STAFF NEWS & ANALYSIS
Immoral and Cowardly to Attack Hillary’s Personally, Bloomberg Says
By Daily Bell Staff - October 18, 2016

The public release, via WikiLeaks, of purloined e-mails and documents related to Hillary Clinton and her campaign has produced starkly different reactions. On the whole, the news media is nonplussed.- Bloomberg

This Bloomberg article makes the case that none of the emails released by WikiLeaks provides evidence of wrongdoing by Hillary Clinton.

Is suggests that the leaks “may or may not be part of a Russian effort to undermine Clinton.” And it explains the leaks expose “routine political discussion among staff engaged in the constant, necessary balancing of policy, politics and presentation.”

In other words it presents Clinton as a “normal” politician doing the things politicians necessarily do.

The article does admit there is “cause for unease about Clinton’s use of a private e-mail system when she was secretary of state.” It also mentions  that the combination of the Clinton family’s foundation work and the presidency might present a conflict of interest, but apparently there is no evidence of that now.

Meanwhile, the article claims to see “pathos” in additional charges leveled at the Clintons. These would include suggestions that Hillary and Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta were involved in the death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.

The article’s conclusion is the most controversial part from our perspective, as follows:

The source fueling the right’s recklessness isn’t stupidity. It’s cowardice. It takes a basic level of character and respect for truth to confront the world as it is rather than concoct fantasies that flatter your ideology, complement your anxieties and excuse your faults. 

The idea here is that critics of Clinton are grasping at illusory wrongdoing rather than confronting her on very real policies. This approach is termed a cartoon version of a politician who is “complex” and real “with formidable skills and obvious failings.”

The article ends by making a moral judgment about  this sort of attack, terming it a “shabby fraud”among critics who “shrink from the demands of honest politics.”

 To defeat Clinton, and the political tradition she embodies, on the merits requires facts, arguments, policies, vision. Credible opponents rise to the task. For cowards, there’s WikiLeaks

But what’s wrong with questioning elements of a politician’s past or personality? Perhaps the problem is bigger than Clinton or any single politician. Politics may be tolerable in small doses but modern democracy provides individuals that, once, elected, will have considerable responsibilities on numerous fronts.

The idea that TV commercials and scripted appearances can provide a good measure of how a politician will act in office seems questionable at best. So this article’s perspective that one should evaluate Clinton based on her policy prescriptions probably will not yield a great deal of useful information.

Beyond that, one must question whether the modern political process provides any credible or valuable results. Seen from a distance, even important politicians are in thrall to money and influences that precede their election and will persist long after they are gone.

Hillary, for instance, seems to be the favorite of the establishment because she can be counted on to escalate military tensions around the world while further entrenching various questionable memes such as global warming – to further expand the reach and control of government.

So the reasons Hillary may win – possibly through voter fraud – have little to do with why people are voting for her. Ultimately, the modern political process likely cannot yield independent elected officials, at all. And one can even argue  that politicians only get elected if they are willing to destabilize the societies they live on the way to expanding global government.

It makes more sense to evaluate politicians on the background and personality than on their policies because the policies they must follow already exist and are entrenched. A bad and unbalanced person can certainly do more damage to more people than one who relatively centered and secure.

As Hillary seems personally violent, mentally unhinged and physically ailing,  it makes sense to consider these traits when casting one’s vote. On the other hand, we’ve often suggested that people not vote at all as voting only encourages and endorses the current technocratic corporatism.

Conclusion: We would suggest that people do what they can to separate themselves from the current system and cultivate their independence, professionally and personally, as best they can.

 

 

 

Tagged with:
Posted in STAFF NEWS & ANALYSIS
  • Owen

    Looking at the platforms and history of the four candidates it seems to me that Jill Stein’s presents the least dangerous path for the US and the world. I do have issues with her economic stand (echoes of FDR) and her stand on gun control, although muted, could lead to unwanted restrictions on the Second Ammendment.

  • TimeToWakeUPAmerica

    What EMPIRE is Bloomberg a SHILL for? FIND OUT!

    Who and what actually comprises and controls the CFR/CIA “Shadow Government” embedded within and controlling the U.K., U.S., Saudi, Israeli, & “E.U.” governments, as well as the so-called “British Commonwealth” governments (Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, etc.)? FIND OUT, HERE:

    THE FINAL DESTRUCTION OF AMERICA: JFK’S 1961 Prophecy EXPOSES Obama, Hillary, the Pope & the NWO/JWO http://sgtreport.com/2016/10/the-final-destruction-of-america-jfks-1961-prophecy-exposes-obama-hillary-pope-the-nwo/

    Read all the comments. Click on all the links. Read/view/listen to all content.

  • RJ O’Guillory

    Bloomberg and his minions are traitors. They should all be charged with treason, convicted and hanged from street lamp poles…
    RJ O’Guillory

  • Owen

    Looking at the platforms and history of the four candidates it seems to me that Jill Stein’s is the least dangerous to the US and the world. Although, her stand on the economy is questionable (shades of FDR) and on gun ownership (she wouldn’t be able to change the Second Amendment), her ideas of closing the US overseas bases (400+), deescalating confrontation with Russia, staying out of the Middle East and dropping TPP (as well as other corprartist benefits) are laudable.

    And though I agree “abstaining from beans” is a great idea, we will probably have a next president.

    • SnakePlissken

      Gary Johnson would also like to reduce our military footprint overseas, deescalate confrontation with Russia and stay out of the ME. As a Libertarian, he doesn’t want to change the 2A and would like to get rid of the IRS. He also served 2 terms as a Republican governor in a largely democrat state.

    • Samarami

      “…we will probably have a next president…”

      I don’t know what kind of “president” you might have. My President will continue to chair the Committee that sustains the Rotation of the Earth on its Axis. Sam

  • Erik Garcés

    The entire system is built upon the premise that we all must be kept distracted and divided with endless debates over personalities and polices without ever questioning the very system itself.

    It cannot be by accident that we see articles linking Alex Jones to Donald Trump or that Hillary Clinton’s emails are being exposed. We’re being corralled into unavoidably asking the questions about the system which just a few years ago would have had those asking them ridiculed.

    This article’s conclusion is forthright: it’s time to find safe haven for chaos is coming.

  • Vorant

    Bloomberg is just as evil as Obama, Soros or Hillary, if this world was just (which it isn’t), all three would be in jail, tried, found guilty and waiting for their date with the executioner….

    • Jim Wahl

      I have known for certain since that the Clinton’s are corrupt, since the first few months of his presidency, both of them.

  • Nobody seems to shy away from attacking Trump’s personality, up to and including speculating openly about his mental health. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

  • Remember Martha Stewart?

    //dennisleewilson(DOT)com/simplemachinesforum/gallery/1_18_10_16_1_02_51.jpg
    http://dennisleewilson.com/simplemachinesforum/gallery/1_18_10_16_1_02_51.jpg

  • Sebastian Puettmann

    Hey DailyBell.

    In a recent article about the maybe directed history of the NASA moon landings you pointed me towards a video of a YouTuber who analysed the space mobil and who made a good case for it to be only a common jeep.

    I want to return the favour and point back to a recent video of this YouTube channel called LIFT THE VEIL. The video is called ‘3 WikiLeaks Bombshells You Haven’t Heard’ and he, only very briefly, points out colluding between the (supposedly independent) FED and political campaings…

  • Scott

    And we scoff at third world countries with all their corruption, I guess because they do it on such a small scale.

  • Don Duncan

    When elections are canceled, then you will know they might have challenged TPTB. Elections are part of the political fraud whereby people are encouraged in their fantasy that they exercise some control over the political process by voting. Every vote is a personal forfeit of sovereignty. By voting one implies acceptance of institutionalized violence, even against him/herself, “for the common good”. It is participation in the collectivist mentality, e.g., the sacrifice of the individual as necessary for all individuals , as a group, to be safe. If this appears to be a contradiction, it is. Individuals forming into groups gives them political power, not moral superiority. A group of murderers have not gained a special right to kill an individual or violate that person’s rights.

  • Disqusid123

    I would expect no less from a Bloomberg org.

    • Sometime I get annoyed and write uncomplimentary comments – this time my comment will be much different – Because the article is EXCELLENT – Taking the non-voting stance – Many years ago – I decided not to vote in one particular UK election – only to have a knock on my door by the Local Labour-Rotweiler – so I dutifully went to the poling station and voted fro the Liberal Democrats – and just look what an absolute disaster they became – so – yes – I wholeheartedly endorse the suggestion – that – one should try to GET-A-LIFE outside of this endlessly ROTTEN [(2 Heads = (1) Body] political system –

  • georgesilver

    Daily Bell your ‘conclusion’ is something I adopted several years ago. By voting you endorse the corrupt system. The media constantly has politicians as their headline news. I think the reasoning is that politicians must be seen to be important and necessary to the people but in reality are a drain on everyone’s resources and energy.

  • Hey you

    Haven’t voted for years. Simply don’t believe that voting can be meaningful.
    — But millions otherwise sane people depend upon vote results.

  • ALPHAMEG

    It is surprising that nothing has been reported of Hillary’s variety of sexual interests. In Arkansas it was a known knowledge of her affair with Vince Foster, who was a “family friend”. Vince and his wife were the best and close friends of the Clinton’s, before Bill’s election to Governor of Arkansas, and when Bill was elected to POTUS, the Fosters went along to Wash. DC, The Foster’s went along. This was documented by two of the Arkansas State Police who were assigned to the Protection Staff for the Clinton’s. There were reports also of Hillary being a bi-sexual. It also was general recognition in Arkansas that the Clinton’s had a “open” marriage.

loading
Sign up now and join our exclusive international network for free-market thinkers
Privacy Assured: We will NEVER share your personal information.