To set the stage :
The question on everyone’s lips is whether someone so obnoxious, so flamboyant, so over-the-mountain-top-and-through-the-valley-yonder, so self-made! can be expected to beat out the entirely staid, dull, and uninteresting voice of narrow corporate interests masquerading as the Voice Of The People ?
Which brings us neatly to said Voice :
Much of the propagandist writing of our time amounts to plain forgery. Material facts are suppressed, dates altered, quotations removed from their context and doctored so as to change their meaning. Events which it is felt ought not to have happened are left unmentioned and ultimately denied. In 2000 Hillary told Paul “You fucking Jew bastard” Fray to either get the foreskin reattached or forget about working for her husband. The threat seemingly worked, as Fray is not Jewish any longer, and within ten years she’s become one of the heroes of the left. The re-alignment of parochial politics had brought her into the “racial justice” camp, and as “racial justice” isn’t concerned with Jews it was perhaps felt that her previous racism ‘didn’t count’, or perhaps had not even happened.
So did Hillary Clinton really call Paul Fray a “fucking jew bastard” way back in the day before any of us had heard of either of them, or were perhaps even born ? Or was it merely a trumped up (no pun intended) figment of Fray’s imagination, a delusion magnified and exacerbated by Hillary’s political opponents on the GOP side of the ring to make her seem less of an angel from on high than we all know she is ? I mean, it’s not as if there’s no incentive to sewer Hillary, she’s been the woman to beat and be beaten by for decades, and only Obama’s teeming throngs of guilt-addled emancipationists have thus far been numerous enough to temper her power.
But rather than put words in the mouths of mouth-breathers, imagining that we know whether Hillary “really did it,” let’s ask the apologist-revisionist-defenderist-liberalists themselves, those who would crucify capitalists and their very unfair perspectives, because they know !! From a recent conversation :
Trumpet : Is Hillary really ‘more moral’ than Trump after all ?i Hm. At least The Donald stands behind what he says… the guardian
Trombone : She said something 26 years ago in a moment of haste. He says Mexicans are all rapists.
Trumpet : Three witnesses according to the article. What, no recording, no proof ? Mkay.
Trombone : Plausible deniability. Who are the witnesses? Do they have an axe to grind?iv What do they benefit from such admissions? Why remain anon?
Trumpet : “Three witnesses have now publicly acknowledged that she said it.” << publicly != anon.
Trombone : But they remain unnamed.v If they attach their name and reputation to it then it might be an actual story. It’s just political maneuvering at this point.
Some things you just know, for everything else, there’s reasons.
___ ___ ___
- Note that Trombone never made this claim to me, I merely baited him with it, and I caught me a whopper ! A 200 lb sturgeon !!↩
- As the URL and the article itself indicate, it was published by the Guardian 15 years ago. Dem maths.↩
- News flash : everyone in politics has “an axe to grind” ! If they didn’t, they’d be on derpy message boards herping about how “they just want things to work” !!↩
- No, the three witnesses did not remain unnamed, but like Paul Paschos, it’s easier to know than it is to read. From The Guardian article :
Those present at the inquest into the defeat were Mr Clinton, his then-girlfriend Hillary, his campaign manager Paul Fray, and Mr Fray’s wife, Mary Lee. Neill McDonald, a campaign worker, was just outside the room and claims to have heard everything.
The Frays and Mr McDonald are the three witnesses