HomeElectionsAre The Democrats Getting Ready To Dust Off Hillary For A 2016...

Are The Democrats Getting Ready To Dust Off Hillary For A 2016 Repeat Run In 2024 Against Trump?

As I’m writing this article today, on January 6, 2022, the mainstream news coverage is commemorating the attempted “insurrection”  of our Nation’s Capital by the “minions of ‘Bad Man’ Trump”.  The news stations will be spinning the narrative that President Donald Trump was the “mastermind” of a national coup to destroy our Country, and they will do anything to keep this false narrative alive.

Although there are many serious questions about the results of the 2020 Election, the circumstances leading up to the Joe Biden’s “big win”, and the politicizing of the January 6th protests/riots, this is not the main subject of this article.  Quite frankly, there are not enough pages to contain all of the relevant information needed to parse through this ongoing carnival show.

This article is being written to discuss something that is happening behind partially closed doors, and has not been discussed out in the open.  As taken from various news sources, (www.uspresidentialelection news.com, www.medium.com, and wwww.elamerican.com), Hillary Clinton seems to be intent on running for President in 2024. 

This news does not appear to be from a Leftist wish list, either.  It has been reported that Hillary Clinton herself is fanning the flames of a third potential run.

Given the wide disapproval of the Biden-Harris administration it seems entirely possible that a “veteran” politician waiting in the wings could drop in and capture the 2024 Democratic nomination. This assumes, of course, that Joe Biden does not or simply cannot run for re-election, and that Kamala Harris is unable to secure unity with Democrat voters for a successful run for the Presidency.  In that case, the 2024 Democratic primary becomes wide open, leaving an option for Hillary Clinton to swoop in and save the Party of Jackasses.

From what I’ve gleaned from the pro-Hillary 2024 websites listed above, they all seem to talk about her popularity as a fundraiser, and only giving minimal mention of her actual political career as an opportunist.  I have not forgotten recent history, as I’m sure the Reader hasn’t either.

I am going to be very honest.  I am no fan of Hillary Clinton, but that admission will not keep me from being as objective as possible in the writing of this column.  I am writing this from an Investigator’s point of view regarding Mrs. Clinton’s negligence while Secretary of State, and her seemingly deliberate attempts to befuddle the American People throughout her career, while in office or on the publicity bandwagon.  I will steer clear of our fundamental philosophical differences in regards to governance.

On Sept. 11, 2012, the United States Embassy and annex in Benghazi, Libya, came under attack.  At first, the story fed to us by the President of the United States, Barrack Obama, and then Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, was that some youtube.com video sparked outrage in an otherwise peaceful protest. When it was over, four Americans, Ambassador Chris Stevens, Information Officer Sean Smith, and two CIA operatives, Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods, both former Navy SEALs, were dead and the remainder of the Embassy personnel were forced to evacuate.

In the years since, a lot has happened, including a series of Congressional hearings and inquiries into events in Benghazi, including testimony taken from former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, who uttered the infamous statement,

“Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night and decided they’d go kill some Americans. What difference — at this point, what difference does it make?”

In the years that have gone by, my opinion has not changed.  what happened in Benghazi did matter.  Not so we can point fingers and assign blame in the aftermath of this tragedy, but solely because we need to learn from our enemies so that something like this won’t happen again.

Through Congressional investigations, as well as through a U.S. Supreme Court Suit filed on unrelated Federal matters, (Larry Kawa v. U.S. Department of State (No. 9:15-cv-81560), that Hillary Clinton never properly obtained a security clearance.  Which then, in turn, revealed that Mrs. Clinton, as the Secretary of State, used a private e-mail server for government business.

I find that to be unusual.  Even as a Boot Private in the Marine Corps, I had a security clearance that required me to be vetted properly, along with a sworn written oath that I wouldn’t divulge any military information.  I fact, I had to be re-certified annually while I was in Service, and still hold that oath to this day.

In March of  2015, shortly after her announcement that she was going to run for President of the United States, it became publicly known that Hillary Clinton, during her tenure as the Secretary of State, had exclusively used her family’s private email server for official communications, rather than the more secure State Department email accounts maintained on Federal servers. Those official communications included thousands of emails that were considered confidential.

During the Benghazi Hearings, members of Congress have contended that her use of private messaging system software and a private server violated State Department protocols and rules, as well as Federal Laws and regulations governing record keeping. In response, Clinton has said that her use of personal email was in compliance with the aforementioned Laws and regulations, and that former Secretaries of State had also maintained personal email accounts.  It has been alleged that the former Secretary of State used her personal e-mail to secure donations for the Clinton Foundation, peddling her influence in the Federal Government for personal financial gain.

During these Hearings, (which were almost derailed by State Department witnesses pleading the 5th), it was determined that then Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, may have sent out government e-mails marked classified on her private server and the Federal Bureau of Investigation launched an investigation for her alleged mishandling of classified material.  Right at the outset of her Presidential Run, it looked like Hillary Clinton can be charged with several major felonies, including the most serious charge, 18 U.S.C Sec. 793(f):  “Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.”  (https://www.law.cornell.edu).

On July 5, 2016, disgraced former FBI Director James Comey held a rare press conference in regards to the Hillary Clinton e-mail fiasco.   He concluded his bizarre press conference with the statement:

“Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past.”

OK…I still cannot wrap my head around this.  The FBI investigation found evidence of  criminal violations, enforced by several codes where the penalty is felonious prison time, such as 18 U.S.C Sec. 793(f)and you recommended that the Justice Department not prosecute.   From the outside looking in, the fix was in. 

Thankfully, the story of Hillary’s incompetence and corruption became headline news during the election cycle, much to the chagrin of her guardians in the mainstream media.  Since her spectacular loss, Hillary has tried to keep her head above the political waters of obscurity by launching “What the Hell Happened?” personal tours that ended in failure, having books ghost-written for her that end up in the Bargain Bin, and giving occasional softball interviews with friendlies in the mainstream media.

As we head into the mid-term election cycle in 2022, we’re seeing nineteen Democratic Lawmakers not seeking re-election.  They appear to be reading the tea leaves and see that they will have no future in politics, presumably because of the bungling stupidity of the Biden-Harris Administration and their cronies.  Although it’s early in the cycle to predict the runners of 2024, if dusting off Hillary Clinton to make a third run is the Democrats’ best option, my tongue in cheek response is, “Good Luck”.

Jonathan Tisk
Jonathan Tiskhttps://jonathantisk.wixsite.com/freelanceinvestigate
Freelance Investigator, licensed by the NYS Dept. of State, proud to serve the corporate community as well as the private individual. I am always on the look out for common sense solutions for our personal, professional and political lives.
RELATED ARTICLES

Most Popular