Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton garnered headlines this week after she traveled to an Italian grocery store to read dozens of her leaked emails to a live audience of onlookers.
This so-called “performance art,” as the stunt is being described by some, involved her sitting at a replica Resolute Desk and scouring through 60,000 pages of her leaked emails.
The “performance” was conducted as part of an art exhibit, “HILLARY: The Hillary Clinton Emails,” that was unveiled four months ago.
“Artist Kenneth Goldsmith is displaying all 60,000 pages of the emails that were sent on the 2016 presidential candidate’s private server as part of his show ‘HILLARY: The Hillary Clinton Emails,’ staged in a Venetian movie theater-turned-grocery store,” Artnet reported in May.
Besides being designed to pay tribute to Goldsmith’s “art,” Clinton’s performance Tuesday at the Venetian Teatro Italia in Venice was also, it would appear, designed to prove once and for all that the scandal over her illicit email activities was a “boring” nothing burger:
Hillary Clinton spent an hour yesterday reading her emails at my exhibition of all 62,000 pages of them in Venice. She is pictured here at a replica of the Oval Office Resolute Desk, stacked with her emails. pic.twitter.com/V8T27klycr
— Kenneth Goldsmith (@kg_ubu) September 11, 2019
Mrs Clinton stated, “This exhibition is further proof that nothing wrong or controversial can be found on these emails. It makes them accessible to everyone and allows everyone to read them”. And then, as an aside, she added: “They are just so boring”.
— Kenneth Goldsmith (@kg_ubu) September 11, 2019
“This exhibition is further proof that nothing wrong or controversial can be found on these emails. It makes them accessible to everyone and allows everyone to read them. They are just so boring,” the former secretary of state reportedly said at the event, according to Goldsmith.
Fact-check: SO FALSE IT’S ALMOST COMICAL.
In fact, her claim was so false that even everyday Twitter users were able to debunk it.
“Did she read the ones from Chris Stevens begging for more security?” one critic asked.
“Did she read the ones that proove [sic] the 2016 primaries were rigged?” another asked. “What about the ones that show how MSM journalists openly coordinated thier [sic] messaging with her campaign? Surely she read the ones that show how the debate questions were given to her ahead of time.”
No, no and nope.
Look at the live fact-checking below:
Did she read the ones from Chris Stevens begging for more security?
— Kenny the Weasel (@cparr941) September 12, 2019
Did she read the ones that proove the 2016 primaries were rigged?
What about the ones that show how MSM journalists openly coordinated thier messaging with her campaign?
Surely she read the ones that show how the debate questions were given to her ahead of time.
— Bsim1 (@Bsim110) September 12, 2019
Did Hillary finally read the Benghazi emails?
— TERRY ?? (@TerryDugue) September 12, 2019
Does those include the ones she deleted under subpoena
— Terri Lynn (@TerriLy75642135) September 12, 2019
— Bluberry Morning (@MorningBluberry) September 12, 2019
Everything about this is sad. Why even bring it up, it must be embarrassing for her as well pic.twitter.com/PrCd6W8VpF
— Thomas (@ThomasIsOnline) September 11, 2019
Did she read this one? We are all dying to hear what classified secret it was all about?
Probably not, since the entire friggin thing was classified. pic.twitter.com/XUKED4sUB8
— ar chroi (@Ar_Chroi) September 12, 2019
Clinton was also bashed for trying so desperately to be relevant:
(…out of relevance). https://t.co/cZYdZoTit7
— Frank Luntz (@FrankLuntz) September 12, 2019
Hillary should fire all of her advisors and anyone else who said this was a good idea. https://t.co/SPPo8Y8fXJ
— Jonah Goldberg (@JonahNRO) September 12, 2019
While it’s unclear which specific emails Clinton chose to read to the public on Tuesday, it’s presumed that she’d purposefully avoided those that made her look extraordinarily bad.
For instance, it’s unlikely that she read from a September 2010 email chain that shows her longtime confidante Lanny Davis suggesting to the then-secretary that he could serve as a private channel to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The benefit of a private channel of communication, which is highly unethical, is that it would have allowed Clinton to communicate with Netanyahu and world leaders outside of government control.
It’s also unlikely that she read from email chains that reportedly show her discussing the location of key U.S. assets, including deceased diplomat Chris Stevens, who died during the Benghazi terror attack in 2012.
“I saw emails that have been revealed under the Freedom of Information Act, and in them, she is discussing the location of French fighter jets during the NATO bombardment of Libya, how big the no-fly zone is, where the no-fly zones are, and — are you ready for this? — the location of Ambassador Stevens, who of course was murdered, in Libya,” Fox News contributor Judge Andrew Napolitano revealed during a discussion four years ago with network host Sean Hannity.
“If that is not classified — if she didn’t know that was classified, she has no business being in public office,” he added.
Source: Fox News
Clinton likely also never read from email chains that prove that she lied to the American people when she told them that the Benghazi terror attack had been motivated by an anti-Islamic video made by some American pastor.
“I condemn in the strongest terms the attack on our mission in Benghazi today. Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet,” she explicitly said in her first public statement following the attack.
Yet on the very night of the attack, she wrote an email to her own daughter, Chelsea, essentially admitting that the attack had in reality been motivated by Islamic terrorism.
“Clinton … emailed her daughter Chelsea, who used the pseudonym Diane Reynolds when communicating with her mother via her private email account, on the night of the attacks, telling her that the consulate had been attacked by an ‘Al Queda-like group,'” Reason magazine notes.
DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW
Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!
- British Royal Air Force nixing ‘useless white male pilots’ in quest for diversity, inside emails show - June 2, 2023
- Howard U. law professor calls for ‘reparations tribunal’ via the UN, wants to ‘create a new community of legal thinkers’ - June 2, 2023
- Judge recuses himself in DeSantis-v-Disney case - June 2, 2023
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.