deplorables,” and I sure as hell am not a Democrat.

To just be “grossly generalistic,” Democrats suck.

 

How Does Hillary Plan to Defeat ISIS Without Using U.S. Combat Troops?

Posted on Comments

 

During a “Commander-in-Chief” forum Wednesday with Matt Lauer, Hillary Clinton claimed U.S. troops won’t be needed to defeat ISIS:

“We are not putting ground troops into Iraq ever again and we are not putting ground troops into Syria,” the Democratic presidential nominee, who has consistently said she does not want to put ground troops into Iraq, said during a forum on national security on NBC News.
“We’re going to defeat ISIS without committing American ground troops.”
Clinton’s remark came in response to a question from an Army veteran who asked the former secretary of state how she would determine when and where to deploy troops overseas, particularly when it comes to fighting ISIS.
“We have to defeat ISIS,” Clinton said. “That is my highest counterterrorism goal. And we’ve got to do it with air power, we’ve got to do it with much more support for the Arabs and the Kurds who will fight on the ground against ISIS.
“We have to squeeze them by continuing to support the Iraqi military. They’ve taken back Ramadi, Fallujah, they’ve got to hold them. They’ve got to now get into Mosul. We’re going to work to make sure that they have the support, they have special forces, as you know, they have enablers, they have surveillance intelligence, reconnaissance help.”

There are currently about 300 U.S. Special Forces in Syria, and about 4,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, so let’s not pretend that we don’t already have Americans in harm’s way, OK? The way Hillary just casually mentions “support,” “surveillance,” etc., ignores this reality. Likewise, her vague assurance that “the Arabs and the Kurds” and “the Iraqi military” will suffice to defeat ISIS raises the question, “Why haven’t they already defeated them?” It’s been nearly three years since ISIS established its Islamic “caliphate” in northern Syria, and they’re still there. While ISIS has suffered recent defeats in Iraq, they maintain their stronghold in Raqqa and — contrary to Hillary’s assertion — President Obama and Turkey’s President Erdogan recently discussed the possibility of a joint U.S.-Turkey operation to destroy ISIS in Raqqa.

Well, it depends on what your definition of “ground troops” is, perhaps. Hillary probably means to say we won’t be committing entire Army corps or Marine divisions against ISIS, but we definitely have troops on the ground — in May, some of our Special Forces were spotted with Kurdish forces within 18 miles of Raqqa. Honestly, if Obama would commit a battalion of Army Rangers to the fight, I’d bet they could capture Raqqa in a matter of weeks, if not days. I’m sure Col. Evans and his boys would enjoy a nice “live-fire” exercise, wiping out ISIS in one quick operation.

Excuse my nitpicky criticism of Hillary’s no-ground-troops talk, but as the father of a soldier, I resent the implication that U.S. Special Forces — the finest soldiers on the planet — are not “ground troops.”

Meanwhile, as a matter of mere politics, Donald Trump totally won Wednesday’s forum, and Hillary looked like an idiot, as usual.




 

Polls Show Hillary Slipping: Is It Because Black People Don’t Like Her Very Much?

Posted on

 

In recent days, Hillary Clinton’s poll lead over Donald Trump has begun shrinking again. In two recent polls — by Investors Business Daily and Reuters — Hillary led by just one point, and in the latest L.A. Times poll, Trump is actually leading by 2 points, 45%-43%. The trend in the Real Clear Polls average of national polls is clear — Hillary’s lead, which was nearly 8 points just three weeks ago, has now been cut in half.

The Clinton campaign’s “run-out-the-clock” strategy, which was based on confidence in Hillary’s frontrunner status, has become a subject of increasing criticism. Part of the problem, it turns out, is that young black voters aren’t really excited about a 68-year-old white woman:

When a handful of liberal advocacy organizations convened a series of focus groups with young black voters last month, the assessments of Donald J. Trump were predictably unsparing.
But when the participants were asked about Hillary Clinton, their appraisals were just as blunt and nearly as biting.
“What am I supposed to do if I don’t like him and I don’t trust her?” a millennial black woman in Ohio asked. “Choose between being stabbed and being shot? No way!”
“She was part of the whole problem that started sending blacks to jail,” a young black man, also from Ohio, observed about Mrs. Clinton.
“He’s a racist, and she is a liar, so really what’s the difference in choosing both or choosing neither?” another young black woman from Ohio said.
Young African-Americans, like all voters their age, are typically far harder to drive to the polls than middle-aged and older Americans. Yet with just over two months until Election Day, many Democrats are expressing alarm at the lack of enthusiasm, and in some cases outright resistance, some black millennials feel toward Mrs. Clinton.
Their skepticism is rooted in a deep discomfort with the political establishment that they believe the 68-year-old former first lady and secretary of state represents.

(Via Memeorandum.) This “discomfort with the political establishment” is a bipartisan phenomenon, transcending the check-the-box categories that dominate the thinking of pundits, strategists and consultants.

Donald Trump got a standing ovation at a black church in Detroit last week, and what was his message to Detroit?

“Our nation is too divided. We talk past each other, not to each other and those who seek office do not do enough to step into the community and learn what is going on,” Trump told the church-goers from the podium, where he briefly spoke about why he was there. “They don’t know. They have no clue. I’m here today to learn. So that we can together remedy injustice, in any form. And so that we can also remedy economics so that the African-American community can benefit economically through jobs and income and so many other different ways.”

The Democrats are running the same playbook they have been running for years — call Republicans “racist” and rely on this smear to win 95% of the black vote — as if black people are too stupid to see through this tactic. What does it matter whether or not Donald Trump is “racist” if Democrat policies do not actually improve the lives of black citizens?

Look at what Democrats have done to Detroit: The city is bankrupt, and Detroit’s population, which was 1.4 million in 1970, has declined to less than 700,000. The claim that electing Democrats is good for black people because Republicans are “racist” never really made sense, but how can anyone look at the situation in Detroit and believe that voting for Hillary Clinton is vital to the interests of black Americans? Detroit is the most dangerous city in America; 38% of the population lives below the poverty line and the violent crime rate is 2,072 per 100,000.

These are simply facts. Is it “racist” to mention the facts? How long can Democrats expect to keep winning elections by ignoring the facts, pointing the finger of blame at Republicans and yelling “racist”?

Leaked Hillary Video Shows Her
Telling Black Man, “I Will
Only Talk to White People”

How much more condescending and insulting can she get?




 


Evidence Shows Hillary Clinton Is Corrupt

Posted on Comments

 

Today’s headlines via Memeorandum:

Emails Raise New Questions
About Clinton Foundation Ties to State Dept.
— Eric Lichtblau, New York Times

NYT: State gave Foundation donor
access to Hillary in exchange for
a private jet ride for Bill
— Ed Morrissey, Hot Air

Top Hillary Clinton Aide Accepted
Request From Foundation Official
for Diplomatic Passport
— Natalie Johnson, Free Beacon

New Batch of Hillary Clinton Emails Show
Blurred Lines With Foundation Contacts
— Byron Tau and Peter Nicholas, Wall Street Journal

Haven’t we seen enough evidence, ladies and gentlemen? Is there any room for reasonable doubt as to Hillary Clinton’s corruption?

These emails do not merely “raise new questions,” but rather provide new answers — conclusive proof that the Clinton Foundation raised money by providing donors with influence at the State Department.

UPDATE: Welcome, Instapundit readers! The good news is, (a) Hillary’s poll numbers are slipping again, and (b) Democrats are beginning to worry about her strategy. Let the panic begin!




 

Why Does CNN Hate Police?

Posted on Comments

 

CNN’s role in creating the Black Lives Matter movement cannot be ignored. Back in 2012, it was CNN that turned the Trayvon Martin case into such a national media carnival, and after George Zimmerman was acquitted, the network went scouting around for other “social justice” sagas to exploit for ratings. This led eventually to CNN’s 24/7 saturation coverage of the Michael Brown shooting. Focusing the media spotlight on Ferguson caused riots there, and then CNN covered the riots.

Civil disorder is good for CNN’s ratings, apparently, so network executives are trying to cause as much civil disorder as possible.

People get shot all the time in America, but CNN only pays attention to shootings that fit a certain narrative. The endless carnage of black-on-black violent crime? Not newsworthy, according to CNN. More than 300 people have been shot to death in Chicago so far this year, and more than 250 of the victims were black, but CNN ignores that bloodshed, because it can’t be exploited by “social justice” activists blaming racist cops.

“So what I think is very important for you to understand just like there are rogue cops who shoot black people for sport.”
— Angela Rye, CNN, July 8

“Turn off your TV!” I want to shout at people who let themselves get worked into a frenzy over this stuff. “Cable news is making you crazy!”

No one ever seems to question the basic editorial decisions behind this kind of coverage. More than 100 people were shot last week in Chicago, but that’s just another average week in Chicago. Because this happens routinely, it is not news, and nobody cares:

Chicago, for all intents and purposes, is a “gun-free zone.”
But all the state and city regulations associated with firearms in Chicago have failed to produce a safe city, and these are the policies that President Obama and Secretary Clinton wish to extend to the rest of the country.

The streets of Chicago are covered in blood:

Weekend gun violence in Chicago pushed the number of people shot in the city this year to around 2,100, about 700 more than this time last year.
A total of 43 people were shot in the city over the weekend, four of them fatally. Nineteen of those were shot during an 11-hour stretch Friday night into Saturday morning, including two men wounded on a crowded sidewalk outside a taco restaurant in Wicker Park, according to police.
Late Saturday, a 21-year-old man was killed and a 15-year-old boy was wounded as they played basketball in Ogden Park in Englewood on the South Side, police said.
Between Friday into Saturday morning, two men died and at least 17 others were wounded; another man was killed and 15 people were hurt from Saturday morning to early Sunday; a fourth man was killed and seven were wounded in shootings Sunday afternoon and evening.

While the death toll in Chicago is strictly local news, CNN continues exploiting “social justice” for ratings and also, partisan politics:

Hillary Clinton wasted little time in assigning responsibility for Thursday’s shooting in Dallas that left five police officers dead — blame whitey!
“I’m going to be talking to white people, we’re the ones who have to start listening to the legitimate cries coming from our African-American fellow citizens,” Mrs. Clinton told CNN Friday. “Clearly, there seems to be a terrible disconnect between many police departments and officers and the people they have sworn to protect.”
Exactly what “legitimate grievances” motivated cop-hating gunman Micah Xavier Johnson were not specified by the Democratic Party’s presumptive presidential nominee. Nor did Mrs. Clinton explain why reports of wrongful police actions in Louisiana and Minnesota should have led to bloodshed in Dallas, where the police chief is a black man and law enforcement officials have striven to build trust in the community. Yet the former Secretary of State’s misplaced concerns were not disputed by the interviewer Wolf Blitzer, whose network’s bias is so blatant that Democrats who supported Bernie Sanders in this year’s primary campaign revived the longstanding Republican claim that CNN is an acronym for “Clinton News Network.”
Being pro-Clinton requires CNN and other establishment media outlets to conform their coverage to fit whatever narrative serves the “permanent campaign” mode that Democrats have maintained since Bill Clinton was inaugurated more than 20 years ago, after he received a mere 43 percent of the vote in the three-way election of 1992. Liberal journalists have never ceased singing along with the Fleetwood Mac tune that was the Clinton campaign theme song, “Don’t Stop Thinking About Tomorrow,” expressing their shared hope that the future would bring eternal Democratic control of the federal government. . . .

Read the whole thing at The American Spectator.




 

PREVIOUSLY:

 


Bill Clinton Met With Anti-Police Hate Group Leader Two Months Ago

Posted on Comments

Bill Clinton and Mauricelm-Lei Millere in May.

During a campaign visit to Kentucky this year former President Bill Clinton met with the leader of a racial hate group that has been implicated in Thursday’s attack that killed five Dallas police officers.

Mauricelm-Lei Millere is leader of the African American Defense League (AADL), which has repeatedly advocated violence against police. Dallas gunman Micah Xavier Johnson supported the AADL on Facebook, where Millere’s group posted messages that declared “ATTACK EVERYTHING IN BLUE EXCEPT THE MAIL MAN” and “sprinkle Pigs Blood” prior to Thursday’s attack. On his Instagram page, Millere wrote: “We have no alternative! We must kill white police officers across the country!”

 

The AADL leader’s meeting with former President Clinton during a May 3 visit to the University of Kentucky is featured on Millere’s Tumblr page, where a photo of Millere shaking hands with Clinton is captioned:

Dr. Mauricelm-Lei Millere accompanies President Bill Clinton and staff around the University of Kentucky campus:
“I was invited to meet with President and Mrs. Clinton and accompany them openly on UK (University of Kentucky) campus. I appreciate his honesty during my hard hitting questions concerning race. He agrees, “anyone should be able to exercise their 2nd Amendment Rights in areas of self-defense, especially African Americans, the most targeted people in the country. I am asking for your endorsement for Hillary and I so you won’t have to.” I agreed with his assessment and replied, “Either we will all live together as brothers or we will all die together as fool.”
Dr. Mauricelm-Lei Millere – African American Defense League, Black Lives Matter.

AADL was formed in September 2014 during the “Black Lives Matter” protests in Ferguson, Missouri, where activists claimed robbery suspect Michael Brown was wrongly killed by a policeman. Subsequent investigation found Officer Darren Wilson had shot Brown in self-defense during a struggle in which Brown tried to take Officer Wilson’s pistol. However,”the lie that Brown had died in a racially motivated police execution was amplified by the media, college presidents, and the left-wing political class,” as author Heather Mac Donald wrote in her recent book The War on Cops. “The newly formed Black Lives Matter movement promoted the notion that black Americans were being hunted down and killed with impunity by renegade white police officers.”

James King and Adi Cohen of Vocativ.com report:

In the days following Brown’s death, Mauricelm-Lei Millere encouraged Black people to kill Wilson. “When you find Dar­ren Wil­son you know what to do! Who­ever finds him knows what must be done! Take every­thing that he took from Mike Brown,” he wrote on his Facebook page, which was cited by the Anti-Defamation League, a civil rights advocacy group that tracks extremist organizations. Despite the fiery rhetoric, Millere’s actual influence seems limited.
“He uses social media to call for violence against police on a regular basis and has flirted with some hate groups like the New Black Panther Party,” Oren Segal, the director of the ADL’s Center on Extremism, told Vocativ. “But his online following seems stagnant and even his relationship with the New Black Panther Party seems tenuous, and they tend to promote anyone who is interested in them.”
Still, Millere’s “calls for violence can’t be ignored and it is hard to determine who may have been affected by his online rants,” Segal added.

 

 

Millere’s anti-police rhetoric increased immediately prior to the Dallas attack, as his Tumblr page quotes him saying on Thursday:

We have no alternative! We must kill white police officers across the country! . . . Across the country, the nation, the Blackman is being assassinated/killed like dogs! Unarmed Blackmen being shot down like animals. Two legged dogs sicking four legged dogs on our black children, young men, young women, and our black elderly. Shooting black folks down like rabid animals. We must kill the one in blue who is killing me and killing you! We must kill the white policeman across the country! We must hide in the darkness of the night and kill the white policeman across the country!

After Thursday’s massacre in Dallas, Hillary Clinton blamed “white people” and police. “I’m going to be talking to white people, we’re the ones who have to start listening to the legitimate cries coming from our African-American fellow citizens,” Mrs. Clinton told CNN Friday. “Clearly, there seems to be a terrible disconnect between many police departments and officers and the people they have sworn to protect.”

Meanwhile, police are being targeted in ambush attacks. In Missouri, a police officer was critically wounded Friday in what officials say was “clearly an ambush” by 31-year-old Antonio Taylor, who had a lengthy history of violent crime. In Georgia, a police officer was ambushed Friday after responding to a 911 call in Valdosta. Officer Randall Hancock is recovering after being shot; the suspect, Stephen Paul Beck, was wounded when Officer Hancock returned fire.

In Tennessee, officials indicated race was a motive for Thursday’s shooting rampage in which a woman was killed and two others injured before the gunman was shot in a gun battle with police. Officer Matthew Cousins was wounded in the exchange of fire with suspect Lakeem Keon Scott, 37. The Tennessee Bureau of Investigation said in a statement: “Preliminarily, the investigation reveals Scott may have targeted individuals and officers after being troubled by recent incidents involving African-Americans and law enforcement officers in other parts of the country.” Scott was receiving disability payments and did not have a job. “He seemed to be getting more and more frustrated with the condition of black people in America,” his brother Gerard Griffin told WVLT-TV.





 

PREVIOUSLY:

 


Surrender Without a Fight?

Posted on Comments

“Americans traditionally love to fight. All real Americans love the sting of battle. . . . Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser. Americans play to win all the time. . . . Because the very thought of losing is hateful to Americans.”
— Gen. George S. Patton, 1944

Today, there is encouraging news for Republicans. The latest NBC tracking poll shows Donald Trump closing in on Hillary Clinton:

While Clinton is looking to wrap up the Democratic nomination with a strong performance in the final group of states on June 7, her advantage in a hypothetical matchup against the Republican nominee has dwindled by the week. Over the last seven days, Clinton led Trump 47 percent to 45 percent, with the Manhattan businessman drawing 2 points closer since the last weekly survey.

This is mirrored in the Real Clear Politics poll average, where Clinton led by 10 points six weeks ago in mid-April, but is now just a single point ahead of Trump. This is encouraging news, I say, if you are a Republican who considers it imperative to defeat the Democrats. On the other hand, if you are a disgruntled intellectual like David Frum, Trump’s impressive success is a threat to all that is good and holy:

The television networks that promoted Trump; the primary voters who elevated him; the politicians who eventually surrendered to him; the intellectuals who argued for him, and the donors who, however grudgingly, wrote checks to him—all of them knew, by the time they made their decisions, that Trump lied all the time, about everything. They knew that Trump was ignorant, and coarse, and boastful, and cruel. They knew he habitually sympathized with dictators and kleptocrats—and that his instinct when confronted with criticism of himself was to attack, vilify, and suppress. They knew his disrespect for women, the disabled, and ethnic and religious minorities. They knew that he wished to unravel NATO and other U.S.-led alliances, and that he speculated aloud about partial default on American financial obligations. None of that dissuaded or deterred them.  . . .

You can read the whole thing, if you’re into that kind of totally demoralizing Voice-of-Doom trip. David Frum hates Donald Trump about as much as does former Hillary adviser Alec Ross, who called Trump “a vulgar, demented, pig demon.” There is a bipartisan consensus against Trump among the decadent intellectual elite, while among the electorate — you know, the actual citizens of America who elect presidents — there is a bipartisan consensus that we need to stop listening to the intellectual elite. It seems a substantial segment of the electorate have decided that the “experts” got us into this mess, and so to hell with the experts.

Is it my job to tell the America people they’re wrong? No, because I actually agree with this anti-elite consensus and the fact that the chosen messenger, Donald Trump, is far from ideal in many ways does not alter the basic politica goal, i.e., defeat the Democrat Party.

We must fight the war we are actually in with the army we actually have.

Now is not the time — scarcely five months before Election Day — to sit around bemoaning the accumulated problems of the GOP political apparatus that made it impossible for conservatives to nominate some other candidate that they might have preferred over Trump.

Honestly, a year ago, it seemed to me that Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker was the man to beat, but he didn’t catch fire in the early debates and was the first candidate to quit the primary race. So much for my own “expert” opinion, I suppose. When he quit the campaign, Walker urged others in the crowded primary field to emulate his example, in order to unite behind a non-Trump candidate. Yet 11 candidates went all the way to the Iowa caucus in February, with eight candidates (Ben Carson, Rand Paul, Jeb Bush, Carly Fiorina, John Kasich, Mike Huckabee, Chris Christie and Rick Santorum) divvying up about 25% of the vote, which might otherwise have gone to either Ted Cruz (who narrowly won Iowa) or Marco Rubio, who placed third in the caucuses. How different might the outcome of the primary campaign have been, if Cruz had won Iowa more decisively and Rubio had finished second, with Trump third? I don’t know, but nearly three weeks later, when Trump decisively won the Feb. 20 South Carolina, only five other candidates (Rubio, Cruz, Bush, Kasich and Carson) were still running, and defeat in South Carolina ended the campaigns of Bush and Carson.

Could this winnowing of the GOP field have been done much earlier? Yes, but do you think any of the consultants and campaign operatives on the payrolls of Team Bush — which raised $162 million — were going to tell Jeb that his candidacy was a waste of time and money? Or what about the various political “experts” hired by the campaigns of Carson, Kasich, Christie, Fiorina, Rick Perry and Bobby Jindal who between them raised a combined total of more than $200 million? Wasted money, wasted time, and nothing meaningful to show for it. All in all, about $400 million was squandered on the ultimately futile campaigns of Republican candidates who didn’t make it past South Carolina, and did anyone seriously believe John Kasich’s extended candidacy could help stop Trump in the much-talked-about “brokered convention” scenario?

Well, all that is now decisively over, and Bill Kristol is now publicly fantasizing about a third-party candidate — an idea perhaps slightly less realistic than a teenage boy’s wet dreams about Kate Upton.

Simple question: Do we want to beat Hillary, or not?

It is evident from the polls that Donald Trump can beat Hillary, and if some of our conservative pundit friends can get over their hurt feelings over their failures in the GOP primary campaign, maybe Trump will beat Hillary. But if we wake up the morning after Election Day and find that Hillary Clinton has been elected president because some disgruntled Republican “strategist” types didn’t do all they could to help beat Hillary, there is going to be hell to pay. The very thought of losing is hateful to Americans, and a victory for Hillary is a defeat for America.

Let’s win this thing.