Has Hillary Clinton completely lost it? Or is her tendency to say incalculably stupid things part of a larger political strategy that the former first lady is reluctant to share or perhaps even acknowledge? President Trump recently asked that same question and though it seems an increasingly relevant query: are we missing something?
Clinton is still potentially waiting in the wings to save America from Trump and the deplorables who refuse to appreciate her greatness.
The increasingly bizarre public pronouncements from Clinton might just be another manifestation of her endless craving for attention and publicity—such is the simplicity of her egotism. In her quest to salvage some kind of positive legacy, Hillary continues to ceaselessly promote her public profile and has, in effect, become the Eva Perón of American political life—the powerful first lady who knows she could have done the job better than her husband and is sure she was cheated from getting that chance.
But Clinton is still potentially waiting in the wings to save America from Trump and the deplorables who refuse to appreciate her greatness.
How else can you explain the depth of absurdity that describes Clinton’s unsolicited, inappropriate and duplicitous appraisal of Democratic presidential candidate Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii), who the former Secretary of State apparently thinks is a Russian agent? “I think they’ve got their eye on somebody who is currently in the Democratic primary and is grooming her to be the third-party candidate,” Clinton said in a podcast. “She’s the favorite of the Russians.”
With just about anyone else, one might be attempted to interpret this latest outburst as a desperate cry for help from someone in the grips of compulsive mendacity that overpowers her ability to understand reality.
But this is Hillary.
[caption id="attachment_180765" align="aligncenter" width="1920"] Tulsi Gabbard.[/caption]
Forget for a moment that the failed 2016 Democratic presidential nominee cited no evidence for this serious accusation. Do consider just how the politically disconnected Clinton would even be in a position to know who the Russians are grooming.
Time has stood still for Clinton since the devastating moment of her electoral defeat.
There is far more evidence to suggest that Hillary has worked as a Russian agent than exists to implicate Gabbard. Clinton’s history with the Russians has been conflicted, to say the least. When she first met then-Prime Minister Vladimir Putin the chemistry was apparently electric as the two discussed endangered species and Putin took the then-Secretary of State into his private office to show her how he planned to tag polar bears. She later invited herself on a trip with the Russian leader and Putin balked; Hillary has been like a woman scorned ever since.
But her apparent resentment over Putin’s rejection did not prevent her from appeasing the Russians in other ways—such as her connection to Russia-owned Uranium One’s acquisition of 20% of America’s uranium supply. But by the time she ran for president in 2016, the Russians were to blame for every setback and misstep that she encountered on the campaign trail—and she began to sense an opportunity to have her opponent, Donald Trump, wear the mantle of Russian interference.
Time has stood still for Clinton since the devastating moment of her electoral defeat. She initially refused to acknowledge the outcome until telephone calls from Barack Obama proved sufficiently inspiring to get her on stage late on the morning of November 9, 2016, and concede defeat. In the time-worn fashion of the self-absorbed politician, she could not reconcile reality with her own worldview.
Clinton’s enemies had every right to bask in the moment—not least because it was the first and perhaps the last time that she actually admitted that she did not win the election and thus was born the Hillary Resistance. It is common these days for the former first lady to pretend that she really won the presidential election. Perhaps more troubling to democrats, she is becoming increasingly brazen to suggest she could do it again, effectively begging anyone so politically maladroit to consider a repeat candidacy.
Was there a bit of transference (or perhaps a hint of things to come) occurring when she told PBS’s Judy Woodruff that she believes Trump can’t leave Hillary behind? “It truly is remarkable how obsessed he remains with me,” Clinton said. “Nothing has been more examined and looked at than my emails. We all know that. So he’s either lying or delusional or both … so maybe there does need to be a rematch. Obviously, I can beat him again.”
[caption id="attachment_180762" align="aligncenter" width="1920"] Hillary Clinton.[/caption]
As far as Russia is concerned, time has stood still for Hillary.
She is unwilling to jettison the debunked theory that Trump colluded with Russia to win the 2016 election. Her first reaction to the frenzy over Trump’s call to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was to suggest that the president was appealing again to a foreign power to help him win an election. And while Clinton considers Trump an illegitimate president who must be impeached, she fancies herself as a leader in exile. She continues to encourage her die-hard acolytes and holds out the possibility that she might still capture the White House from the Great Pretender.
The politics of Hillary and the ascendancy of her grasping, greedy approach to public office remains what this game is all about for Clinton.
But she can’t quite get there. So she continues to penetrate a media that has largely forgotten her with the sort of commentary one might expect from the nether regions of the internet’s comments sections in a series of desperate attempts to stay relevant. Observe the political relationship that she is nurturing with Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.). Is she offering genuine assistance and advice or merely positioning herself to knock-off the leftist senator when it is opportune?
Clinton still sees herself as the one person who can unify the Democratic Party—the liberal feminist who will sometimes wink at you as if to say, “Can I really be in the pockets of the socialists when Bill and I have so enjoyed the benefits of capitalism? Do I really desire a feminist inquisition when I have consistently ignored and ridiculed the female victims of my sexual predator husband?”
The politics of Hillary and the ascendancy of her grasping, greedy approach to public office remains what this game is all about for Clinton. That is why she plays the Russia card so flippantly. During the anti-communist fervor of the Cold War, some public figures unquestionably abused the political climate by fingering their political enemies as communists. It could be a pure political theater to do so. And we all know that theater rarely transmits unalloyed truth to an audience and more often creates an illusion.
Hillary identifies Russian agents with an ease that would impress the late senator from Wisconsin, Joseph McCarthy.
Clinton knows full well that Gabbard is not a Russian agent, but saying so provides another precious moment of intensely coveted media exposure for Clinton who, in the spirit of Evita, still imagines herself as the savior of the Democratic Party—a political force that alone can save America from those awful deplorables.
But to paraphrase Evita, “Don’t cry for me America. The truth is I never left you.”