There’s no debate: Clinton is unelectable
(October 14, 2016)

In my previous essay, I showed that Hillary Clinton is politically unfit to be president because of the corrupt manner in which she “won” the Democratic nomination from Sen. Bernie Sanders. Now it’s time to show that she is also mentally and politically unfit, but to do so it is necessary to go outside the pro-Clinton media, which is minimizing or censoring negative reporting about her to skew the vote.

For much of the campaign, this media manipulation did not appear to be having the desired effect. After the so-called debate on Sept. 26, Clinton and Trump were separated by less than one per cent, which was no change from July 26.

Who needs voters when the media decides elections?
TOP: After the second debate, Clinton opens up a 5-point led over Trump but it had nothing to do with the debate. The media had been reporting on long-past acts of Trump’s sexual impropriety, making the change the result of media manipulation.

CENTRE: Polls after the first political "debate" on Sept. 26. Clinton and Trump are virtually tied;

BOTTOM: July 26 poll taken by Real Clear Politics. Note that 44 per cent is Trump’s maximum rating, whereas it is nearly Clinton’s lowest. The obvious inference is that voters were abandoning Clinton more than they were choosing Trump, though that may now be changing for non-political reasons. Given Clinton’s lack of upward mobility between July 26 and Sept. 26, it is fair to say she cannot win this election; she and her media have to make Trump lose it.

If Trump were the great menace that the Clinton News Network and other media lapdogs make him out to be, then Clinton should have been well ahead. The race should have been all but over, but Clinton is unlikable, dishonest, and treasonous, and no amount of lipstick can make that pig look pretty. In a rather unflattering YouTube clip Clinton brayed at the camera: “Why aren’t I 50 points ahead?!” An even more unflattering clip details the reasons. All things being equal, Trump would stand fair chance of winning, but the ruling oligarchy can’t allow that to happen.

There has long been a subversive, undemocratic “deep government” that influences the U.S.’s elected government at the highest level. We have seen the effects, for example, in the assassination of JFK, the creation of the federal reserve and the invention of corporations as “persons.” However, the 1980 presidential election allowed this oligarchy to consolidate its power and begin the evisceration of U.S. democracy that we see today.

As I wrote in April, this unelected oligarchy includes Big Oil, Big Pharma, Big Banks and Big Armaments. It alternates support of the two parties depending on which presidential candidate promises to be the most loyal to Israel and cares the least for the rights of American citizens. The oligarchy’s current favourite is Hillary Clinton and not for the first time. She was being groomed to win the Democratic nomination in 2008 when a combination of cockiness and a successful challenge from black Illinois senator Barack Obama pushed her aside. Now, as the Democratic candidate again, the oligarchy hopes Clinton will finally fulfill its destiny by destroying Syria, Iran and Russia. (Cue Darth Vader-like exhale.)


Without exaggeration, the great foreign policy objective of Clinton (and the U.S. in general) is to overthrow legitimate governments (democratic or otherwise) and commit murder whenever corporate or Israeli interests are opposed. Clinton has already done much to burnish her imperial credentials in expectation of being named Israel’s governor in Washington. She declared that the U.S., for the first time, would not consider Israel’s colonies on Palestinian land to be illegal even though by definition they are under international law. In this link, the reader can see reporter Wayne Madsen’s complete list of countries that Clinton has deliberately destroyed in the name of zionist/corporate interests.

Americans have great people like Julian Assange and Seymour Hersh to thank for publicizing Clinton’s unfitness for office. For example, Assange released 1,700 e-mails that prove Clinton sold weapons to Islamic State and that she lied to Congress about having done so—both of these are indictable offences. Hersh, arguably the best investigative journalist in America, showed that Clinton knowingly sent sarin gas from Libya to the U.S.’s proxies destabilizing Syria:

Ken Klippenstein ( “You write that Obama authorized a ratline wherein CIA funneled arms from Libya into Syria and they ended up in jihadi hands. [According to Hersh, this operation was coordinated via the Benghazi consulate where U.S. ambassador Stevens was killed.] What was Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s role in this given her significant role in Libya?”

Seymour Hersh: “The only thing we know is that she was very close to [Gen. David] Petraeus who was the CIA director at the time ... she’s not out of the loop, she knows when there’s covert ops. ... That ambassador who was killed, he was known as a guy, from what I understand, as somebody who would not get in the way of the CIA. As I wrote, on the day of the mission he was meeting with the CIA base chief and the shipping company. He was certainly involved, aware and witting of everything that was going on. And there’s no way somebody in that sensitive of a position is not talking to the boss, by some channel. (my emphasis)
Read Hillary Clinton’s 13 Acts of Treason
We have since learned that it was the Saudis that were transporting the sarin gas when it exploded in the Damascus neighbourhood of Ghouta in August 2013. The gas was supposed to be used in a false flag attack that would be blamed on Syria’s president Bashar al-Assad, which would then be used as a pretext for the U.S. to invade Syria. However, the gas went off earlier than planned and the cover story exploded just as fast.

The UN and other agencies have proof that Assad was not to blame for the attack, but Clinton and the lapdog media don't care: the lie is still truth. Clinton gets a gold star (of David, presumably) for promising that the U.S. would destroy Syria for Israel. For her part in approving the delivery of the sarin gas to Syria—to say nothing of her role in destroying Libya—Clinton is a war criminal and Donald Trump is right to insist that she be jailed.


The U.S.’s premeditated aggression toward Syria is made even worse by the fact that it is merely a means to an end—the destruction of Iran. Here’s what Clinton said on Good Morning America on April 22, 2008.

I want the Iranians to know that if I’m president, we will attack Iran. In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them.

“Totally Obliterate?” Leaving aside the idiotic hyperbole, how does a whole country deserve to be obliterated? Is this what U.S. presidents are supposed to do—destroy countries for Israel? To his credit, Obama refused to launch such an unprovoked attack. These and other fits of moral conscience naturally frustrated his imperial superiors, and George Soros, one of the oligarchy’s grandest poobahs, said that he regretted supporting Obama in 2008.

The real perversity on Clinton’s threat is that she knowingly lied when she said Israel faces a threat from Iran. As I wrote in The Host and the Parasite—How Israel’s Fifth Column Consumed America, Israel has admitted that no such threat exists.

Shai Feldman, director of Brandeis University’s Crown Center for Middle East Studies, said many Israeli analysts do not believe that Iran poses an “existential threat.” On the contrary, they see Iran as a risk-averse country that is well aware of Israel’s second-strike capability: “It’s not that the day after Iran gets the nuclear bomb [that] they drop it on Tel-Aviv. It is rather, the many ‘general geopolitical implications’ of a nuclear Iran that concern Israel. One is that it would lead other countries [in the region] to follow suit [with their own nuclear arms programs]. Two is that an Iran equipped with nuclear weapons would throw its weight around the region to a much greater extent than is currently the case.

In other words, the “threat” that Iran poses is political, not military, and is explicable only in the broader context of Israel’s repression of the Palestinians and need for regional domination. This is essentially the assessment of Abba Eban, Israel’s former UN ambassador and inventor of the false history of the 1967 War. In 1995, he said the conditions that made the Arab-Israeli wars possible, and threatened Israel’s existence, no longer existed. Israel’s interests in the region, he said, were now hegemonic, not existential, and that Israel’s strategic thinking had been taken over by right-wing ideologues.

Since Israel has no military fear of Iran’s potential possession of nuclear power, the U.S.’s provocative policy toward Syria is insane and psychopathic as shown by these excerpts from a State Dept. memo dated Nov. 30, 2015:

The reader should note that the memo, which represents Clinton’s view, not only lies about Iran posing a threat to Israel, but places Israel above U.S. law. In short, Clinton subordinates the U.S.’s interests to those of Israel. That makes her an agent of a foreign government and a threat to U.S. national interests. She cannot take the oath of office and swear to uphold the Constitution if she speaks for Israel.


At the Democratic National Convention, Bill Clinton sports a “Hillary” button written in Hebrew, depicting the Democratic Party’s and his wife’s loyalty to the imperial homeland.
A consequence of an oligarchy victory in November could be the U.S.’s provoking nuclear war with Russia. President Vladimir Putin has distinguished himself as perhaps the world’s greatest statesman for his unwavering support of Assad and for his willingness to stand up to Isramerican aggression in Syria and Ukraine.

This has angered the oligarchy because Putin dared frustrate Isramerican imperial authority, which recognizes no limits. This, in turn, has produced two ludicrous anti-Russian defamation campaigns. The first is falsely accusing Russia of hacking the Democratic National Committee’s e-mails. The second is Clinton’s claim that anti-fracking and environmental activists are Russian front groups.

Why Clinton would make such imbecilic statements cannot be understood rationally. They can only be understood in the context of anti-Syria/anti-Iran warmongering for Israel:

  • Israel wants to topple the Assad regime as a precursor to an attack on Iran.
  • Russia wants a peaceful Middle East and staunchly supports Assad.
  • Russia, as an ally of Syria, is an enemy of Israel, which makes it an enemy of the U.S., Israel’s biggest overseas possession.
  • THEREFORE, Russia must be subjected to a smear campaign.

Truth and logic play no part in anything Clinton or her media says. “Policy” is manufactured to serve a pre-established loyalty to Israel, and the media spread these false narratives because the decision to attack Syria and Russia has already been deemed necessary. Nothing Assad or Putin says or does makes any difference. The “anti-fracking and environmental activists” claim is part of the same pre-attack propaganda, just as the WMD hoax conditioned the public to accept the empire’s need to attack Iraq. It’s also no coincidence that Clinton actively promoted fracking while Secretary of State.

The need to attack Russia also lies behind the full-scale ad hominem campaign against Trump. Unfortunately, for voters, this distraction is having some success. Democrats and some Republican big shots like Paul Ryan and John McCain are disavowing him, as if that mattered. The New York Times even libeled Trump by claiming he committed sexual assault, and refuses to pull the story.

The sexual misconduct circus is a smokescreen for a much larger issue: Trump has an intelligent foreign policy. Unlike the oligarchy’s candidate and virtually everyone else in the two main parties, Trump seeks co-operation, not war, with Putin, and wants to put an end to Islamic State. Both of these are direct challenges to the zionist-dominated oligarchy, which means Trump must be pilloried . While the public fixates on inconsequential blather about Trump’s attitude toward women, honest reporting of Clinton’s criminality is ruthlessly suppressed: collusion with Goldman Sachs banksters, promotion of fracking, plan to sellout U.S. independence to a hemispheric supernation and intent to kill untold numbers of Syrians by imposing an illegal no-fly zone.


Hillary Clinton wants to rain death upon millions of people and sacrifice even more U.S. lives and freedoms to serve Israel; Donald Trump does not. Admittedly, Trump is a bombastic, ignorant buffoon with a questionable grasp of government and deplorable moral conduct, but so what? The same can be said of George W. Bush, but he was never the target of a co-ordinated media assault.

In fact, the servile media that is now pouncing on Trump’s every utterance (past and present) to denounce him with unconcealed glee made possible Bush’s destruction of Iraq, Afghanistan and the Constitution. Even though, President Bill Clinton’s sexcapades were front page news, the media never behaved with such co-ordinated and unapologetic venom.

Those who plan to vote for Clinton in the misguided belief that Trump needs to be stopped, need to consider the following distinctions:

• Trump is not a mass murderer.
• Trump will not start WWIII.
Trump will not rain nuclear bombs on Russia and the Middle East.
• Trump did not destroy tens of thousands of e-mails to cover up a war crime.
• Trump’s spouse did not influence the attorney general to sabotage a criminal investigation.
• Trump has not committed treason.
• The pro-Clinton media has rigged the election to make your vote irrelevant..
• A vote for Clinton is a vote for mass genocide and the end of America.

To paraphrase Dr. Robert Oppenheimer:

Clinton is Death—The Destroyer of Worlds