Time To Put Up A Wall Between Hillary Clinton & Government

Jun 27, 2024

Hillary is Clinton launching a new book, Something Lost, Something Gained: Reflections on Life, Love, and Liberty. In it, she professes to issue a “warning” to all American voters: That a Trump presidency will spell the end “the end of our democracy,” and that “the kind of threats that you hear coming out of Donald Trump should scare every American.”

Of course, we have heard these types of things before. In fact, we have heard them consistently ever since she lost to Trump in 2016 and became the premiere election denier.

But as “threats to democracy” go, Hillary Clinton has an impressively nefarious history; one that includes a whole-hearted endorsement – through word and deed – to Marxism and totalitarianism in some of the most damning ways.

Hillary Clinton has faced scrutiny for various actions as Secretary of State and throughout her political career and public life. From the Watergate era to her potential bid for the Democrat presidential nomination in 2024, if the DNC were to replace Joe Biden, Clinton has proven to be an opportunistic globalist with a devotion to Marxism and a tremendously authoritarian figure.

In an age when the United States stands severely divided, and our Constitution seems to be nothing more than a list of suggestions to the neo-Bolshevik Left, the last person we need in the Oval Office is a maniacal megalomaniac who is willing to do anything to satisfy her obsession with power; her addiction to the spotlight and her unwarranted need to feel important. The last person we need in the Oval Office is Hillary Clinton.

Clinton’s Initial Marxist Influences

There is a damning expose featured in DiscoverTheNetworks.org that is deeply and credibly sourced. Please take the time to read it. You will never – ever – look at Hillary Clinton the same again. In fact, you will wonder how someone who hates the founding tenets of Americanism so committedly could rise to the levels she has in influence and power.

Clinton’s compulsion with winning at all costs started with her fixations with an article by Carl Oglesby titled “Change or Containment” – in which he defended Ho Chi Minh, Fidel Castro, and Maoist tactics of violence, and with Saul Alinsky, whom she became lifelong friends with and of which she based her college thesis at Wellesley College in Massachusetts. Ironically, before attending Wellesley, she was a Goldwater Republican. Her radicalization would come to her at Wellesley.

Clinton wrote of Alinsky in her 92-page Wellesley senior thesis:

“Alinsky is regarded by many as the proponent of a dangerous socio/political philosophy. As such, he has been feared – just as Eugene Debs [the five-time Socialist Party candidate for US President]...has been feared…If the ideals Alinsky espouses were actualized, the result would be social revolution.”

Interestingly, Clinton participated in the 1968 riots in Chicago during the Democrat National Convention and, later, became personally involved in the defense of several Black Panthers (including the infamous Bobby Seale) who were tried in Connecticut for the torture, murder, and mutilation of one of their own members.

In a speech he gave at Chicago’s Grant Park during the lead-up to the 1968 riots in Chicago, Seale stated, “If the police get in the way of our march, tangle with the blue-helmeted motherfuckers and kill them and send them to the morgue slab.” Seale was among eight persons – the “Chicago Eight” – arrested and charged with conspiracy and inciting to riot.

Hillary’s Radicalization Continues

While at Yale Law School – aside from being an ardent anti-war protester and protest organizer at Yale Law School, Clinton was strongly influenced by Duncan Kennedy, founder of the academic movement called Critical Legal Studies (read: Critical Legal Theory of the same intellectual cloth as Critical Race Theory).

Drawn from the works of the Fabian Socialism of the Frankfurt School, Critical Law Theory viewed the law as a “social construct” that the corrupt routinely exploited as an instrument of oppression to protect and promote their own “bourgeois values at the expense of the poor and disenfranchised.”

Advocates of Critical Legal Theory were interested in revolutionary change and the building of a new society founded on Marxist principles, much the same as today.

In her time as one of nine editors of the Yale Review of Law & Social Action publication – a radically Leftist alternative to the Yale Law Review, she green-lighted articles by or about ultra-Leftwing radicals like William Kunstler, Charles Reich (author of The Greening of America); Jerry Rubin (who urged parents to “get high with our seven-year-olds,” and students to “kill our parents”); and Charles Garry, the civil rights attorney who defended Black Panther Party members accused of murder.

In 1972, Clinton went to the University of California at Berkeley to work as an intern at the law firm Treuhaft, Walker & Bernstein, which had been founded by then-current and former members of the Communist Party USA. This firm acted as a legal asset not only for the CPUSA but also for the Black Panthers and other Marxist-based radical groups in the San Francisco Bay Area.

One of the founding partners of Treuhaft, Walker & Bernstein, Bob Treuhaft, was head of the California Communist Party and had been labeled one of the nation’s most “dangerously subversive lawyers [and] a man who dedicated his entire legal career to advancing the agenda of the Soviet Communist Party and the KGB.”

Hillary Clinton’s Watergate Disgrace

In 1973 and 1974, Clinton maneuvered her way into becoming one of 40 lawyers serving as key researchers for the House Judiciary Committee’s impeachment inquiry staff. This staff was tasked with researching the charges and crafting impeachment articles against then-Richard Nixon for his role in the Watergate scandal.

With what many described as “single-minded zealotry,” Clinton was estimated to have worked on the investigation anywhere from twelve to twenty-four hours per day, seven days a week.

Clinton would eventually be relieved of this role. The Committee’s general counsel and chief of staff – and Clinton’s direct supervisor on the committee – lifelong Democrat Jerry Zeifman, said in 1999, “If I had the power to fire her, I would have fired her.”

In a 2008 interview on “The Neal Boortz Show,” Zeifman was asked directly about it, and his answer was clear. “Well, let me put it this way. I terminated her, along with some other staff members who were — we no longer needed, and advised her that I would not — could not recommend her for any further positions.”

Despite what some may call her “accomplishments,” Clinton’s contemporary malfeasance eclipses the neo-Bolshevik actions of her youth and young adulthood. Should the Democrat National Committee choose to replace Joe Biden with Clinton as its candidate in the 2024 General Election, these more contemporary actions must be used to question her fitness for office – at any level and at any time.

The Private Email Server Scandal

One of the most significant controversies surrounding Hillary Clinton is her use of a private email server for official communication during her tenure as Secretary of State from 2009 to 2013. This decision, which violated federal guidelines, exposed classified information to unauthorized access and raised questions about her commitment to transparency and national security.

In 2015, it was discovered that Clinton had deleted 33,000 emails from the private server, which were under investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. She claimed these emails were personal and unrelated to her State Department work. However, this action obstructed the investigation and demonstrated Clinton's willingness to hide information from the public. Furthermore, an FBI investigation found that Clinton had mishandled classified information in emails on her private server.

Although no charges were filed, the FBI Director, James Comey, stated that Clinton and her aides were "extremely careless" in their handling of classified information.

Pay-to-Play, The Clinton Foundation
& State Department Access

Another controversy surrounding Hillary Clinton is her involvement in pay-to-play schemes with the Clinton Foundation and donors seeking access to the State Department.

The foundation, founded by her husband, former President Bill Clinton, has been scrutinized for its ties to foreign governments and businesses.

Critics rightly point out that the Clinton Foundation served as a vehicle for Hillary Clinton to leverage her political influence for personal and financial gain. They point to instances where donors to the foundation received special access to Clinton and the State Department, raising concerns about corruption and conflicts of interest.

A chief example of this recurring scheme is chronicled by Jack Crowe of The Daily Signal:

“In a similar example of apparent preferential treatment for Clinton donors, the managing director of left-wing fundraising organization Democracy Alliance, Kelly Craighead, emailed Abedin asking her to ‘reach out’ to an ‘extremely loyal supporter’ who was awaiting a response regarding an application for a senior position at the State Department.
“One year later, in April 2010, Craighead reached out again with a State Department personnel request.
“‘It would mean a lot to me if you could help or advise on a personnel situation for a dear friend,’ Craighead said. Abedin appears to have prioritized the request. ‘We love [name redacted]. Looking into this asap,’ she responded.”

The Benghazi Attack Cover-Up

Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State was marred by the tragic events of September 11, 2012, when the US diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, was attacked by terrorists. Four Americans, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens, were killed in the attack. This event was beautifully captured in the movie 13 Hours.

Clinton mishandled the response to the Benghazi attack, covering up the true nature of the incident to protect her political ambitions, which culminated in Clinton’s infamous testimony before Congress, in which she said, “What difference, at this point does it make?!”

As The Hill.com – by no means a conservative outlet – reported:

“The theme that hits home throughout the [House Select Committee’s Benghazi] report is the litany of excuses from the Obama administration as they struggle to explain away their failure to act. Not surprisingly, the same “talking point rationale” is used repeatedly – ‘tyranny of time and distance'...
“Their report starkly contrasts the heroism of GRS personnel, Diplomatic Security Agents, and Team Tripoli fighting to protect American lives in Benghazi, with the total incompetence and dereliction of duty of so-called ‘leaders’ in DC who chose to talk and spin while actually doing nothing.
“Apparently, those who chose that night to debate videos and uniforms, and who have never smelled the smoke of battle, think Americans are stupid enough to buy their after-the-fact excuses for why they did not even attempt to rescue over thirty Americans facing multiple assaults.”

It has since been proven that both Clinton and the Obama administration knowingly misrepresented the attack as a spontaneous protest rather than a premeditated terrorist act to avoid political fallout during the 2012 presidential election.

Accepting Donations From Countries
With Poor Human Rights Records

Clinton has faced criticism for accepting donations from countries with poor human rights records for the Clinton Foundation. These donations raised questions about her commitment to human rights and the potential for conflicts of interest in her foreign policy decisions.

The New York Times reported:

“...the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation has accepted tens of millions of dollars in donations from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Algeria, and Brunei – all of which the State Department has faulted over their records on sex discrimination and other human rights issues.
“The department’s 2011 human rights report on Saudi Arabia, the last such yearly review prepared during Mrs. Clinton’s tenure, tersely faulted the kingdom for ‘a lack of equal rights for women and children,’ and said violence against women, human trafficking and gender discrimination, among other abuses, were all ‘common” there.’
“Saudi Arabia has been a particularly generous benefactor to the Clinton Foundation, giving at least $10 million since 2001, according to foundation disclosures. At least $1 million more was donated by Friends of Saudi Arabia, co-founded by a Saudi prince.”

Misuse Of State Department
Resources For Personal & Political Gain

Clinton was accused of misusing State Department resources for personal and political gain throughout her tenure as Secretary of State. These allegations have included using government resources to promote her political ambitions and employing government staff for personal tasks.

As Annie Karni of the far-Left publication Politico reported in 2015:

“The latest email dump of 7,800 Clinton messages shows the former secretary of state dealing primarily with her day job handling the country’s international concerns. But quietly, throughout her four years heading the State Department — and most often without overt political commentary — Clinton’s top aides fed her tidbits of gossip and updates on the movements of other political players who could affect the presidential election landscape, the new batch reveals.
“Clinton’s return to the national political scene last April was pitched as a comeback story. She had been out of the national loop for so long, the narrative went, that she required downtime to thoughtfully assess whether or not to run again...
“But in the latest release of State Department emails, Clinton divulges an appetite for the gossip and granular detail of national politics that’s more typically associated with her husband, Bill Clinton. And it suggests that even after a brutal loss in 2008 and thoughts of ‘never again,’ Hillary Clinton never completely turned her gaze away from the mechanics of presidential politics…
“While Clinton kept tabs on the Republicans angling for the 2012 nomination, she also made sure to keep alive her own network from the failed 2008 campaign.”

As Andrew McCarthy noted in an article for The National Review:

“Hillary and her husband, former president Bill Clinton, operated the Clinton Foundation. Ostensibly a charity, the foundation was a de facto fraud scheme to monetize Hillary’s power as secretary of state (among other aspects of the Clintons’ political influence). The scheme involved (a) the exchange of political favors, access, and influence for millions of dollars in donations; (b) the circumvention of campaign-finance laws that prohibit political donations by foreign sources; (c) a vehicle for Mrs. Clinton to shield her State Department e-mail communications from public and congressional scrutiny while she and her husband exploited the fundraising potential of her position; and (d) a means for Clinton insiders to receive private-sector compensation and explore lucrative employment opportunities while drawing taxpayer-funded government salaries.
“While the foundation did perform some charitable work, this camouflaged the fact that contributions were substantially diverted to pay lavish salaries and underwrite luxury travel for Clinton insiders…”

The canard that Clinton was only conducting state business in her official capacity as Secretary of State is just that.

Enabling & Covering Up Bill Clinton's Sexual Misconduct

Clinton has also been rightly criticized for enabling and covering up her husband's sexual misconduct.

As First Lady and during her political career, she has been accused of actively working to discredit Bill Clinton's accusers and protecting his reputation at the expense of the women involved.

Tim Brown of The Washington Standard compiled an exhaustive list of women who fell prey to Bill Clinton, including: Eileen Wellstone, Juanita Broaddrick, Carolyn Moffet, Elizabeth Ward, Paula Corbin, Sandra Allen James, Christy Zercher, Kathleen Willey, Gennifer Flowers, and Monica Lewinsky.

These are just some of the unethical and/or criminal acts executed by Clinton and her inner circle. This doesn’t include:

Clinton’s implication in the production and dissemination of the Steele dossier
The Clinton campaign’s funneling of millions of dollars to the Democrat National Committee through a joint fundraising agreement that gave Clinton undue influence over the DNC during the 2016 primary
Clinton’s use of her position as Secretary of State to secure lucrative deals for donors to the Clinton Foundation
Accepting millions of dollars in speaking fees from large corporations and special interest groups while holding public office

Perhaps the most nationally damaging act was her acceptance of donations from Russian interests while approving the Uranium One deal. The deal, which was approved by the State Department during Clinton's tenure, gave Russia control of 20 percent of US uranium reserves.

Again, from The New York Times:

“As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.
“And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.”

Clinton's involvement in the Uranium One deal demonstrates her willingness to prioritize personal and financial gain over national security interests.

With Regard To Hillary Clinton: Never Again

So, as questions abound about Joe Biden’s mental fitness to run for re-election and the August Democrat National Convention nearing, we must lend credence to an idea sketched out by Ben Garrison that exhibits Hillary Clinton’s lust for the spotlight and her addiction to power:

The scandals and controversies that have plagued Clinton’s career raise serious and significant questions about her fitness for public office and her commitment to ethical governance.

As the American public continues to grapple with the consequences of her actions, it remains to be seen whether Hillary Clinton's legacy will be one of ruthless ambition or scandal and corruption. But one thing is quite clear: the true threat to our “democracy” would come in a Hillary Clinton presidency.

This neo-Bolshevik Marxist should “never again” be elected to a position of power.