Hillary Clinton’s Turn has Come for US Presidency?

0
91
 By Tariq Majeed  : – 
 
Hillary Clinton’s Election to the Senate
When Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton was elected to the US Senate in 2000, those, who understand that the government in America is actually run by ‘invisible hands’ of a powerful clique, knew that in time to come she would be led to the White House. “This was the first time an American first lady ran for public office and she was the first female Senator from the state of New York.”1It was a mark of distinction, and valuable publicity, for her political career.
Her election was contrived by the clique. The long-serving Senator from New York, a dedicated Democrat, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, announced his retirement in November 1998. Hillary Clinton easily won his open seat in the Senate election of 2000.
 
Neocons Clique is in Control in America  
Call the members of the clique Israeli-Americans or American Zionists or Neoconservatives (Neocons), their currently common name, they dominate every activity of national life and every institution in America, including the mainstream Media. Prominent American scholar and author, Professor David Ray Griffin, calls them, “The Cabal who Engineered 9/11.”2
      The Neocons conduct US policies for the interests of Zionism and Israel and not those of the United States. This fact is not aired in the US media for obvious reasons. However, there is no dearth of material on it. Just scanning through two books, former Congressman Paul Findley’s They Dare to Speak Out—People and Institutions Confront Israel’s Lobby,3 and Professor Stephen J. Sniegoski’s The Transparent Cabal—the Neoconservative Agenda,4 is enough to expose the Neocons and their highhanded exclusiveness in conducting the affairs of the state. Sniegoski’s book could be downloaded from the Internet.
 
Loyalty to Neocons Agenda is a Necessity for American Leaders
The Neocons exercise their power mainly through the Presidency and the Congress, and ensure that the occupants in these two premier institutions are those who are absolutely loyal to their agenda and possess the ability to implement it. They select the candidates for these institutions, keep them under their reigns and let the drama of electioneering go on with ups and downs for the candidates till at the final stage they create the conditions for the earmarked candidate to win.
The Neocons’ elusive agenda of aims and objectives can be discovered through analysis of their policies and political moves. But what strategies and machinations will be employed and what will be the time frame for accomplishing an objective is almost impossible to assess in advance. These facts have to be taken into consideration for understanding the politics, and the national policies, in America.
 
Hillary’s Run in the 2008 Election Race
At first I expected Hillary Clinton would be a candidate for the presidency in 2004. “She had been mentioned as a potential candidate for United States President since at least October 2002.5 But, she stayed out of that election. Instead, on a green signal from her sponsors, she made preparations for the 2008 election. In January 2007, she announced on her Website the formation of a presidential exploratory committee. In her announcement she stated: “I’m in. And I’m in to win.”6
Throughout the first half of 2007, the opinion polls placed her ahead of all her rivals for the Democratic nomination. Her closest competitors according to polls were Senator Barack Obama and a former senator, John Edwards. The financial status of her campaign topped the funds held by the other candidates. By September 2007, opinion polls in the first six states holding Democratic primaries or caucuses showed that Hillary was leading in all of them. “National polls had her far ahead of any Democratic competitor.”7
Apart from her standing in the opinion polls, Hillary Clinton seemed to be more popular in public than the other candidates in the race. She garnered broad support from amongst young folks, women and Hispanics. She seemed well set to securing the nomination at the Democratic Convention. Then, strangely, “by December 2007, as the race tightened, especially in the early primary states of Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, Hillary began losing her lead in polls.8
Gradually, Barack Obama moved ahead of her in polls and general popularity. A new game plan, with the opinion polls and the media clearly favouring Obama, had taken shape. At the Democratic National Convention held in Denver, Colorado, August 25 to August 28, 2008, Obama received the nomination for President. He went on to beat the Republican Nominee, Senator John McCain, in the Election.
 
The Enigma of Hillary Losing the Nomination to Obama 
Barack Obama turned out to be the man the Neocons had selected to be US President in 2008. Then why had they fielded Hillary Clinton in the Election, and provided her with abundant funds that enabled her to build a large following? This was a mystery, a puzzle.
It didn’t take me long to crack the puzzle. Just after Obama’s nomination, Hillary backed him with her full support. Obama was the beneficiary of her large vote-bank, which was a key factor in his victory against McCain. Hillary was made secretary of state, thus becoming a member of the exclusive team of top decision makers in the Obama Administration. She stayed in the post for four years, from 2009 to 2013.
 
The 2016 Presidential Election
Hillary entered the 2016 presidential election race with fairly impressive merits. But, would the majority of the American voters be ready to have another Democrat as president after two lacklustre terms of a Democratic President? This question could not be brushed aside. An analyst, Dan McLaughlin, discussed it as early as September 4, 2014 in an article, “History is Not on The Democrats’ Side in 2016.” His key comment was, “If Hillary Clinton wins the presidency in 2016, it will be a historically unprecedented event in more ways than just her gender.” 9
Her sponsors had a literally foolproof scheme for her to succeed—and let that be a historically unprecedented event! They engendered disunity and acute leadership crisis in the Republican Party. Then, to face Hillary Clinton as the Republican Challenger in the final phase of the 2016 Election, they chose a man, Donald Trump, described as a “Real estate mogul”, who was outright unqualified and ill-equipped to be president of the country.
 
The Scheme for Hillary to Win  
There were sixteen Republican candidates when the campaign took off in late 2015. Each one of them had credentials worthy of the post being contested. Among them were well-known political heavy-weights: John  Kasich, Governor of Ohio, Jeb Bush Governor of Florida, Chris Christie,Governor of New Jersey, Senators Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and Rick Santorum. They withdrew by March 2016, during the primaries; the others had withdrawn even earlier!
Through manipulated publicity and opinion polls, Donald Trump had been given a lead that his Republican rivals found unbridgeable. Trump had not spelt out any notable political programme nor he had given any cogent views on foreign policy. His foibles, which became more pronounced later, were already evident. The Republican candidates were nonplussed and frustrated. They were experienced politicians and most probably understgood the plot.
 
Policylines for Trump
Trump’s handlers had fed him policylines designed to appeal to some sections of American people. The themes were: anti-immigration, anti-immigrants, anti-Muslim, blaming Islam and some Muslim countries for terrorism; and an attractive theme/slogan ‘make America great’. He played on  these themes repeatedly. The controlled corporate media and the opinion-polling agencies fabricated Trump’s popularity and lead in opinion polls. It was done so brazenly that as early as February 24, 2016, it was said, Donald Trump is well on his way to the 1,237 Delegates he needs to be the GOP nominee.”10 It was unprecedented. The Republican National Convention was yet five months away.
 
Trump’s Reckless Statements
Trump’s conduct was inconsistent, often emotional and non-serious. He would blatantly make reckless, unrealistic statements. ‘He set off alarm bells in European capitals after suggesting he might not honor the core tenet of the NATO military alliance.’ Trump said, “The U.S. would not necessarily defend new NATO members in the Baltics in the event of Russian attack if he were elected to the White House.”11 
 
‘Retired US General John Allen said that if Republican nominee  Donald Trump becomes president and follows through on some of the things he’s said on the campaign trail, the U.S. could face a “civil military crisis, the like of which we’ve not seen in this country.” ‘In the past, Trump has supported the use of waterboarding and other enhanced interrogation techniques, and has said the military should kill the families of alleged terrorists.’12
 
Hillary Clinton had little to do in pointing out Trump’s mistaken views, facts and judgements. He did this job himself, or his supporters tried to extricate him from bungled situations. Commentators covering the Election also brought out his failings in this respect. A story said: Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump scoffed at the suggestion that he check every statistic on his twitter account after he posted an image containing made-up statistics on race and murder.13
 
An uncomplimentary story, dated 10 August 2016, said:  Donald Trump has several times walked back comments that got him in hot water.’ The story listed nine times when Trump distanced himself from his own comments.’ Just one example is reproduced here. “I got to know him very well because we were both on ’60 Minutes’. We were stablemates, and we did very well that night,” Trump said of Russian President Putin. ‘Later, the notion that they met on the set was debunked, as they were in different cities when their interviews were taped. Trump, then, said: “I have no relationship with him.”14       
 
Hillary Clinton had her shortcomings, besides questionable actions she took as secretary of state, eg using her private server for secret emails communication—that was investigated by FBI. The media did highlight such matters, but they were dwarfed by Trump’s idiosyncrasies and flaws which were legion.
 
Election’s Outcome already Obvious
 
Donald J. Trump was officially nominated on July 19 at the Republican National Convention, while Hillary Clinton received the official nomination at the Democratic National Convention on July 26, 2016. After their nomination, Hillary was given a decisive lead over Trump in opinion polls. Then, a story on 13 August 2016, said: Hillary Clinton leads Donald Trump in ABC News’ Electoral Ratings. A candidate needs 270 electoral votes to win the White House. ABC News puts Clinton at 275 electoral votes and Trump at 191, when including both solid and leaning states, which would give Clinton enough states right now to hand her the White House.”15
 
Those statistics literally announced the outcome of the 2016 Presidential Election. However, the drama, including usual suspense, will go on till the Election date November 8, 2016 approaches.
The writer is an analyst of the game of global control.
 
Notes:
1.  https://www.hillaryclinton.com
2.  Barrie Zwicker,TOWERS OF DECEPTION: THE MEDIA COVER-UP OF 9/11, Gabriola Island, Canada, New Society Publishers, June 2006, p. 303.
3.  Paul Findley. They Dare to Speak Out—People and Institutions Confront Israel’s Lobby, Lawrence Hill & Co, Westport, 1985.
4.  Stephen J. Sniegoski.  The Transparent CabalTheNeoconservative Agenda,War in the Middle East, and the National Interest of Israel, Enigma Editions, USA, 2008.
7.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton, p.14.
8.  Ibid.
11.  Cassandra Vinograd, NBC News, July 21, 2016, 2:52 pm.
12.  Nicki Rossoll, ABC News, July 31, 2016, 3:18 pm.
 
 
(Commodore Tariq Majeed is former officer of Pakistan Navy ) 
Disclaimer: Views expressed are not of The London Post