Like water off a duck’s back

So, when will Hillary Clinton’s fashion style change into prison garb? And when will her selection of jewellery change into balls and chains?

What’s been emerging from special counsel John Durham’s probe into what some still call “Russiagate” seem to indicate that the former First Lady and presidential candidate’s case has become a prime example of what it means to call something open-and-shut.

Those who liked (still do) invoking Donald J. Trump’s name as Russia’s puppet have never realised that President Vladimir Putin, a former KGB officer, still remembers his craft. When the accusations first surfaced before the 2016 U.S. presidential elections, unofficial word (for the background) from the Kremlin was straightforward: the Muscovites would prefer Ms. Clinton to anyone, ten times out of ten.

Why? Easier to blackmail (легче шантажировать).

They knew their facts.

Many are still asking why gate has become part of the description of each and every scandal, especially those mainstream media claim they have uncovered. Watergate has become a part of American journalism’s legend, even though many of those who still recall the details have a number of questions. Most of those questions would (should) make the Washington Post crowd squirm because it now is beginning to look as if not all was as it had been presented.

Who’s fake here?

Tweeting from Germany’s capital city, Berlin, Hillary Clinton denied everything and tried to go on attack: Trump & Fox are desperately spinning up a fake scandal to distract from his real ones. So it’s a day that ends in Y.

The more his misdeeds are exposed, the more they lie.

For those interested in reality, here’s a good debunking of their latest nonsense.

To add a proof to her statement, Clinton added a link to a Vanity Fair story of Feb. 15, 2022, headlined modestly (the capital letters are theirs): YOU’LL NEVER BELIEVE IT BUT HILLARY CLINTON DID NOT, IN FACT, SPY ON TRUMP’S WHITE HOUSE.

An impeccable source as ever, Vanity Fair magazine’s editors added these newsworthy words to their own post announcing the story: In less breaking news, Donald Trump remains a moron.

As labels go, this one takes the cake.

According to special counsel John Durham, a technology executive, aligned allegedly with the Democrat Party and the Clinton campaign, spied on Trump’s residences and the White House when he was president.

This allegation was part of the case Durham has made against Michael Sussmann.

The lawyer who worked on behalf of the Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee in 2016, had lied to the FBI. He told the bureau that he wasn’t working for any client when he provided false documents that claimed to have linked the Trump Organization to a Russian bank, Durham alleges.

Verbatim: Sussmann “assembled and conveyed the allegations to the FBI on behalf of at least two specific clients, including a technology executive (Tech Executive 1) at a U.S.-based internet company (Internet Company 1) and the Clinton campaign.”

Whether it was surprising or not, and whether it was wise or not, remains to be seen, but Sussmann has pled not guilty. On top of it, his lawyers said the filing included “prejudicial — and false — allegations” against their client. They wanted the allegations removed just on their say-so.

By pleading not guilty, Sussmann may have opened a direct path to a trial where more dirt may (or may not) come up. By extension, if the dirt does come up, Sussmann may have opened the door to his own inexplicable suicide.

The tech executive, while claiming he was an “apolitical Internet security expert,” has been quoted in a number of news reports as stating that he had “legally provided access to DNS data obtained from a private client that separately was providing DNS services to the Executive Office of the President (EOP).

A White House spokeslady declined to comment on Durham’s findings: “That’s something I can’t speak to from this podium, so I refer you to the Department of Justice,” White House deputy press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters.

The rest of the story gets too complicated, but it is still quite shocking: a sitting president not only aware of illegal shenanigans performed by his heir-apparent but having no issues with his own office taking active part, either.

The question why all of it has started coming out only now may be more interesting than the final results of the Durham investigation (and the subsequent court proceedings, if any).

Obviously, the so-called Deep State, the real power-that-be in the United States, would not permit anything of the kind to make any sort of headlines while Trump was still the boss: the idea was to discredit him, after all.

Why here, why now?

There may be several reasons for these strange revelations to be happening two years after the questionable elections of 2020.

One of them: the new bosses at the Democratic Party are trying to get rid of any and all traditional operatives, including the current White House incumbent. They are moving their party much further to what is still called “the left” in the hopes they would become undisputed dictators.

They may regret their short-sighted decision-making process sooner than they can imagine now. Revolutions have been known for eating their own children.

They are also afraid that Trump will come back to run for presidency in 2024, and Clinton has already lost to him once. The reward is too huge to permit her another chance.

The Democrats also need to polish their image so they can claim they let justice take its course even in the case of such a mighty pillar within their party like Hillary Clinton.

One issue that does not sound too optimistic: America’s children have been exposed to militant Marxist propaganda since the 1960s, and it is beginning to show. Yes, there still exist level-headed parents (and grandparents) who are fighting the system tooth and nail, but, it seems, the system is beginning to enjoy the upper hand. After all, after more than half of a century of teaching children all kinds of lies, the results had to become apparent one day. And that one day is now.

Add to it the fact that most parents in recent decades haven’t had enough time to keep an eye on their children. Most have been busy putting bread on the table, and checking not only their children’s marks but their curricula, too, became secondary.

All of this means that even if Hillary Clinton’s extraordinary extracurricular activities did make mainstream media’s headlines with factual reporting to follow, most of today’s American grown-ups would yawn.

It’s hard to say how many would get their stories from mainstream media, as slanted as ever, and how many would trouble to go deeper to find the facts.

That answers the questions that opened this story: when will Hillary Clinton’s fashion style change into prison garb? And when will her selection of jewellery change into balls and chains?

The answer, at least for today, is: never.

And that’s the tragedy.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: