Marx on Monday: Hillary 2016

I know it’s a bit early in the day for speculation on who is going to be the next Presidential nominee for the Democrats but they are really going to struggle to get someone who can fill Obama’s boots. Where on earth are they going to find a candidate who measures up to Obama’s standards of honesty and integrity?

I was mulling the question over whilst enjoying my breakfast in one of the healthiest and finest restaurants in Chicago – “The Wiener’s Circle” – when I bumped into the answer to all of the Democrat’s prayers.

I had just taken a bite out of my chilli dog when my attention was drawn to a very glamorous woman who walked in to order some food. She was an older lady but still sported a head of golden hair and had a pretty good figure. She could have passed for a woman in her forties if she hadn’t had a neck like a dinosaur’s scrotum. She ordered a foot long wiener with fries then turned to look for somewhere to sit.  There was a spare seat at my table and she wandered over and asked if anyone was sitting there.

“No,” I replied with a smile and then gasped in surprise. I’d recognize those chipmunk features anywhere. It was none other than Hilary Rodham Clinton – ex First Lady and early front runner to be the 45th President of the United States of America.

“Hilary!” I gasped, “what brings you to Chicago?”

“This is my home town Kevin,” she replied, “and I hope to be the second Illinois born President in America’s history – the first being that Republican fascist Ronald Reagan.”

“But didn’t you used to belong to the Republican Party?” I asked her.

“That was a long time ago,” she smiled.

“Didn’t you once say that in your mind you were a conservative and in your heart you were a liberal?” I put to her.

“I’m still a liberal in my heart,” she replied, “but I lost my conservatism when I met Bill.”

“So there are no longer any conservative ideals in your mind?”

“I don’t know, there may be,” she sighed, “I lost my mind at the same time as I lost my conservatism.”

“And why do you think you would make a good President?” I put her on the spot.

“I’ve learnt a great deal from my husband and even more from Obama,” she replied, “to be a good, no, a great, President you have to earn the people’s trust.”

“What about those lies you told about your trip to Bosnia in 1996?”  I played devil’s advocate.

“What lies?”

“You said that your plane had to make a corkscrew landing to avoid being shot down,” I reminded her, “then once on the ground you had to make a run for it to avoid sniper fire.”

“That’s exactly what happened,” she pouted, “isn’t it?”

“The whole incident was filmed,” I put her straight, “and not only did the plane make a perfectly normal landing you were greeted at the airport by an eight year old girl carrying a bouquet of flowers.”

“It was still terrifying,” she insisted, “for all I knew that little girl could have been a suicide bomber.”

“Well then what about the Whitewater scandal?” I pressed her. “When you were subpoenaed by a grand jury, and to avoid being charged you hid important evidence against you in the Whitehouse library for two years.”

“I’d forgotten that I took the records, for no apparent reason, from the client files of the law firm I worked at in Arkansas and stored them behind some books in the Whitehouse library,” she protested, “when the investigators asked where they were I couldn’t remember. Anyway, the grand jury decided that there was insufficient evidence to prosecute me for a criminal fraud.”

“Isn’t that because you had hidden the evidence in the Whitehouse library?”

“I hadn’t hidden it,” she insisted, “I put it there for safekeeping.”

“Why did you take the documents out of the client files in the first place?” I asked.

“I’m afraid I can’t tell you that,” she replied, “it’s a matter of client privilege.”

“But wasn’t the client a great friend of yours who went to prison over a multi-million dollar fraudulent land deal that you and Bill were co-investors in?” I pressed her.

“She did go to prison,” Hilary conceded, “but Bill, who was governor of Arkansas at the time, gave her a state pardon so she was released immediately.”

“Wasn’t that a corrupt use of his powers?” I asked.

“Absolutely not,” she spat back, “we only pardoned her because she was a personal friend and we felt sorry for her as she was carrying the can for us. Neither Bill nor I would ever abuse the powers of office.”

“But when you went to the Whitehouse as First Lady,” I challenged her, “didn’t you personally sack every member of staff in the travel office and give their jobs to unqualified personal friends of yours from Arkansas?”

“There was an investigation into those allegations,” she replied, “and I was cleared totally of any wrongdoing.”

“But didn’t the independent counsel’s report find that you were responsible for the firings and had lied about it?”

“I don’t think they said I’d actually lied,” she protested.

“But didn’t the final report conclude that you were responsible for the sackings,” I asked, “and had made factually false statements about it?”

“Exactly,” she nodded her head, “the report didn’t conclude I had lied – just that I had made factually false statements.”

“What about the allegations of insider trading, bribery and corruption over the millions of dollars you made from trading in cattle futures in the 1970s,” I asked, “or the allegations you had documents that might have incriminated you in the Whitewater scandal removed from the office of Vince Foster, on the night he committed suicide in that very same office, whilst his body still lay on the floor?”

“That’s all they were,” she protested, “allegations, no-one could prove anything.”

“Like when you illegally ordered hundreds of FBI background files on all employees at the Whitehouse who were known to have Republican sympathies to be delivered to your office?”

“That’s right,” she replied, “like I explained at the time, it was a bureaucratic mix up. Anyway, all these things happened years ago. I’m a different person now.”

“So what about the Benghazi scandal,” I asked, “when US Ambassador Stevens along with three other Americans, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods were murdered by terrorists?”

“There was a full Accountability Review Board investigation into that,” she sighed, “and the ARB conducted a rigorous and unsparing investigation that completely exonerated me.”

“Rigorous and unsparing?” I raised an eyebrow.

“Absolutely!” she insisted.

“But weren’t the ARB investigators, Thomas Pickering and Mike Mullen, neither who were qualified for the job, personally appointed by you to investigate whether or not you had done anything wrong?”

“Yes,” she conceded, “and they conducted a rigorous and unsparing investigation.”

“If it was rigorous and unsparing,” I asked her, “why was no oath administered to witnesses; why was there no stenographer present to record the witness testimony; why were witnesses not allowed to read through and check the notes taken of what was allegedly the evidence they gave; why to this day are witnesses denied access to what they allegedly said; why were witnesses not asked to sign the notes of their testimony; why has the list of witnesses who gave evidence never been published; why were you personally spared from giving evidence and why has the evidence of witnesses who gave evidence to the committee which implicated you personally been suppressed?”

“What do you mean suppressed?” she snorted.

“Didn’t DCM Gregory Hicks testify to the ARB that you told him personally that you wanted Benghazi to become a permanent unified outpost,” I asked, “yet the ARB concluded, without hearing from you, that it was always intended to be a transitory and temporary facility?”

“It was transitory and temporary,” she protested, “it’s not there now is it?”

“And didn’t DCM Gregory Hicks also state that Ambassador Stevens was co-ordinating his visit to Benghazi, to comply with your order to make it a permanent facility, for several weeks with your office in Washington before he made the trip and yet the ARB concluded, without hearing from you, that Ambassador Stevens made the trip without your knowledge or approval?”

“If that was the ARB’s findings,” Hilary protested, “who are we to disagree with them?”

“And didn’t the ARB blame Ambassador Stevens for failing to request additional security for his trip from your office,” I asked, “but then had to backtrack and accept that security was not provided despite frequent requests from him for you to provide it?”

“We did respond to Ambassador Stevens concerns that there were problems with security at Benghazi,” Hilary protested.

“That’s right,” I conceded, “there were thirty military personnel stationed there, but just before Ambassador Stevens’ visit you reduced it to nine.”

“But as the ARB found,” Hilary replied, “such was the speed of the attack that an increased military presence would not have prevented Ambassador Stevens’ murder.”

“That’s true,” I was forced to agree, “nor Sean Smith’s, but Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods held out against 150 terrorists armed with heavy artillery, rockets, mortars, grenades and machine guns for 6 hours, waiting in vain for reinforcements that never came, until they were finally killed by a direct hit during a mortar attack. The remaining 7 guards were seriously injured but managed to break out of the compound, drive under heavy fire to the airport, commandeer a plane and escape, along with the 30 American civilian personnel from the Benghazi consulate who they rescued.”

“But if there were 150 heavily armed terrorists,” Hilary shrugged, “what good would an extra 21 American military personnel have done against those numbers?”

“The 9 American military personnel at Benghazi lost 2 men dead, 6 hours into the battle. Both men, Glenn Doherty and Tyrone Woods, were former Navy Seals,” I answered her, “the remaining 7 managed to escape, rescuing 30 of the 32 American civilians working at Benghazi. During the battle the 9 American military personnel killed 100 out of the 150 heavily armed terrorists. What difference do you think another 21 Navy Seals would have made?”

“Oh dear,” Hilary sniffed, “when you put it like that I can’t help feeling partly responsible – can we talk about something else?”

“So how is Bill?” I changed the subject, “have you forgiven him for the Monica Lewinsky scandal yet?”

“Forgiven him?” she laughed, “let me explain something to you Kevin – a good President, or First Lady for that matter, is one who delegates all the dirty jobs they don’t want to do themselves. Monica was doing me an enormous favour – well – not enormous – about 3 ½ inches worth.”

“Doing you a favour” I asked incredulously, “by giving your husband oral sex?

“Absolutely,” she replied, “do you know what a blow job has in common with lobster thermidor?”

“No,” I admitted.

“You don’t get either of them at home.”

5 comments on “Marx on Monday: Hillary 2016

  1. concretebunker
    September 23, 2013 at 9:49 am #


  2. Simon Roberts
    September 23, 2013 at 10:40 am #

    Some years ago I worked with an American woman who was committed Democrat. I once asked her why and she responded that she despised the Republicans for their corruption.

    I wonder what happened to her?

  3. therealguyfaux
    September 23, 2013 at 1:00 pm #

    A woman whose sheer hubris in even running for the Senate in a state in which she had never lived– you could even forgive her running in Arkansas, perhaps– this is what the Limo-Lib mindset, the American equivalent of Champagne Socialism, is all about. It is nothing to do with her qualifications for any post, it’s all about her having been a good soldier and allowing herself to be pipped by Barack Obama’s having trumped her by using the race card. It’s “her turn” now, “reason” the Lefties. Just because she did all those things detailed above, none of them make her a “bad person”– and you might look to include her possible involvement in the mysterious death of Vincent Foster as well; an apparent suicide, that seemingly took place other than where the body was found, of a law partner of HRC’s, whose records were found to have been “sanitised.” If nothing else, it would prove her mettle for sacrificing someone and covering up her involvement.

    This will tell you something, I know not what: Hillary Clinton, born in 1947, claimed to have been named after Edmund Hillary, who scaled Everest six years later. She is either a barefaced liar, or possessor of such a dry wit, that she is so funny, people forget to laugh at her humour, first among them her– neither one a trait I would look for in a potential President.

  4. Donal Corrigan (@BigDon62)
    September 24, 2013 at 12:13 am #

    Rodham-Clinton is only sort of coming clean (as you put it) over Benghazi because her failings in State are out there in the public domain on this matter. If I were part of The GOP team for 2016 I’d be raking up the dirt on Bill’s Missus big time, mind you I’d need a huge warehouse to store it all as she has plenty Republicans can use, that’s the way they play it in The States, so they may as well play it well to ensure Conservative Government returns to America. Apart from that Obama has as much power these days as an ICBM without a nuclear war head attached, he can fire himself into another continent but when he explodes he’ll do little damage. The Dude ought to resign now & admit it’s been all to much & bring in a GOP professional man to do the job.

  5. MathMan
    September 27, 2013 at 4:41 pm #

    She also claimed to be at Ground Zero on 9/11. More B******t.

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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: