We shouldn’t be surprised that Hillary Clinton would continue to double down in the face of a mushrooming scandal. This has always been her strategy in handling such situations, and heaven knows she’s had plenty of experience. Whitewater? Pfft! Nothing to see here. Travelgate? Just a vast right-wing conspiracy. Benghazi? What difference could it possibly make? Hillary has survived more scandals than perhaps any politician in history, so her current hubris might be somewhat expected. But the goings-on with the Durham Probe is different. Hillary’s current hot water isn’t like the other cauldrons she’s been in. The Durham probe and its recent court filing is a big deal… a really big deal.
Winner: Hillary Clinton tries to downplay revelations from the Durham Probe, but the reality is quite different.
Anyone who relies on the mainstream media to stay informed on current events is likely either unaware of or unimpressed by last Friday’s court filing by Special Counsel John Durham who continues to investigate the origins of the Russia Hoax. Details in the filing provide a glimpse into where this nearly three-year investigation is headed, and one thing is certain: things aren’t looking good for Hillary Clinton and her minions.
Some of the key assertions made in Durham’s 13-page document include:
- Clinton campaign lawyer Michal Sussman orchestrated the hiring of a technology company to acquire data while attempting to establish an “inference” and a “narrative” tying then-presidential candidate Donald Trump to Russia.
- That company then illegally infiltrated the servers of the Trump Campaign, and that access continued past Trump’s inauguration.
- Sussman then fed some of the acquired information to the FBI, which used it to initiate “Operation Crossfire Hurricane” which was the driving force behind the Russia Hoax, and another federal agency believed to be the CIA.
Therefore, consider that Hillary’s campaign spied on Trump not only prior to his election, but after he was in office, and there was clear coordination between Clinton surrogates, the FBI, the CIA, and who knows how many members of the Obama Administration. Add to these items the news that certain investigative targets of Durham have agreed to cooperate, and what do we have? A potential disaster for Hillary Incorporated.
While the media insisted for three years during the Russia Hoax that “the walls are closing in” on Donald Trump when in reality it was all a farce, Hillary Clinton finds herself in the very position the left and the media tried to portray Trump as dealing with. So how does Hillary respond? Deny and deride.
On Wednesday, Hillary tweeted the following: “Trump & Fox are desperately spinning up a fake scandal to distract from his real ones. So it’s a day that ends in Y. The more his misdeeds are exposed, the more they lie.” Then on Thursday during a speech, she explained, “It’s funny. The more trouble Trump gets into the wilder the charges and conspiracy theories about me seem to get.”
"*" indicates required fields
It’s one thing for Hillary to dismiss Trump or Fox News for their ‘spin.’ That’s par for the course, not just for Hillary, but for most politicians, particularly on the left. But by calling the content of the Durham report a “conspiracy theory,” we must wonder: what does John Durham think about comments like that? Does he take it as a taunt? Perhaps.
John Durham is a professional, but he’s also human. Anyone toiling on an investigation like Durham’s for almost three years has put a lot of effort into its outcome, and the last thing they want to hear is someone with high media visibility like Hillary disparaging their work. For those already accused to be badmouthing the investigation – as Michael Sussman has been doing – is unsurprising. But Hillary seems to be daring Durham to implicate her, and that is not a smart move.
Additionally, everyone loves to see the high and mighty crash and burn. When Matt Lauer, Jimmy Swaggart, and Andrew Cuomo all had their downfalls, the media and the public ate it up and relished in their misery. And in such cases, they delight in recalling previous statements of denial, particularly arrogant ones like Hillary’s. There was no need for Hillary to poke John Durham in the eye this week, but she did. And for that reason, Hillary Clinton is a knucklehead.
Honorable Mention #1: Disgraced Anthony Weiner goes on Hannity for reasons that are still unclear, and things do not go well.
Speaking of the high and mighty who have crashed and burned, Anthony Weiner is trying to make a comeback and is doing so by launching a weekly radio show with Curtis Sliwa. We can only guess that Weiner was attempting to create a buzz about the show by going on-air with Fox News’ Sean Hannity on Monday. Hannity asked the former congressman if his sex scandal and subsequent prison time had changed him, to which Weiner replied, “I don’t think you go through that type of experience and don’t emerge changed.”
Hannity proceeded to pummel Weiner: “Either you know in your heart if you’ve changed, or you know in your heart if you didn’t change. Can you assure people?” Hannity added that he “expected a little more sincerity — a little more heartfelt” and “repentant” response. Next time you’re asked that question, Anthony, consider giving this response, “Absolutely I’ve changed, and I’m sorry for what I did.”
Honorable Mention #2: CNN is launching their premium service next month, and you’ll never guess one of the ‘stars’ for which subscribers will be paying.
In an effort to squeeze as much revenue as possible out of a saturated entertainment and news coverage market, many networks have chosen to offer premium programming for paying subscribers. PBS has Passport, NBC has Peacock, and now CNN is giving the idea a try with the cleverly named CNN+. There’s a major problem with CNN’s plan, however: Nobody watches their network already, and it’s free for virtually everyone. How, then, does CNN plan to entice prospective customers into taking out their credit cards and filling out their online subscription form? By offering subscribers-only a daily show with none other than… wait for it… Brian Stelter. Seriously.
Stelter’s current show Reliable Sources airs every Sunday and has seen some of the worst ratings in television recently. During a show in November, for instance, Stelter failed to reach even 600,000 viewers, the lowest rating of the year. Reruns of Bonanza and documentaries on whether ladybugs are misgendered get better ratings than Brian Stelter. Nobody watches Brian Stelter because nobody likes Brian Stelter. He’s a liar, he’s hyperbolic, and, frankly, he’s just flat-out annoying. Good luck with those subscriptions CNN. Let’s hope your servers don’t crash with all the traffic you’re going to get.
P.F. Whalen is a conservative author at TheBlueStateConservative.com. His work has appeared in multiple publications, including Human Events, the Western Journal, and American Thinker. Follow him on Parler and GETTR; he does not do Facebook and Twitter.
Enjoy HUGE savings at My Pillow with promo code BSC