Hillary Clinton

Photo of the Day

Clinton and Lewinsky on a 1998 Abkhazia stamp.

The Story Behind the Dress

In November 1997, Monica Lewinsky told her confidant and supposed friend, Linda Tripp that she had in her possession a blue Gap dress that still bore the semen stain that resulted from her administering oral sex to President Clinton in February of that year.

Tripp called her literary agent, and fellow Clinton-hater, Lucianne Goldberg to report the news that evidence existed in Lewinsky’s closet that could prove a sexual relationship between Monica and the President. Goldberg and Tripp, according to published reports in both Time and Newsweek, discussed stealing the dress and turning it over to investigators. Goldberg admitted having such a discussion with Tripp, calling it a “Nancy Drew fantasy.”

In late November, Lewinsky mentioned to Tripp that she intended to have the dress, which she had been saving as a souvenir, dry-cleaned for a family event. Tripp, anxious to preserve the dress to nail the President, discouraged her from doing so. “I would tell my own daughter,” Tripp told her, that she should save the dress “for your own ultimate protection” should she later be accused of lying about the affair with Clinton. When Lewinsky expressed skepticism that it would ever come to that, Tripp told her that the dress made her look “really fat” and she shouldn’t wear it again in public.

Read more »

CNN is done, stick a fork in them

The Clinton News Network continues to run stupid anti-Trump story after stupid anti-Trump story.

The latest is that he is afraid of stairs…I’m not kidding.

If the final nail hasn’t already been put in CNN’s coffin, this should do it.

In a it-has-to-be-seen-to-be-believed segment, morning hosts Chris Cuomo and Alisyn Camerota — with looks on their faces that say, “I can’t believe they pay us to do this” — introduced a story only CNN could find worthy to air.   Read more »

Just what America needs, another bloody Clinton in the house

It looks like the Clinton family just can’t get enough of a smacking.

Now Chelsea is talking about entering the house.

Despite Hillary Clinton’s loss in the presidential race, the Clinton name might still have a future in politics.

Speculation is already rising that Chelsea Clinton may run for a congressional seat in New York following the retirement of a 79-year-old Democratic incumbent. Rep. Nita Lowey has spent almost 30 years in office representing New York’s 17th district, which covers Rockland County and parts of Westchester — where Bill and Hillary Clinton reside.   Read more »

The best understanding yet of how Trump became president

Most mainstream media commentary about Trump’s election has either missed the point or carries on with the negative messaging that got him over the line in the first place.

This article from news.com.au is probably the best one I’ve read yet as to why Trump ended up as the President of the USA.

In the dying days of the Gillard government, as the PM and the Labor Party lay prostrate in the polls, factional hardheads contemplated the once unthinkable: A return to Kevin Rudd.

Rudd was politically more dangerous and electorally more popular. The only catch was just about everybody in the ALP hated him.

But when this reservation was put to one party elder he simply shrugged his shoulders.

“So he’s a c***,” he said. “So what?”   Read more »

Would you donate to the Clinton Foundation?

You’ll recall that the Taxpayers’ Union revealed the millions of taxpayers’ dollars NZ Aid is shuffling into an off-shoot of the Hillary Clinton Foundation.

They’ve been out over the weekend fundraising asking people to part with their own cash and join the Government in donating to the Clinton Foundation.  It didn’t go well…   Read more »

It wasn’t Putin, it was Hillary

There are a great many people in the Media party trying to blame Russia for Hillary Clinton’s disastrous loss.

The Guardian thinks that only Hillary Clinton is to blame.

The US political and media establishment is in a state of mounting frenzy over alleged Russian interference in the presidential election in favor of Donald Trump. The source of what has been called a “swell” of “circumstantial evidence” is the CIA, an agency which has been known to interfere with an election or two itself, and isn’t really a paragon of honesty.

And what exactly are the claims made by these Putin-did-it stories? That were it not for Russian chicanery, Hillary Clinton would have won the popular vote by five million and not almost three million? That displaced machinists on the banks of Lake Erie were so incensed by the Podesta emails that they voted for Trump instead of Clinton? That Putin was pulling FBI director James Comey’s strings in his investigation of the Clinton emails? That those scheming Russians were clever enough to hack into voting machines but not clever enough to cover their tracks?

It’s strangely reminiscent of the days of the Red scare, minus the Reds.

Read more »

Remember when the owner of the NY Times said they were going to improve?

Remember when the owner of the NY Times said they were going to improve?

Yeah, well, not so fast there. It seems they haven’t learned a thing.

Truth Revolt reports:

In a hire that will shock no one who knows anything about the New York Times and the mainstream media generally, a Politico writer whom WikiLeaks exposed as sending stories to Hillary Clinton staffers before publication has been hired by the Times to cover the White House, the Daily Caller reported Monday.

“We’re thrilled that Glenn Thrush is joining The Times,” said Elisabeth Bumiller, The Times’ Washington bureau chief. “He’s a premier political journalist, a master of breaking news and long-form story telling and a stellar addition to our White House team.”

He is also, as he described himself in an email to Hillary’s campaign chairman John Podesta, a “hack.”   Read more »

Big money buys elections, right? Wrong

The numbers are in and yet again it has been proven that big money cannot buy elections.

Donald Trump’s campaign spent about $94 million in its final push for the White House, according to new fundraising reports filed today.

The Republican continued his campaign-long trend of spending far less than Democratic rival Hillary Clinton. Her campaign blew through almost $132 million in its closing weeks, according to reports filed Thursday with the Federal Election Commission. The latest reports cover Oct. 20 through Nov. 28.

Over the course of the primary and general elections, the Trump campaign raised about $340 million. That included $66 million that the billionaire businessman contributed from his own pocket. The Clinton campaign, which maintained a longer and more concerted fundraising focus, brought in about $581 million.

Brad Parscale, Trump’s digital director who was empowered with spending decisions across the campaign, credited strategic last-minute investments with helping propel the political newcomer to victory.

Specifically, he told The Associated Press, the campaign and Republican Party spent about $5 million in get-out-the-vote digital advertising targeted in the final few days to Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Florida. That proved critical; some of those states were won by razor-thin margins.   Read more »

Don’t worry, there was no hacking of voting machines in Wisconsin

Carl Bialik and Rob Arthur write at FiveThirtyEight about the claims by the deluded left about voting machine fraud in Wisconsin:

According to a report Tuesday in New York Magazine, a group of computer scientists and election lawyers have approached the Hillary Clinton campaign with evidence they believe suggests the election might have been hacked to make it appear that Donald Trump won the Electoral College when Clinton really did. The hacking claim appears to be based on concerns about tampering with electronic voting machines. We’ve looked into the claim — or at least, our best guess of what’s being claimed based on what has been reported — and statistically, it doesn’t check out.

Read more »

Scott Adams on the cognitive dissonance of the left-wing

Scott Adams, the creator of Dilbert, offers up an analysis of the cognitive dissonance of the left.

As Trump continues to demonstrate that he was never the incompetent monster his critics believed him to be, the critics will face an identity crisis. They either have to accept that they understand almost nothing about how the world works – because they got everything wrong about Trump – or they need to double-down on their current hallucination. Most of his critics will double-down. That’s how normal brains work.

And that brings us to our current situation. As Trump continues to defy all predictions from his critics, the critics need to maintain their self-images as the smart ones who saw this new Hitler coming. And that means you will see hallucinations like you have never seen. It will be epic.

The reason this will be so fun to watch is that we rarely get to see a situation in which the facts so vigorously violate a hallucination. Before Trump won the presidency everyone was free to imagine the future they expected. But as Trump continues to do one reasonable thing after another, his critics have a tough choice. They can either…

1. Reinterpret their self-images from wise to clueless.


2. Generate an even stronger hallucination. (Cognitive dissonance.)

If Trump’s critics take the second option – and most of them will – it means you will see a lot of pretzel-logic of the type that is necessary hold onto the illusion that Trump is still a monster despite continuing evidence to the contrary.

Read more »