By Rene Sotolongo:
Just turn on the television, turn to a news channel, and you are immediately assaulted by the video and transcripts of Trump using vulgar language (in private) while describing his attempts to sleep with a woman.
Was the language crude? Yes. Was the language offensive? Yes. But Trump’s dialog pales in comparison to Hillary Clinton’s actions. And actions speak louder than words.
First, let’s address Trump and the video.
Donald Trump uses crude language as he describes his attempts at seducing a married woman. But I dare you to find a man who hasn’t used that kind of language… in private.
And therein lies the rub. It was a “private” conversation. And most men (and even women for that matter) will speak in a different style and tone when they believe they are having a private conversation. So here we have a private conversation between two men that occurred over 11 years ago and it’s all the media can talk about.
Now understand, we are not condoning his behavior or his language. But what we are saying is that the media is hyper focused on this one incident by Trump that happened over 11 years ago.
So my question is why has the media not given the same amount of airtime to Hillary Clinton?
Let’s just start with the multiple accusations of rape against her husband and her threats against the women that made the accusations.
Or the fact that several sources have stated—on the record—that Hillary Clinton talks like a drunken sailor when the cameras and microphones are off. Here are a few choice examples:
- From Inside, by former Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare Joseph Califano: “You sold out, you mother f—-r!”
- From Unlimited Access, by FBI Agent in Charge Gary Aldrich: “Stay the f—k back, stay the f—k away from me!”
- From First Family Detail, by Ronald Kessler: “Good morning, ma’am,” a uniformed Secret Service officer once greeted Hillary. “F—k off!” she replied.
- From The Truth About Hillary, by Edward Klein: “Where’s the miserable co– suc–r [referring to her husband]?”
Or how about how Hillary Clinton, at a fund-raiser, said; “half of Donald J. Trump supporters were “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic.” So Mr. Trump gets non-stop coverage, and Hillary gets barely a blip.
In fact, according to Brent Bozell, of the Media Research Center:
They really are pretty incredible. If you look at the coverage of the media and Donald Trump’s taxes, 49 minutes, 21 seconds. The media (on Hillary’s comments regarding Trump supporters]— 42 seconds. The media and Hillary and what she says, two minutes and 41 seconds. Do the math. That’s almost a 25 to one disparity.”
And what about the (illegal) backroom dealings by Hillary?
Hillary Clinton put the State Department up for sale, with top aides pulling strings and doing favors for fat-cat donors to the Clinton Foundation. The disclosures came in a batch of 296 pages of State Department documents released by Judicial Watch, a watchdog group that has been fighting in court to recover Clinton’s emails through the Freedom of Information Act.
And that was not the first time Team Clinton used its clout to land a position for a donor to the foundation. In emails obtained in June (2016) by Citizens United, another watchdog group, it was revealed that a Chicago securities trader who was a Clinton bundler and gave at least $1 million to the foundation landed on the International Security Advisory Board despite having no experience in the field.
And what about her outright lies which were administered under oath – which is a criminal offense? Like her lies in regards to Benghazi.
The most despicable lie came from Hillary when she was trying to defend her conduct. In short, she spent virtually the entire day (under oath) suggesting that Ambassador Stevens knew the risks of his job, that he accepted those risks, and that he died knowing those risks. She even said that Stevens “felt comfortable” on the ground.
But ask yourself this: If Ambassador Stevens really was “comfortable” why then did his team ask for more security over 600 times?
Then, to make matters worse, Hillary said she did not receive any of those requests. Instead, she shifted the blame to her security team for not granting more security. And yet, despite her statements to the contrary, there are several dozen emails that reveal she was fully aware of the security issues.
But even worse: she clearly spells out, in five different emails, exactly where Ambassador Stevens was going to be. These emails were sent using her private email server, which we already know had been hacked.
And so the argument can be made that she intentionally revealed Ambassador Stevens location (on five separate occasions) with the intent that he should be killed. Heaven forbid the American people should discover that Benghazi was just a front for an illegal arms trade.
And what happened when those diplomats and those who ran to help them were killed? She blamed a YouTube video… which has now been proven to be blatantly false. And in a final affront, she used her jerry-rigged email server to selectively edit the material the public would be able to see.
And now, on the heels of these scandals comes a new hurdle for the Clinton campaign to handle: Sixty-four House Republicans wrote a letter dated July 15, 2016, that requested the IRS, the FBI, and the Federal Trade Commission investigate the foundation run by Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton.
In the letter, members of Congress called into question the foundation’s “issues of public corruption” With its 501(c)(3) status, the foundation’s original philanthropic intentions have been undermined by its current activities, the House Republicans claimed.
So of course, the political appointed John Koskinen, who succeeded Lois Lerner simply referred the congressional charges for investigation against the Clinton Foundation to the tax agency’s exempt operations office. So how much media attention has this piece of information garnered? Slim to none.
In fact, Representative Marsha Blackburn (one of the signers of the letter) called out the IRS for what is a clear and obvious double standard. According to the Daily Caller:
Blackburn also blasted the IRS for what she sees as a double standard in who and what they choose to investigate, saying that “they would go after conservative groups and religious groups and organizations, but they wouldn’t be looking at the Clinton Foundation for years… It was as if they choose who they are going to audit and question. It’s not right.”
But do not worry. This is all a Republican conspiracy, and Hillary Clinton is the victim. At least according to Hillary Clinton and her accomplices’ in the mainstream “news” media.
Wouldn’t it be nice if just once, the news media covered the Clintons with the same coverage and indignation with which they cover Trump?
Rene C. Sotolongo is an OpsLens Contributor and a retired U.S. Navy Chief Petty Officer who served for over twenty years as an Information Systems official. Sotolongo also specialized in homeland security and counterterrorism.
Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2016 OpsLens