Trump: God’s Gift to Hillary Clinton

Two things happened yesterday regarding our major party presidential candidates. Both were reported by major media outlets. One I’m sure you’ve heard about; the other you probably haven’t.

Here’s the one you may not know about, reported by Eric Lichtblau at the New York Times:

A new batch of State Department emails released Tuesday showed the close and sometimes overlapping interests between the Clinton Foundation and the State Department when Hillary Clinton served as secretary of state.

The documents raised new questions about whether the charitable foundation worked to reward its donors with access and influence at the State Department, a charge that Mrs. Clinton has faced in the past and has always denied.

In one email exchange, for instance, an executive at the Clinton Foundation in 2009 sought to put a billionaire donor in touch with the United States ambassador to Lebanon because of the donor’s interests there.

In another email, the foundation appeared to push aides to Mrs. Clinton to help find a job for a foundation associate. Her aides indicated that the department was working on the request.

There are many examples of apparent collusion between Hillary Clinton’s State Department and the Clinton Foundation, although without evidence of direct quid pro quo Clinton has always been able to brush it off.

The State Department turned the new emails over to a conservative advocacy group, Judicial Watch, as part of a lawsuit that the group brought under the Freedom of Information Act.

The documents included 44 emails that were not among some 55,000 pages of emails that Mrs. Clinton had previously given to the State Department, which she said represented all her “work-related” emails. The document release centers on discussions between Mrs. Clinton’s aides and Clinton Foundation executives about a number of donors and associates with interests before the State Department.

Tom Fitton, the president of Judicial Watch, charged that Mrs. Clinton “hid” the documents from the public because they appeared to contradict her official pledge in 2009 to remove herself from Clinton Foundation business while leading the State Department.

In a normal election year, this would have been headline stuff, and the Republican Noise Machine would be screaming about it to the rafters. However, this happened:

Donald Trump has been accused of a making an “assassination threat” against rival Hillary Clinton, plunging his presidential campaign into a fresh crisis.

The volatile Republican nominee was speaking at a rally in Wilmington, North Carolina, about the next president’s power to appoint supreme court justices. “Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish, the second amendment,” said Trump, eliciting boos from the crowd.

“If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the second amendment people, maybe there is, I don’t know. But I’ll tell you what, that will be a horrible day.”

You’ve heard about that one, huh? The Republican Noise Machine has been forced to drop the Clinton emails for the moment and instead make excuses for Trump.

There’s a conspiracy theory popular in the dunce corners of social media that says The Donald actually is working for the Clintons. He met with Bill right before he declared his candidacy, see, and the Plan all along was for Trump to win the nomination and then throw the election to Hillary.

Do I believe this? No; I think the simpler explanation is that Trump is (quoting our frequent mahacommenter eryinyes) “bug fuck crazy.” But if I were inclined to believe such things, this would be Exhibit A. Time after time, Trump trips up his own campaign. This time he ran over his own campaign with a bus.

Note that just a few days ago, Trump made one of a series of promises that he would “tone down” his rhetoric. He appears to not know what that means.

See also “Stress Over Family Finances Propelled Hillary Clinton Into Corporate World.”

14 thoughts on “Trump: God’s Gift to Hillary Clinton

  1. How does a guy with such small hands keep stepping on his d*ck so many times?

    And Hillary is very lucky that her opponent is so ridiculous, otherwise this new batch of e-mails would be very damaging.
    But, mentioning someone assassinating your opponent – even in jest (which still wouldn’t be funny) – kind ‘trumps’ some e-mails.

    Mr. tRUMP, please continue…

  2. The Clinton story is only a bit more consequential than the email server debacle that Bernie correctly dismissed as of no interest to voters. That said, the press WOULD have dragged it into the news rotation ad nauseum had the Donald (or I should say “the other Donald”, since the original, the Duck, was far quicker of wit) not solicited violence.

    Not being an HRC apologist, but a proper scandal involves being found with “a live boy or a dead girl”, though in HRC’s case we would need to reverse the genders.

    • Tom_b — Yeah, I doubt anyone will ever find a direct quid pro quo between the State Department and the Clinton Foundation. Hillary doesn’t strike me as that reckless.

  3. I agree that Trump is bug fuck crazy, but I think in this case Trump got a little over confident or carried away in his belief that “he’s got the best words”. It’s obvious how he gets off by playing with innuendo, double entendres and alluding. You tell me?
    Yea, it’s an effective form of speech in moderation, but if it’s over worked it become offensive to an intelligent listener. It’s like so seventh grade..

  4. If Trump was a normal candidate he would have been out long ago. His comments on getting Hillary won’t make any difference. I’m afraid it will take a serious result to cause him to withdraw..

  5. Credit John for this terse and poignant comment from the NYT on tRump’s comment to those 2nd amendment people:

    “Trump voters caught the crazy virus from Fox News a long time ago. Trump’s gift was to recognize an insane asylum waiting for a leader.”

  6. Thanks Bernie, but you and John deserve the credit.

    By the way, about twenty five years ago, I learned a lot of the songs on ukulele, somehow it never ignited the minds of the masses. But, that was long before the uke got popular again.

  7. Trump could have ended that sentence “the Second Amendment people could assassinate the President and her judges”. He could also have ended that sentence “the Second Amendment people could call their senators and demand obstruction.” The second is clearly civilized, the first is clearly barbaric. But he said neither; he didn’t even finish the sentence.

    So he was vaguely thuggish, and vaguely insurrectionist, and vaguely treasonous. And I DON’T LIKE VAGUENESS!

    I demand that Trump be _clear_ in his barbarism. He should tell us what he _really_ thinks, assuming that he thinks at all.

  8. Were it not for the fact that the expression “second amendment solution” has been in use by the right, by everyone from the lunatics to even some elected republicans, Trump might have an argument that his remarks were misinterpreted. But his comment was clearly with this in mind. Besides, his scenario has Clinton selecting judges, which she could only do after being elected. Second amendment voters could lobby their senators to fight back, but there would not be any voting involved, as Trump’s minions are now insisting is what he “really” meant.

    Trump clearly meant to “stop her” using this solution the right has gotten used to bandying about. And given the usual chants of “lock her up,” calls from even elected republicans for Clinton to be hung, what Trump said and meant is really not out of the ordinary for a right wing that has increasingly celebrated violence and death. Its par for the course.

    The media and GOP elites are “shocked” now, but this kind of talk has been typical for some time now.

  9. As for Hillary being fixated on making money, from the time they started out together in Arkansas up to the point of leaving the white house, I don’t see anything nefarious in wanting to make money to support the family. That happens when one spouse/partner may lose a job or is unable to work, the other has to pick up the slack. What is not typical is to have the kind of friends/associates who can offer you a deal to turn a $1000 investment into $100,000. I don’t hate her for that either; who wouldn’t jump at an opportunity like that?

    But the speeches are an issue; they do sound like pay for play and probably are, which is the reason Clinton has fought the release of the speech texts.

  10. I must give credit to my old friends from the Southern California Pile drivers union for the term “bug fuck crazy”, it was used widely in the 70’s and 80’s. When I arrived in Florida in 1990, I learned a similar term, “sprayed bug crazy”. Both seem to define The Donald’s antics.

Comments are closed.