Well, pardon me while I fall off my chair. The GOP has threatened NBC and CNN with a boycott of those stations during all 2016 debates if they go ahead with their planned tv movies about Hillary Clinton. Congrats to Reince Priebus for doing what should have been done many elections back, demanding neutrality in political moderators. Now we’ll see if the RNC sticks to its guns or if, like Obama, its threats are all blow and no go.
I’m curious how the Hollywood propagandists will re-define the smarmy Ms. Rodham’s life. How will they portray the world’s most grasping and ambitious woman, someone who rivals the scheming Lucretia Borgia? Will they highlight her lack of morality in public life, the tendency to lie, cheat and probably steal to get what she wants? I’m pretty sure that if they just faithfully presented the facts, they would speak volumes about her character. So I guess Hollywood won’t do that.
I remember when Ben Stein declared that Hillary wore that ubiquitous headband she used to sport to prevent her brains exploding from self-righteousness. That is Hillary in a nutshell, a first-class harridan who lets nothing get in her way when she wants something. Her ruthlessness and scheming have left a trail like a slug through her ascent to power and I hope that the masters of unreality in sunny CA will follow it wherever it leads. If they don’t, I’m sure somebody will.
I suppose the fantasy epic will open at Yale in the 60’s, where the geeky Hillary, glasses on her fat little nose, is passionately defending the rights of certain Black Panthers who murdered policemen with a great deal of pleasure and satisfaction. Let’s see her unvarnished state, arrogance oozing out as she tells the public why it is okay to murder cops if you happen to be a poor black guy with a grudge.
They might show all those angry teary nights when she sits at home in Arkansas plotting revenge on her philandering husband or pan out for a shot of her throwing lamps at him as he creeps in at three in the morning, but will they allude to the rumors of Bill Clinton’s involvement in drug-running out of Latin America through Mena Airport? Will they show us the day she takes the Rose Law firm records being subpoenaed by Special Prosecutor Ken Starr and hides them in a closet at the White House? And since the infotainment world doesn’t need facts to make claims about anything, perhaps they will give us that evening when, with door locked, she combs through the records for incriminating evidence and then starts a little bonfire with it.
I’ve often wondered what she set a match to besides the Whitewater-related evidence of corruption. Soon after Clinton was nominated for president, I was informed separately by two highly informed Panamanian sources that Mrs. Clinton and “others from some law firm” were investors in a private resort that was laundering drug-money. The establishment does exist but isn’t listed on any stock exchange, and it sits in the jungle on the border of Panama and Colombia. I wonder if the return on Clinton’s claimed investment was more eye-popping than the $100,000 she got from a $10,000 investment in record time (and will Hollywood remind us about that windfall?). Maybe she invested the $100,000 and got a million. Maybe that first wildly luck investment was the same sort of investment as her alleged Panamanian venture. I wonder if she paid income tax on that windfall from Panama. Surely our nosy IRS could take a quick look and tell us, since we know the nation’s accountants have no trouble sharing politically-useful information with the Democrats. Turn-about is fair play, Mr. Werfel! On the other hand, I wouldn’t believe a thing Werfel said.
How about showing a close-up of Mrs. Clinton’s face as she tells the world how she landed under enemy fire in Bosnia. Don’t you think there is something mentally off-kilter about people who tell lies to your face knowing you can figure out it’s a lie with no trouble at all? Did she consider that people who really did die going in under fire might be the tiniest bit angered by her lies?
And I hope Hollywood goes into detail about both Benghazi and Libya in general. Show Generalissimo Clinton leading the pack baying for war against Qaddafi so the US could install in government its own bunch of incompetents (The Resistance!). Libya was supposed to showcase Clinton’s brilliant foreign policy skills and demonstrate that she had guts. She could turn despots into corpses and tyrannies into enlightened democracies. Hillary’s Libya policy was supposed to demonstrate that she was smarter about other people’s countries than even the leaders of those countries were. Instead, the disastrous US foray into nation- building demonstrated a total lack of qualities that either a Secretary of State or a President needs. She showed that she could destroy, but not build. Show us that, Hollywood.
Show us Hillary euphoric with glee and squealing in delight at the news that Moammar Qaddafi had been on his knees begging for his life when one of America’s proxy heroes shot him in the head like a rabid dog. In the days when old Hil’ and Bill were protesting the Vietnam War I bet she didn’t get quite the same kick out of photos of a North Vietnamese prisoner being shot in the head in a summary execution. But she wasn’t in charge then.
Show Hillary Clinton approving a “diplomatic” outpost in one of earth’s most dangerous spots because she eagerly supported the illicit arming of the Syrian “resistance.” Arms-running out of Benghazi with the Turks as intermediaries gave her a chance to bring down another government, adding yet more shine to her star. Inexplicably, after opening Arms Deals Central in Ground Zero Benghazi, she also approved a “no guns” security policy at the outpost. I hope Hollywood gets to the bottom of that insanity, because Hillary isn’t saying. I don’t know what they’ll do about the bizarre business of Mrs. Clinton vanishing from sight for weeks after taking responsibility for Benghazi (but only for anything that happened in the State Department, don’t forget that qualification). Of course we were told the poor dear had a stroke or some such thing, but I’d like to know the real story. It doesn’t pass the smell test, despite the ugly glasses. It was in any case a huge and lucky coincidence of timing that kept the chief architect of everything that happened in Libya out of the public eye and away from the frenzy over the blunders and misjudgments and cold political calculation that led to the deaths of Americans in that Libyan hell-hole.
I’m hoping to see a close-up of the face of Ambassador Thomas Pickering as sweat breaks out all over his forehead, the phone pressed to his ear. He hangs up and turns to a close aide and almost bursts into tears. “I’m the head of the Benghazi investigation. I might have to question Hillary Clinton. It will be the end of my career!” Perhaps Mr. Pickering’s dreams of being Secretary of State were salvaged. We know that he never interviewed or as much as shared a “good morning” with Mrs. Clinton on the subject of Benghazi and nevertheless presented an investigative report that absolved everybody of guilt except the usual low-level expendables. Now there’s a man who ought to be Secretary of State, right?
And finally, I hope they include that “fun” shot shown around the world of Secretary of State Clinton tripping on the top step of an aircraft as she jetted off to save the world. That huge round expensively clad bottom rising into the air was like “Moon Over Miami” and just begged to be kicked. One of my favorite pictures of Hillary, it is like a metaphor for who she is.