The danger of scapegoating Hillary


In my previous post, I asked Will Hillary Clinton be the scapegoat?

And while I think it is possible the media and Democrats would love nothing more than to let Hillary take the fall for the Russia scandals, there is a danger in doing that.

Back in June of 2015, I wrote a column titled Dance with the one that brung ya.

At the time, Hillary had yet to give her big, splashy Roosevelt Island speech. But despite not officially being a candidate for President, Democrats were already grumbling that Hillary was not the best choice.

Can you blame them? Look at everything dragging her down — the email scandal, Benghazi, Clinton Foundation Pay-to-Play. Hillary wasn’t exactly the best choice.

So naturally some Democrats were desperate for a better candidate to toss his hat into the ring.

And in my column, I wrote this:

If they bail on Hillary a second time, the damage will come from Hillary herself.
Like Obama, Hillary has no party loyalty. All she cares about is her own power and career. And if the Democrats leave her standing like a wallflower in order to woo a new candidate into dancing with them, she will turn on them like a rabid dog.
Burning bridges behind her is Hillary’s primary mode of transportation.
And trust me, she’ll start burning.

And if it was true in 2015, it is doubly true today.

As it is, Hillary already feels betrayed by the Democrats. And let’s be honest. She has nothing to lose.

Her guaranteed victory blew up in her face like a trick cigar.

And she’s bitter, angry and looking for payback.

If Hillary Clinton were a Democrat party loyalist, she never would have written that damn book.

And we wouldn’t be subjected to her never-ending blame tour.

She doesn’t give a damn that her ubiquity is damaging the Democrat Party.

In fact, among those she’s blamed for her defeat are the DNC and Obama himself.

So no. Hillary has no loyalty to them or to the country.

After all. We all betrayed her. And we’re all on her list.

So what happens if the Democrats decide to make her the scapegoat for Uranium One and the dirty dossier?

Well, let’s put it this way — danger Will Robinson, danger.

If you think Donald Trump is the only one Hillary has dirt on, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

I shudder to think what she has on the DNC or Barack Obama himself.

And if she doesn’t care what her book tour is doing to the Democrats, I’m guessing she wouldn’t hesitate to set fire to the whole party if they try laying these scandals at her feet.

Hillary wasn’t given the nomination because she was “the most qualified candidate for President ever to run.”

Only Peter Daou and the lickspittles who troll Verrit think that.

No. The DNC sold its soul to ensure Hillary got the nomination because to not do so would have unleashed hell, hell, hell.

Any other candidate saddled with as many scandals as Hillary Clinton would have been jettisoned in a heartbeat.

So the only logical explanation for their loyalty to her is Mutually Assured Destruction.

If she went down, she was going to take them with her.

So if they intend on laying off the Russian scandals on Hillary, she’s going to set fire to the entire Democrat Party.

Come on. You know I’m right.

Come to think of it. I’m actually hoping that’s exactly what happens.

Hit the Tip Jar!

Your contributions help keep an ad-free site. Hit the DONATE button in the side bar. Or, set up a recurring monthly contribution by choosing SUBSCRIBE. Even a few bucks can make a world of difference!

Check out

— my Conservative & Christian T-shirt Store.

Share, share, share

6 thoughts on “The danger of scapegoating Hillary

  • October 27, 2017 at 4:56 pm

    Do you think the DNC is thinking that now would be a good time for Hillary to come down with a bad case of Arkencide?

    She’s so distraught, you know? Bill will be heartbroken.

    And then they can try to blame it on Trump.

  • October 27, 2017 at 6:08 pm

    If you are right, maybe we should be buying stock in popcorn.

  • October 27, 2017 at 7:19 pm

    “their loyalty to her is Mutually Assured Destruction”
    I’ve always believed she was another LBJ, in as just like him she has most everybody of importance in the party D**ks in her pocket.

  • October 29, 2017 at 10:13 am

    What’s the down side to Hillary going nuclear? The total demolition of the democrat party? That can’t be a bad thing.

  • October 29, 2017 at 12:58 pm

    Burn baby, burn!

Comments are closed.