Hillary Clinton feeling her oats, gets all snarky with Giuliani on Twitter

(FILE PHOTO by video screenshots)

Failed Democrat presidential nominee Hillary Rodham Clinton thinks she’s got jokes. But unbeknownst to the former secretary of state, the joke may, in fact, be on her.

In a snide, sarcastic, mocking tweet to President Donald Trump’s attorney Rudy Giuliani posted Tuesday, Clinton essentially said that she knows what it feels like to really be scrutinized by the media.

She posted the tweet in response to Giuliani complaining about the media’s relentless, never-ending attacks on him, on the president and on the Trump administration.

“WP, NBC, and CNN are going after me because I’m the messenger, and covering up the message, Dem corruption,” he wrote. “Meanwhile, they have yet to ask Biden difficult questions because he is protected and immune like the Clintons and crooked Clinton Foundation!”

In response, Clinton sarcastically tweeted, “Yes, I am famously under-scrutinized.”

The obliviousness to reality was glaring, for the evidence makes it abundantly clear that the media have habitually downplayed or outright ignored scandals pertaining to her.

Ukraine Scandal

Two years ago a lone mainstream media outlet ran a report detailing efforts by corrupt Ukrainian officials to affect the 2016 U.S. presidential election in Clinton’s favor.

“Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office,” Politico reported at the time. “They also disseminated documents implicating a top Trump aide in corruption and suggested they were investigating the matter, only to back away after the election.”

Here’s the kicker: “And they helped Clinton’s allies research damaging information on Trump and his advisers.” The Democrat National Committee reportedly took part in the collusion as well.

“A Ukrainian-American operative who was consulting for the Democratic National Committee met with top officials in the Ukrainian Embassy in Washington in an effort to expose ties between Trump, top campaign aide Paul Manafort and Russia,” the report continued.

But the story was buried soon after its publication, and the collusion between Clinton, the DNC and corrupt Ukrainian officials was never further scrutinized.

Dossier Scandal

Aside from a column in The Washington Post by conservative political consultant Ed Rogers, you won’t find much information in the mainstream media about Clinton indirectly teaming up with Russia during the 2016 election to smear then-GOP nominee Trump via the Steele dossier.

“While the media is filled with stories and theories about Trump’s interactions — or lack thereof — with Russia, not enough attention is being paid to revelations about pro-Hillary Clinton operatives’ use of opposition research that ostensibly came from Russia,” Rogers wrote last year.

Why not? Because “[t]he idea that the Democrats were the ones who solicited and utilized Russian-supplied, damning information about Trump instead of Trump using Russian-supplied, damning information about Clinton is something that Trump’s opponents cannot process.”

And by “Trump’s opponents,” Rogers meant the anti-Trump, pro-Clinton media, i.e., the same media that have proudly labeled Clinton “the nation’s abuela” and acted like her groupies.

Clinton Foundation Scandal

“[W]hen reports emerged last year that Russian nuclear officials had routed millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state, that story was mostly ignored by the major networks,” Reps. Lamar Smith and Alex Mooney correctly pointed out in an op-ed in 2017.

“As secretary of state, Clinton’s role was critical to the sale of Uranium One—a uranium mining company—to the Russian-controlled firm Rosatom. The House Intelligence Committee, along with the FBI, opened an investigation into this deal. That’s two active congressional investigations into an issue of major national security concern, with less than five minutes of news coverage informing the American people about it.”

Speaking at the time on Fox News about the media’s behavior, Media Research Center journalist Dan Gainor argued that they didn’t want to talk about anything that’d make Trump look good and Clinton look bad.

“You look at the media coverage of Russia through summer, ABC, CBS, and NBC evening news shows did 415 minutes on the Russia scandal, but 94 percent of it was negative,” he said of the since-debunked Russian collusion delusion hoax.

“And so if you start throwing in things that would make Trump look good, because basically we’ve finally — we can point fingers at one of the presidential candidates linked to Russia scandal. It’s not Trump, it’s Hillary and they don’t want to talk about it.”

He added that the media were acting as if the Clinton scandal was “radioactive.”

Listen:


(Source: MRCTV)

Conversely, the media have shown a willingness to discuss literally anything negative about the Trump, including even claims from porn stars regarding his penis.

But when whistleblowers testified against the Clinton Foundation last year, mum’s was the word.

Media Scandal

Back in 2016, The New York Observer revealed the real reason why both the media and tech giants like Google were essentially “censoring” information to protect Clinton.

“To understand why The New York Times, Google, CNN, and PBS would censor negative information about Clinton, particularly, stories revolving around the Clinton Foundation scandal, all you have to do is follow the money,” the Observer’s report reads.

“All of these companies have donated—in some cases up to seven figures—to the Clinton Foundation. Carlos Slim, Chairman & CEO of Telmex, the largest New York Times shareholder, donated between $1 and $5 million. Google donated between $500K and $1 million”.

The parent company of CNN, Time Warner Inc., gave between $50k to $100k to the foundation. (Woodruff, who serves as co-host and managing editor of PBS ‘NewsHour’, gave $250 to the foundation’s Clinton Haiti Relief Fund in 2010.) It’s no wonder these media entities are reluctant to report harmful stories on Clinton, specifically ones surrounding the Clinton Foundation, since in doing so they could be implicating themselves in this evolving scandal.”

But because these same partisan media entities and veritable propagandists control the airways, a whole host of Americans know nothing about these scandals — nor will they ever.

Thus, it should come as no surprise that Clinton’s snide tweet boasts over 250,000 likes, not to mention thousands of comments from groupies who genuinely believe that — just like former President Barack Hussein Obama — she too is scandal-free.

Fact-check: VERY FALSE.

Vivek Saxena

Comments

Latest Articles