Mangroves: environmental guardians of our coastline

University of South Australia Media Release They are the salt-tolerant shrubs that thrive…

Tuvalu, Climate Change and the Metaverse

When lost to climatic disaster and environmental turbulence, where does a whole…

Nats Vote No OR When You're Standing At…

It's sort of interesting that just a few days ago we had…

Was Amtrak Joe derailed?

By 2353NM Prior to becoming President, Joe Biden was a US Senator for…

Football Capitulates at Qatar

It did not take much. The initial promises of protest from a…

Thanks To Dan Andrews I Got My First…

Just to be clear here, I didn't get it at the polling…

Democracy Tested

The only defence that we, the people, have against an arrogant leader…

Promises, Promises, Promises

What's a promise or, more specifically, an election promise? Is it a…

«
»
Facebook

The Hillary Clinton Resentment Machine

Only a sadomasochist would consider it a genuine prospect. A failed presidential candidate, the louse in the locks of the Democratic Party, keen to make yet another vain tilt at the White House. But in the rogues’ gallery of the defective and disturbed, Hillary Clinton can count herself as pre-eminent, a historical creature who should be preserved as a warning for the party faithful. But she refuses to lie (and lie) quietly, and has given ventriloquised clues via her husband that she might be readying for a return to competition.

The way Clinton disturbs the news bubble is through complaint heavy with spite. She gazes at the mirror in self-loathing, and claims to spot the faults of others. (The loathing is understandable to some degree: it was Clinton and her circle who decided, disastrously, to elevate Donald Trump as electable material ahead of rival Bernie Sanders). The story she bores her audience with lacks variation: The 2016 loss to Trump could never be put down to her, veteran political figure, establishment doyen. No, that would be inaccurate for a person with the credentials for office.

A person in such a state is bound to see any contender as dangerous. Heap upon them; dismiss them as lacking that scoundrel factor of patriotism. Hide behind some rich, over egged notion of fact checked veracity, while casting grave accusations of foreign control and veiled treason.

One of the Democratic fold has proven particularly troubling to Clinton (kudos to the candidate.) Tulsi Gabbard’s views on US foreign policy and the imperium’s insatiable appetite for interference and meddling is particularly worrying for the former Secretary of State.

Gabbard, in her electoral platform, insists on bringing “about a bold change in our foreign policy that bends the arc of history away from war and towards peace. That stops wasting our resources, and our lives on regime change wars, and redirects our focus and energy towards peace and prosperity for all people.” The United States best be done with notions of “gun boat diplomacy” focusing, instead on “differences with communication, negotiations, and goodwill.”

Light-on-hill romanticism was bound to figure in the rhetoric, and Gabbard insists that the United States lead in ensuring “the survival of the human race.” Power should only be used for “good”; the sleepwalking towards nuclear war stopped in what she hopes to be “the turning point of human history, that era in which the world’s greatest powers chose to abandon the path to confrontation and war and agreed to pursue the path of cooperation, diplomacy, and peace.”

There is much in Gabbard’s words to question, and these should linger with persistent tenacity. But the scorn from Clinton towards such views was evident, coming out in the Campaign HQ podcast last month that made the rippling rounds. “I’m not making any predictions, but I think they’ve got their eye on somebody who is currently in the Democratic primary and are grooming her to be a third-party candidate. She’s a favourite of the Russians. They have a bunch of sites and bots and other ways of support for her so far.”

While there was some doubt as to whether Clinton had intended Gabbard to be the subject of the barb, spokesman Nick Merrill’s remark on NBC news “if the nesting doll fits” suggested as much. (Merrill insisted, however, that the “grooming” reference was to Republicans, rather than Russians, but who, in this hyperventilating world of addled speculation can tell?)

To this resentment of slander, Gabbard was quick and sharp. On Twitter, she thanked Clinton with acid gratitude. “You, the queen of warmongers, embodiment of corruption, and personification of the rot that has sickened the Democratic Party for so long, have finally come out from behind the curtain.” A challenge was duly issued. “It’s now clear that this primary is between you and me. Don’t cowardly hide behind your proxies. Join the race directly.”

Another to receive the Clinton splash was Jill Stein, the Greens candidate for the White House in 2016. The Clinton set have had issues with Stein since she attended a media conference in Russia in 2015. To merely be in Russia was to be a Putin supporter; to have “Red Square as her backdrop” in a video that was attacked was sufficient to disqualify her from office.

Penning her defence in The Guardian, Stein saw dark clouds over US politics. The efforts by Clinton and her campaigners “to shift responsibility for their electoral failure to ‘Russian assets’ has fuelled a new era of McCarthyism – a toxic brew of warmongering, political repression and censorship now poisoning our public discourse.” In response to the Clinton wounded vanity machine, Stein issued a challenge similar to Gabbard’s. “It’s past time to give the American people the real debate they deserved in 2016, but were denied by the phony DNC/RNC-controlled Commission on Presidential Debates.”

As before, the Clinton ability to stir and invigorate Trump has no parallel. They provide the president a bounty of low lying fruit. In a cabinet meeting in October, Trump openly asserted that Gabbard was “not a Russian agent.” He considered the entire Clinton show to be “sick. There’s something wrong with them.” The common denominator remains, as ever, Russia.

Such adamant stirring leads to the question that refuses to leave the Democrats: will Hillary accept the challenge and run? Husband Bill is making sure his wife’s name blots the electoral news though, as ever, he can never avoid making an observation without referencing himself. “She may or may not run for anything, but I can’t legally run for president again.” The remark came during the course of an event at Georgetown University School of Law, one shared with Hillary and Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Philippe Reines, an advisor who has earned his bread from advising Clinton over the years, has also added kindling to the prospects. In a discussion with Tucker Carlson on Fox News, Reines speculated that “there might be a reason that she’d be the best person, not only to beat Donald Trump, but to govern after Donald Trump, which is a part we don’t talk about much. And, look, you can make fun of her all you want, but 65 million people voted for her and that’s second more to anyone except Barack Obama.”

This is not an issue of making fun, let alone making light of matters. If there is one candidate who can issue an iron-clad guarantee for a Trump victory, it is the same person who did so in 2016. Should the Democrats entertain the notion seriously, their inability to win the White House will be assured and long lasting.

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

 130 total views,  2 views today

48 comments

Login here Register here
  1. Hungry Charley

    American politics is never dull, but this low blow from Clinton is toxic, as it undermines similar accusations at Trump, making the whole shit show even more of a circus. Gabbard would be a good running mate for Sanders, both progressives and with Gabbards outspoken views on foreign policy (lets the spend the money at home) may attract Republican voters. Clinton should butt out pronto or run herself.

  2. Stu

    Thank you for your illuminating article today. I now know to immediately delete any email from AIMN that indicates that Binoy Kampmark has written the day’s most recent AIMN article – if today’s article is representative of his usual standard of writing, AIMN is starting a sizeable downhill slide in terms of writing quality.

  3. John O"Callaghan

    Thank you or an exellent article on the war criminal and her pedophile husband Bill.. yes he ‘s been recorded in the flight logs to have travelled on his now murdered pedophile mate Jeffery Epsteins “Lolita Express” 36 times……… Hillary and her husband are probably the most evil people in America and if the truth ever does come out they will spend the rest of their lives in prison.
    Thank you again for the courage to write a truthful article on the evil that is Hillary Clinton………

  4. Jack Cade

    The US is not a democracy. In fact, it is trashing the word. If the Democrats offer up Biden, Clinton or Warren as their 2020 candidate then the Yanks – and the world – would be better off voting for Trump again. At least his gangrene is on the surface and stinks, and we know it. The same corporates own the Democrats as own the Republicans – the oil barons, the coal barons and the armaments barons.

  5. Alpo

    Clinton is not running for POTUS, she has no chance whatever to run for POTUS, not now, not ever again.
    End of the story.
    Going on in circles with Clinton can only benefit Donald Trump…
    If she says anything, just ignore her, but replying in the stupid and ignorant tone suggesting that Clinton is a warmonger, worse than the worst of the Neoliberal republicans is pure idiocy. The loss in 2016 was a collective failure of ALL Democrats, plus an effect of the Trump campaign benefiting from the interference by Putin and WikiLeaks…. ignoring obvious facts does no good to the truth.

  6. Roswell

    Are they about to make the same mistakes they made in 2016?

    It’s a worry.

  7. Phil Pryor

    Someone calld Stu is taking the knob polishing a bit far, setting out to reduce a contributor. Perhaps a contribution might illustrate the background more, the alternatives. But on the general area of this topic, USA history is appallingly erroneous, delusional, masturbatory, for it is based on self deceptions. People went there to thieve, steal, accumulate, acquire, occupy, exterminate, enslave, abuse, dominate, expand.., ikt has been a never ending journey of intrusive, imperious, self glorifying rampage and criminality. How could we expect some focussed society, culture, history, action, diplomacy, from this end resulting nation of heirs to inflicting horror and pain?

  8. John O"Callaghan

    Hey Binoy,i see you’re not as brave as i thought you were as i think censoring my comment does’nt do a lot for free speech,but i can understand i suppose why you did as the Clintons are a powerful well connected organisation much like the Mafia is.

  9. Roswell

    John, I’m one of the moderators here and I don’t see any deleted comments from you. There are none caught up in the system either.

  10. Brozza

    I agree with Jack C.
    With killary in the presidential race, the American voters would no doubt vote for the lesser of two evils again, and killary is on the public record as saying she would definitely ‘push the button’ on Russia. Obviously only too happy to use nuclear weapons or any wmd on civilians.
    She may well be the most investigated pollie in U$ history, but that was only the corrupted investigating their own.

  11. paul walter

    Seem to recall some fairly down stuff on Hillary. The US and the Democrats have planned things so badly that now they are forced to the last resort.

    It has finally reached the stage of a non choice between out of touch geriatrics and howling at the sky mad dogs on the other

    How has the place sunk to denialist fantasism as absolute?

  12. David Bruce

    Karen, perhaps you can explain the Clinton body count, starting with Seth Rich?

    The release of the DNC emails by wiki leaks signed Assange’s death sentence and now the US Senate wants to investigate these emails.

    Also interesting that her campaign manager was in New Zealand during the Christchurch incident? Obviously just coincidence!

  13. corvusboreus

    Few problems with candidate Hillary.
    Her own political conduct has not exactly been exemplary. For example, her use of an open server may have been sub-criminal but it was also sub-competent.
    Then there is there is the problem of name brand association.
    On socio-economics, there is the image of power-lawyer Hillary standing at Bill’s shoulder nodding and smirking as he signed NATA (trigger Us industry collapse) and repealed glass-steagall (trigger GFC).
    On ethics, she has seriously diminished credibility in calling out Trump’s (flagrant) creepoidity when she not only stood by her husband through credible rape accusations and multiple infidelities, including a flagrant abuse of power imbalance to obtain sexual gratification (cigar, Mr president?), but rode alongside her hubby aboard the ‘lolita express’
    I hope the DNC is not stupid enough to consider candidate Clinton

  14. Karen Kyle

    David Bruce……What body count? There is not a shred of evidence. And just what has Julian Assange and his problems which are mostly self infliced got to do with Clinton? And her campaign manager in Christchurch during what incident exactly. Clarification is required.

  15. Karen Kyle

    Corvusborus. Hillary said Bill was a hard dog to keep on the porch. Their marriage is their own business..

  16. Karen Kyle

    Jesus…..now she is responsible for triggering the GFC? Give me a break..

  17. corvusboreus

    KaK,
    Not a refutation, just a small consolation about a single aspect within a bunch of facts that I happened to point out.
    Anyway, on with the day.

  18. Karen Kyle

    CB…. Not at all sure they were facts. Maybe a deliberate attempt to be vague and obscure. Please clarify.Using checkable facts.

  19. Perking Wattleneck

    Russia is no longer communist.What it is, is a rival to US influence in Europe and elsewhere. I have no doubt it interfered in the US elections. And why not? The US interferes in theirs ( and everybody else’s, including Australia’s. That’s what US embassies do. 800 bases worldwide and bitches about China messing about in the South China Sea.
    I’d like to see the US response if China carried out ‘ocean exercises’ in the Caribbean with Cuba and maybe Venezuela.

  20. Karen Kyle

    Russia in fact is nothing at all. The Russian economy is smaller than the economy of Italy. All they have is Oil and Gas which Putin controls and uses to fund the oligarchs, who in turn fund corruption. This has happened because Putin stuffed up big time. The Russian economy has not been diversified and has shrunk dramatically as a consequence.

    The reason for the interference in the USA elections and the wooing of Trump is to have the sanctions lifted. Russia has big oil deposits which it needs to exploit and they are stopped by sanctions. They are stopped because Russia can”t get the oil out of the ground. All the easily to get oil has been exploited and now they are down to the hard stuff..They need the American and European Oil companies in there to drill the oil.

    Perking Wattleneck……when did the US interfere in Russian elections?

    See Rachel Maddow’s book “Blowout”

    Oh by the way Trump has done Putin another big favour by undermining Zelenski and forcing him to settle his differences with Russia on Putin’s terms. Poor Ukraine. Fine friend Trump turned out to be. .

  21. corvusboreus

    Kak,
    No thanks, I’ll not bother putting up links at your behest.
    The cited statements regarding Bill and Hillary are all on public record for anyone who bothers to do basic research (although I did spell NAFTA NATA), and, frankly, I view you as little more than a Zionist shill with a degree in peddling primitivism who spouts shit that she can’t back up and can’t ever seem to quote another without adding false projection.
    The site administrators have already declared your presence unwelcome, and I am not particularly interesting in encouraging more endless reams of your tediously obsessive drivel.
    Don’t bother addressing me again.

  22. Karen Kyle

    CV As a matter of fact Bill Clinton’s economic record is good,one of the best in fact.. One of the reasons he survived impeachment. I fail to see what Bill Clinton’s economic record had to do with Hillary. She wasn’t in politics at the time. And I am no shill.Ijust can’t stand lies.

  23. Roswell

    Do you really think that’s the reason he survived impeachment?

    I thought it was more the case that the Dems had the Senate

  24. wam

    Iput a little bit of my heartbreak city winnings on trump to win because I thought when the crunch came the septics wouldn’t vote for a woman. I was wrong as she was close to winning. Indeed I think trump’s lying promise to drain the swamp was the difference.
    He has added to the swamp but that doesn’t matter this time because he has been so awful that the drover’s dog will give him a bath.
    Has anyone seen a democrat with the ability of a blue heeler??

  25. corvusboreus

    Kak,
    I also despise lies, and doubly despise the lying liars that tell them.
    For example, when you previously derided Carl Sagan as a ‘silly bugger’ by claiming that he had stated ‘SCIENCE HAS CREATED ARTIFICIAL LIFE!’ (regarding a proto-biotic experiment that you arbitrarily dismissed from a position of complete ignorance) you were lying about his statement, which was actually ‘science has created the building blocks of life, if not life itself, the notes of the symphony, if not the music itself’.
    Using falsehoods, especially to slag off science in favour of religious superstition, kind of undermines your credibility, so I suggest that in future you supply multiple credible verifying links to back up any assertion you make.

  26. Michael Taylor

    Good luck arguing with that one, cb.

  27. Phil

    There is going to be a book soon that will be a best seller. Its title? ‘ The thoughts of Chairwomen Karen Kyle ‘

    This drongo makes bullshit a science. I can only presume AIM is the only outlet with a sense of humour to
    let this fantasist keep telling her jokes.

  28. corvusboreus

    MT,
    No arguments here.
    If the shill wants to keep waffling and the site is willing to publish, sobeit
    However she should not trouble to waste words on my behalf, as based on prior evidence (eg ‘Hypatia wasn’t killed by Christians, that’s just Marxist propaganda!’) I regard her unsupported opinions as being worth less than a fistfful of farts.

  29. Michael Taylor

    cb, no matter how many facts you throw at her, she’ll just bat them away and fire back with outrageous conspiracy theories.

  30. Michael Taylor

    Phil, I am tiring of her. Most people would be, so maybe it’s time to re-evaluate her welcome here.

  31. Socrates.

    Karen Kyle, I think a bit of a recap would suggest that the the problem for you at the moment exists from the post at 2.51.

    You overdo the Russia bit. I wasn’t sure you understood that all powers apart from the US are second tier powers and most eventually kick back at US foreign policy which global and great for the US version of Chinas or Russias oligarchy but of little use to just about everyone else.

    Hillary rightly wrongly is seen as part of the overall problem involving the breakdown of US democracy and world hopes for political social and economic progress against the domination of globalised financialised capitalism.

    I understand some of the stuff that interests from studying similar stuff there myself and realise you are not so much ignorant as still incorporating the intense matter uni teaches us into an overall frame work that can morph over time.

    It was why I havent disagreed with you as much as some re Hypatia,lynched by a mob in a dreadful way, although my readings have included claims that though she was considered brilliant, may have also been a bit abrasive at a time when religions and philosophy were politicised and fighting for political dominance, especially what we would call fundamentalist or militant elements.

    But I wont hold back as to Dr Venturini and still puzzle at your vehement misinterpretation of Venturini and what he is actually discussing, to do with oligarchy as a block to rational progress. You obviously have a bee in the bonnet about Russia, yet the far more powerful City of London/ Wall st formations are as destructive, as you surely must see, when they hem places like Iran and Russia in and deny them the right to operate except in ways that suit the west.

  32. Michael Taylor

    Too bad you don’t like it. You can’t use any ideology religious or political to neaten it all up until it suits you.

    You know nothing about me. Don’t pretend that you do.

  33. Michael Taylor

    PS: And one more attack on Dr Venturini and you’re out of here. For good.

  34. Phil

    Karen Kyle. Bwawawawawawawawawawawawa. If you went to Uni on my dollar my loss if you paid for it, ask for your money back. The last paragraph in your latest burst of verbal diarrhoea is the best I’ve read thus far.

    So the US and UK operate within civilised limits do they? Someone should explain that to the millions of Vietnamese that were murdered by US forces in Vietnam. The unknown number of tribes people killed in Cambodia and Laos. Not to mention the millions of Iraq’s. I’m sure the families of 58000 thousand American military personnel that were killed in the Nationalist war in Vietnam would love your worldly insights. Weapons of mass deception in the case of Iraq. Btw the US’s latest foray into Venezuela is all the rage at the mo doncha know?

    At the risk of me being banned from this most informative outlet, you Madam are nuts, certifiably insane.

  35. Michael Taylor

    Never a chance of you being banned, Phil. Never. 👍

  36. Socrates.

    Karen, I well remember a couple threads involving the good Dr.

    I remember what was written by contributors and how it collated to meet with what I felt I knew and although you raised some points, overall we must agree to disagree.

  37. Phil

    Never a chance of you being banned, Phil. Never. 👍

    Cheers Bud. I keep thinking that Kyle is some kind of ‘ Agent Provocateur ‘ She must think we all live in a cave with no communication to the outside world. She is a bull shit artist with out peer. I mean, I didn’t get into the debate about the Clintons, her statements were extraordinary. Old Slick is as fake as a nine bob note, the working class suffered immensely and went backwards while he was President. There are enough links to the New York Times and the Washington Post about his LEGAL goings on in government that effected the working class to their detriment, to fill a Library. As for Dr Venturini his work can’t be faulted everything meticulously researched with notes. Now I aint saying the Royals had anything to do with the murder, sorry suicide of Epstein. I will wait for Dr Venturina’s assessment, but I know where my money is going.

  38. Phil

    ‘ Phil…..policy of Containment. After the war. Most people in the West supported it.’

    Utter unmitigated horseshit. The war had fck all to do with communism, that is a canard prosecuted by the US. It was a Nationalist war period. The people I knew didn’t support the war only right wing stooges like you did.

    You don’t like whataboutism because it torpedo’s your attempt to spread your anti communist twaddle.2 million civilians dead up to 250.000 South Vietnamese soldiers 58000+ Americans and 500 + Australians God knows how many French, more bombs dropped on North Vietnam than WW2 combined and you call it containment. More utter unctuous unmitigated, horse shit.

    To say the Americans have not been involved in regime change in countries from Cape Horn to the US Mexican border is just more horse shit.+ the M.E. Iran being their pièce de résistance. Not to mention the CIA’s input into the sacking of Whitlam. The Brits are just as bad, having starved 3 million Indians to death by sending their crops to the war effort during WW2. and relieving the Indian economy of trillions.

    What ever it was you studied at Uni it certainly wasn’t history. You know seven eighths of five fifths of F.A. about it.

  39. Rebecca

    Hi Binoy, looking for an intelligent politician, try Marianne Williamson at the National Press Club, 29 October 2019:

  40. Socrates.

    Karen you said it, it must be right. and no hint of complexity that might suggest that Vietnam, conscription and so forth were any more complex than that that is contained within your fearful reduction.

    You could study these things for centuries, or atleast the less bright among we unwashed.

    For my part, “All I know is I know nothing”.

  41. corvusboreus

    ‘My greatest wisdom is the knowledge of my ability to be mistaken’
    corvusboreus

    ‘I am often misquoted on the internet’
    Socrates the philosopher

  42. Phil

    Karen Kyle.

    More delusional bollox. Look Kyle you’re out of your depth here. This is not a pack of cubs and Scouts you are spreading your abject twaddle too. The war in Vietnam was a nationalist war and all your hysterical anti communist twaddle, wont change that fact.

  43. Socrates.

    One day , they will tell Socrates he is the wisest man in Athens.

  44. Matters Not

    Re:

    war in Vietnam was a nationalist war

    So it’s as simple as that? A complex conflict with just one motivating cause in play? Don’t think so.

    Seems to me, there’s lots of threads, lots of variables, lots of hypothesis, lots of forces, still being tested and then to be retested. Not to find truth (this is history after all and not mathematics or logic) but perhaps better insights.

    Just one example.

    (Sorry for the interruption.)

  45. Brozza

    Plus the Vietnam/u$ war was based on a complete and utter lie, ( the ‘Gulf Of Tonkin incident’).
    I’m surprised the yanks didn’t ‘nuke the place, but then, covering civilians in burning petroleum jelly, (napalm), is such fun isn’t it?

  46. Phil

    Plus the Vietnam/u$ war was based on a complete and utter lie, ( the ‘Gulf Of Tonkin incident’)..

    Yes it was. A false flag.

  47. Phil

    ‘ So it’s as simple as that? A complex conflict with just one motivating cause in play? Don’t think so.’

    What you think, matters not. Yes the war was complex, especially for the poor bastards involved in it all and doing the dying.

    It was a Nationalist war. Foreigners invaded Vietnam. And the North Vietnamese kicked them out. Simple logic really.

    The communist bogey was just that. Reds under the beds, Australian politicians telling the feeble minded that the North Vietnamese would be driving their tanks down Rundle Street in Adelaide. That is not just a throw away line it is on record.

    It is also on record Ho Chi Min offered the South elections on at least two occasions it may have been more, I can’t be f#cked looking up the links for the dates. These offers of elections and peace were rejected by the west. All the bollox about communism is utter rubbish. They could have all been Capitalists it wouldn’t have mattered, their country was occupied by foreigners end of transmission.

    https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/vietnam/55election.htm

  48. Matters Not

    Karen Kyle, seems to me that the causes of the American War, (as the Vietnamese call it) will be subject to an ongoing debate – and so it should Seems to me also that Ho Chi Minh was a nationalist first and foremost, with communism best seen as a means to an end – at least, in the early days, and not an end in itself initially. But that’s just my amateur take.

    Having (only) been there a couple of times, I ‘know’ the average citizen is imbued with capitalist ideology – as evidenced by behaviour in their many marketplaces. At the same time, being awoken by ‘ideological’ broadcasts on their many trains suggests that there is a real gap between the verbalised ideology and their lived one.

    As always, I don’t know. But I suggest (as always) one should visit Vietnam to get some better ‘insights’. In many ways – it’s mind bending. Particularly their ‘war museums’ re the American war.

    Phil – it would seem that simple answers is your preference.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 2 MB. You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop file here

Return to home page
%d bloggers like this: