Bizarre, Politics

Hillary Clinton: “I Take Responsibility For Every Decision I Made, But That’s Not Why I Lost”

Hillary_Clinton_Testimony_to_House_Select_Committee_on_BenghaziWe have previously discussed how Clinton has blamed self-hating women, the Russians, and a long list of reasons for her loss . . . except for herself.   Despite losing the virtually unloseable election to Donald Trump, Clinton continues to be celebrated by Democratic insiders in speeches and continues to blame others for her historic loss.  That campaign was in full view this week with Clinton’s appearance at the annual Code Conference in Rancho Palos Verdes, California.  Clinton continues to evade tough questions about her own conduct while giving the false impression of taking responsibility.  This week she crafted a truly Clintonesque line: “I take responsibility for every decision I made, but that’s not why I lost.”  In other words, I take no responsibility.  As many on this blog know, I have been very critical of Trump but I have no more patience with Clinton or the establishment figures who brought about this historic loss.  All of these groups celebrating Clinton ignore the fact that Trump could not possibly have succeeded without her — and the effort of virtually every national Democratic leader to guarantee her nomination.

As we discussed earlier, Clinton’s magical mystery tour after the election is designed to avoid blame for herself and the Democratic establishment which largely engineered her selection.  We are still waiting for a serious post-election interview of Clinton.  Carefully selected interviewers never ask about any of the scandals that plagued Clinton or the fact that she was one of the least popular politicians in the country or that she magnified these problems by refusing to turn over her Wall Street speeches.  They also do not ask why Clinton remained so close in the polls against someone so polarizing as Trump.  Finally, when Clinton refers to her controversies as causing the loss, she is never asked about the fact that Trump faced endless such controversies at the same time but still prevailed against her.  Trump faced unrelentingly bad press and, in comparison, Clinton had overwhelmingly positive (and at times openly supportive) coverage.  Yet Trump prevailed against her.  As David Axelrod said this week, “it took a lot of work to lose to Donald Trump.”

The show was in full display in the latest speech. The Clintons however have continued to evolve in their blaming of others.  Within minutes of the loss on election night, Clinton aides began to spin the loss and entirely the fault of FBI Director James Comey — a spin picked up by Clinton herself the next day. Many of us have questioned that spin in light of Clinton’s long-standing low polls on truthfulness and her ranking as (with Trump) the most unpopular nominee of a major party for the presidency.  Now however it is the Russians who stole the election from Clinton (who could not get serious distance from the most unpopular presidential candidate in history due to her own low polling).  Accordingly, after claiming that she would take responsibility, Clinton immediately denied any responsibility: “The overriding issue that affected the election that I had any control over — because I had no control over the Russians — was the way the use of my email account was turned into the greatest scandal since Lord knows when. This was the biggest ‘nothing burger’ ever.”

There are a couple of obvious problems with this spin of course.  First, Clinton’s use of a personal server did compromise security and was widely denounced.  Despite her denials, classified emails were sent to her personal server.  Second, Clinton and her supporters still struggle with the fact that the key emails cited in the election were true.  They were not fake.  So they are still trying to get voters upset that hackers revealed false statements by Clinton and high ranking officials.  They are supposed to be disgusted that anyone allowed them to see emails that directly contradicted what they were being told.

I have previously said that the Russian hacking warrants comprehensive investigation, even though our county is notorious for such hacking and influencing of elections.  It is a serious matter if the Russians selectively hacked Clinton’s emails to try to influence the election.  However, I do not believe that the hacking was the reason that she lost.  More importantly, the Clintons continue to avoid discussing the misrepresentations disclosed

A recent poll showed that, despite Trump being the least popular modern president at this point in his Administration, he would still beat Clinton.  Clinton still remains radioactive with many voters. Before the establishment all but anointed Clinton as their candidate in the primary, polls clearly showed that the voters did not want an establishment figure so the DNC worked to guarantee the nomination to the ultimate establishment figure. However, it clearly goes deeper than that.  Again, even against one of the most unpopular figures in history (Trump was even worse at 63 percent unfavorability), Clinton struggled even to maintain a majority of women with favorability ratings.  I believe that voters are willing to elect a woman and I do not believe that the last election was decided by self-hating women. There was ample reason to vote against Clinton who was not just the ultimate establishment figure but was dragging a long chain of controversies (as well as polls showing that voters heavily viewed her as dishonest).
 As previously discussed, the New York Times study found that Trump won by “persuasion” and not turn out. In other words, they rejected Clinton as a candidate as they did when she ran against Obama.  It came down to the candidates: “The voter file data makes it impossible to avoid this conclusion. It’s not just that the electorate looks far too Democratic. In many cases, turnout cannot explain Mrs. Clinton’s losses.”
However, that is not the point.  It is essential for Democratic leaders that the blame for this election not fall on Clinton (and by extension themselves).  It is easier to blame Comey or the Russians or women.  Clinton returned again to the notion that there was no reason why any woman could possibly vote against her other than her own self-hate: “At some point it bleeds into misogyny.”
Ironically, like Trump, Clinton continues to blame “fake news” without explaining what critical story undermined her campaign.  The complaint ignores that Clinton lost not one but two presidential elections.  The public has always distrusted her and even the highly favorable media would comment on her striking inability to simply answer questions directly and truthfully.
The concerted effort of Clinton and her supporters to rewrite history is understandable.  It is hard to get voters to come back into the fold if they blame you for your disastrous role in the 2016 loss.  That is why it has to be the Russians or Comey or self-hating women.  The tragic thing is that it may work.  The Clintons are back on the speaking circuit (with the addition of Chelsea who is rumored to be thinking to taking over as the new Democratic standard bearer).  Figures like Debbie Wasserman-Schultz are back on the air attacking others for dishonesty.  Nancy Pelosi is still the leader of the Democratic House members.  Little has changed but the narrative.
For years, I have argued that the duopoly of power is killing this country and that we need real political reform (here and here).  We have become a country of chumps.  The two parties continue to limit the choices for voters while running primarily on the hatred for the other side.  Yet, even with our history of falling time and time again for the same rhetoric, there is no evidence of upward learning curve.  The reinvention of Hillary Clinton is a prime example of just how gullible we have become.  The Democrats could well take one or both houses based not on their popularity but the rising hatred for Trump.  These very same Democratic leaders will then again enjoy the fruits of power in the endless swing of our pendulum politics between the two main parties.

Clinton: Majority of news items posted on Facebook were fake

226 thoughts on “Hillary Clinton: “I Take Responsibility For Every Decision I Made, But That’s Not Why I Lost””

  1. “Lawyers, Guns And Money”

    Well, I went home with the waitress
    The way I always do
    How was I to know
    She was with the Russians, too

    I was gambling in Havana
    I took a little risk
    Send lawyers, guns and money
    Dad, get me out of this

    I’m the innocent bystander
    Somehow I got stuck
    Between the rock and the hard place
    And I’m down on my luck
    And I’m down on my luck
    And I’m down on my luck

    Now I’m hiding in Honduras
    I’m a desperate man
    Send lawyers, guns and money
    The shit has hit the fan

  2. Hillary lost because of the ugly photos of her posted by Turleyblog and others. The one at the top of the article was second worst. The worst is the one with her in sunglasses looking down at her smartphone.
    How was I to know that Turley was with the Russians too?

  3. She needs to do something she hasn’t done in about 50 years: appreciate and enjoy mundane life. Sell the house in Westchester, tell Billy Jeff to make his own arrangements, find an apartment near where Chelsea’s living, read books, go to films, visit museums, go to the theatre, spend time with Huma and Susan Thomases, dine out, sit for her grandchildren, visit her brothers once or twice a year, bury the hatchet with cousin Oscar, &c. And shut down that godawful ‘Foundation’.

    1. She doesn’t want to be near her daughter or grandkids. She is an Ice Queen. Chelsea and Hillary hate each other. Stevie Wonder could read that body language.

      1. Watch Veep on HBO and you’ll see the relationship between Hillary and Chelsea on full comedic display.

      2. Not buying. If she had those kind of issues with her mother, she’d have contrived to order her life in such a way that she was not intertwined with her at all. That she most certainly did not do. She might also (or in lieu of that) engaged in obnoxious exhibits of herself. Patty Reagan despised her mother. Chelsea does not resemble Patty at all.

  4. Sometimes you need to thin out the old growth to make room for the new growth. The next generation of Dems (Corey Booker et al.) is soon going to flex its muscles and take over the party from the old guard. HRC will be put out to pasture. The only question is whether she will go quietly and with class (less likely) or fight the inevitable and further damage her legacy (more likely).

    Chelsea will not save her. The Clintons are not the Roosevelts or the Kennedys. The Clinton dynasty begins and ends with Bill.

    On a personal level, like many retirees, HRC is having trouble adjusting to the fact that she is no longer wanted in the role she held her entire life. Showing up for that conference wearing a bath robe only reinforced her image as a tired relic of the past.

    1. You’re right…Hillary looked BAD. She has gained weight and apparently isn’t haven’t her hair done any more. Would be surprised to see her let her grow it out again and wear her trademark “ponytail”.

      1. It’s a good thing Trump is staying thin, and keeping his white hair fully orange.

    2. The Roosevelts and the Kennedys are not the Roosevelts and the Kennedys. Two of FDR’s five children served terms in Congress, That’s it. As for the Kennedys, their time in the sun lasted from 1960 to 1968. Ted Kennedy won 11 presidential primaries in 1980 (contra Jimmy Carter). One of the grandchildren (Mark Shriver) served a couple of terms in the Maryland legislature; Mark Shriver has paternal-side as well as maternal-side relatives and their home base is Maryland. One of Robert Kennedy’s sons had a tour on a municipal council in Southern California. Edward Kennedy Jr. (who resembles his father not-at-all where it counts) has had a tour in the Connecticut legislature. Otherwise, they’ve been confined to the Boston media market, which has a critical mass of fools who will vote for hopeless characters like Joseph Kennedy II and Patrick Kennedy. With Ted’ and his alcoholic n’er do well son out of Congress, the family’s now represented therein by Joseph Kennedy III, who, at age 33, has yet to produce scandals and embarrassments that anyone knows about.

      1. Correction: age 36. Joseph Kennedy III’s parents are divorced. As with John Kennedy Jr., the smart money says his general competence and baseline of morals are attributable to his mother.

      2. You neglected to mention the Sagamore Hill branch of the Roosevelt family, Teddy and Jr. Also, didn’t some Kennedy serve a term or two as a Congressman from RI? Those are pretty fair dynasties, certainly more extensive than the Clintons and, more importantly, multi-generational.

        1. Theodore Roosevelt was Eleanor’s uncle. The common ancestor he had with Franklin was seven generations back. Only one of TR’s children had a political career and his consisted almost entirely of appointed positions (with only a brief stint in a state legislature). TR’s son-in-law was a prominent pol, but he was already a member of Congress before he married TR’s daughter, came from Ohio rather than New York, and was at odds with his father-in-law politically.

          I called explicit attention to Ted Kennedy and his son, so I’m not sure how I’ve ‘neglected’ them.

        2. “Fair dynasties?” The Kennedys thrive where there’s Boston media. Otherwise, they’re rank-and-file (and, in Mark Shriver’s case, drawing on the other side of the family). Franklin Roosevelt Jr and James Roosevelt were back bench members of Congress from 1949 to 1965.

          By contrast, you’ve had four generations of Bush’s elected to office in three quite disparate states. (And in none were they native sons). Prescott Bush Sr. served in local positions. The others did not. Prescott Sr and papa George were in Congress, Jeb and son George were state governors, and George Prescott. is a special state executive.

          1. I agree with you that the Bushes are also a political dynasty. However, i try to be balanced. As ambivalent as I am about the Roosevelts and as much as I dislike the Kennedys, in fact, they are both political dynasties. The fact that the local media fawn over all of them does not lessen the fact that there have been members of their families (and I don’t quibble too much about the extent of the term families) that have held positions of power (elected or appointed) for generations. For the record, I would also include the Tafts, the Byrds, the Blairs, and the Dalys in that category. Approaching dynasty status but not there yet are the Cuomos, the Pauls, and the Murkowskis. I am open to other suggestions.

      3. Mark Steyn wrote an hilarious piece on JFK, and the Kennedy clan. I think you will enjoy it:

        https://www.steynonline.com/7875/the-larger-imagination-of-a-despoiler-of-women

        Here is an excerpt, and there is more at the link:

        Most of what I know about young Jack comes from Nigel Hamilton’s magisterial biography of the early years, Reckless Youth – “reckless” being a euphemism for “sex-fiend”. I had forgotten the difficulty Hamilton had in connecting the sex with the geopolitics, but he gives it his best shot:

        As Jack wooed his ladies, the European cauldron was meanwhile coming to a boil…

        Did the earth boil for you too? And again:

        Just as there was no political issue apart from the multi-party diversity of democracy in which Jack deeply believed, so his love life demonstrated no other principle than multi-woman diversity.

        I’ll bet Jack would have sent that line back to Ted Sorensen for a bit of a polish. A life doesn’t have to make sense, doesn’t have to connect the way the book of the life does. Kennedy was a literate, thoughtful man who liked to read Lord David Cecil and discuss learnedly whether Halifax could have served as Prime Minister from the House of Lords …and then he’d go out and screw Mexican whores.

        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

    3. Vince Jankoski – I think all of this “I was not responsible for my loss” is setting up for 2020. She is not done. She is the ambitious one in the family, not Bill.

      1. I agree that she is trying to set herself up for 2020. There is no chance she will be successful No one, not even those loyal Dems who pay lip service to her excuses, really believes them. Three and a half years away from the next Presidential election, the party faithful can afford to humor her. The party will gladly reap whatever benefit, financial and otherwise, they will get from her association (like the word association there) with Bill. However, as the election draws near, when push comes to shove, the young Turks of the party will gradually ease HRC out of the picture. If she does not ease gradually, she will get thrown under whatever bus is convenient. She will then blame the bus.

        1. Vince Jankoski – the problem is that she is a savvy politician and may wrap up all the unaligned votes for the primary in advance. That makes it hard to run against her. She learned her lesson from being aced out by Obama. And she has deep ties in the DNC. Hence her dig at Obama. Obama wants to run the party now and she wants to run the party now. There can only be one capo.

          1. One of the two potential capos is 2 for 2. The other has struck out both times at bat and claims the pitcher cheated.

            1. Vince – I did see the Obamas’ bought that house in Washington, D C. However, his upward mobility is limited now unless he make a lateral shift to the UN or the EU. Hillary can still move up. She can still be capo de capo.

        2. Vince J re “No one, not even those loyal Dems who pay lip service to her excuses, really believes them” Unfortunately that’s not the case – all those folks who believe everything they read in NYT, WaPo, Politico, Atlantic, etc. and talking heads like Rachel Maddow, John Oliver, Bill Maher, Gloria Steinem, etc. would back her. They share her delusion.

      2. No one wants her. If the dems want a Senator from NY, they need to go with the younger Gillibrand

    4. If the Dims run Booker, Warren or any other establishment person they will lose again. Tulsi Gabbard 2020 – hope she will run as an Independent – break the chains of duopoly control.

    1. Whatever she is, she lost due to insufficient campaigning in three crucial states, so losing the Electoral College vote despite capturing a majority of the popular vote.

      1. Compared to most of the ranting in this blog, you are being way too rational.

      2. perhaps, and perhaps had she campaigned more in the few Demo leaning states she lost in she might have lost more votes. We will never know. What we do know is that the baby man Trump beat the unbeatable HRC. So maybe, just maybe, the Demo party should look long and hard at themselves as the reason they lost to Trump.

    1. Thank you, but all caps is considered to be Internet shouting and so quite rude.

      Let us try to be polite, despite our differences.

  7. I think the lesson here is; was this someone who we want to lead us, let alone be an inspiration to our children?
    Isn’t the true mark of character how we handle set backs and misfortunes?
    We got to see her true self and continue to do so.

    I cherish the moment everyday when I celebrate that she is not our president.
    BTW, DWS got the message that the “Chumps” are not to be ignored.

  8. Pingback: Hillary Clinton: “I Take Responsibility For Every Decision I Made, But That’s Not Why I Lost” — JONATHAN TURLEY – 오피쓰 대구건마 opss3.com 대구오피

  9. Clinton, like her husband, is a DINO. Almost a Dixiecrat in drag.

    1. Yup. And some of the names being floated for the 2020 Democratic Presidential nomination aren’t much better than Clinton, Cuomo is utterly corrupt. Booker is beholden to monied interests and is even in Kushner’s sphere of influence, having received significant campaign contributions from Kushner.

      I have to say, however, that I’m truly proud of Prof. Turley for allowing so much time to go by in between his anti-Clinton blog posts.

    2. Thank you David for the funniest post of the morning. I totally can see Hillary and Bill in “drag”.

    3. Clinton, like her husband, is a DINO. Almost a Dixiecrat in drag.

      To anyone remotely familiar with either the Clintons or Strom Thurmond, this statement is nonsensical and unreal. You’re a fine argument for the utility of disciplinary boundaries.

      1. dss – I have been questioned by the FBI on 3 occasions and I think they tapped my phone for awhile (someone did). So far I have not ended up in jail. You just tell them the truth and move on.

          1. dss – it has been a confusing day. I keep getting comments from yesterday, today. I commented on your comment a long time ago and am just now getting your response. I am sooooo confused!!!!!

  10. More often than not, regular here isaacbasonkavich posts that Trump is criminally stupid, ignorant, etc, etc, etc. Isaac: I double dare you to post anything Trump ever did as insane as HRC’s justifications for her, the MSM, and the DNC pooping their pants in the 2016 election.

    I mean, really, Hillary: Even the “Macedonians” caused you to lose the election? The Macedonians?

    In the welcome WikiLeaks email dump (never ever proven to have released false info), we learned, after running for POTUS for eight years, eight months prior to the election, HRC emails her staff pleading for someone to give her a platform on which to run. HRC did not know why she ran for the most powerful mortal position on earth. Isaac wanted to giving someone this level of power that had no idea why she sought it. Hint Dems: if you don’t know why you want to be POTUS, don’t run.

    Even someone as allegedly “stupid and ignorant” as POTUS Trump is a genius next to this sorry excuse for a human being Hillary Clinton. Pathetic does not even begin to address her shortcomings as a human being.

    Does the term “vast right wing conspiracy” ring a bell? After months of concocting known lies about Monica Lewinsky, including labeling her a “bimbo” and a “stalker,” and after Bill shook his finger at America while saying “I did not have sex with that woman” (Bill used his alleged friend and NPR reporter as a tool to help sell Bill’s lie to America), St. Hillary blamed the Lewinsky story on Republican lies. Irony is so strong it burns.

    As journalist Jonah Goldberg said tonight on Special Report with Bret Baier: “…short of a five o’clock shadow and wearing wing tips on the beach, her (HRC’s) transformation into full blown Nixonian bitterness is complete…”

    Isaac: Jared Kushner agreed to talk to Congress. Obama’s State Department employee Susan Rice requested the NSA unmask American names previously redacted from tapped telephone conversations. Why has Rice refused to cooperate? Dems and the MSM were so anxious to figure all this out, till it looked like Dems illegally weaponized USA security organizations specifically to destroy Republican political enemies.

  11. HRC: “The dog ate my homework.” Or………”My psychic told me not visiting Wisconsin was a winning strategy.” Or……………..”My friends told me this year the electorate wanted an establishment Goldman Sachs approved candidate.” Or………….(this is the truth; per Wiki email dump, eight months prior to the election HRC emailed her campaign begging them to give her a platform on which to run): “I did not know it was important to have a reason to be POTUS before running for the office.”

  12. The pay-per-play ‘Clinton Global Initiative’ predictably shut down after her loss despite preelection declarations.
    The Russian fiction continues for the establishment democrat’s ego & ‘deep state’s job security.. Glory to Donald Trump who told NATO countries they must pay their unpayed 2% of GDP. Glory to Donald Trump who put a tariff on Canadian softwood lumber.

    1. “Glory to Trump?” Do. you read the papers? There is little glory in Trump.

      1. Why would anyone want to read the “Papers”? You mean the LIAR newspapers like the Washington Post, New York Times, USA Today? Please, please don’t tell me to read the papers. They aren’t even good enough to wrap dead fish any, any more? Liberal/Socialist/Progressives, whatever they call themselves these days…LOST! I don’t need a LIAR newspaper to tell me more LIES. I’m a master at detecting LIES and LIARS because I listened very carefully to OBAMA for 8 f……g years!

    2. “Glory to Trump” ???? I know he thinks a lot of himself, but has Trump declared himself to be God ? Or will he just settle for getting his face up on Mt. Rushmore?

  13. Prof. Turley seems to have forgotten that Hillary got more votes than Trump.

    1. Wow, so original, Ben! Does your mom still tie your shoes? Please, do keep thinking HRC deserves to be POTUS even though she is apparently ignorant of the Constitution’s rules Re. the Electoral College.

      Gore, Kerry, and now HRC, all blame everyone but themselves for losing. Does anyone see a pattern here?

      1. @ J.J. But don’t you see? It was those pesky Rooshins…. Except NO ONE can explain, or provide any reasonable scenario demonstrating how they had any plausible influence on the vote in 50 individual states.

    2. Yes, but where she got them was the key. Ultimately in terms of winning, meant nothing. Fills her drool cup however.

      I noticed she wore the deep blue tinted sun glasses again on Memorial Day, Bill and she out at the local parade. The glasses that may, or may not, be the anti seizure application.

    3. And Ben…aren’t we Americans fortunate that we have an Electoral College that put Trump into office? California is now part of Mexico and New York is well….let’s just say: has its own issues. Trump won fair and square and I for one dance every day with joy for seeing Hillary beat like a drum!

  14. Clinton is thoroughly corrupt – a moral hypocrite, a liar and a megalomaniac.

    Let us hope the rumours about her health are true.

  15. Mrs Clinton was as polarizing, only about 5 points below Trump’s unfavorabilty rating – polling that was taken some time after their party’s conventions but before the Wikileaks October surprise. Besides personality and credibility issues, presidential candidate Hillary Clinton was also on the opposing side of the Democratic Party’s base when it came to issues such as the TPP-TTIP, Healthcare (no vocal support for “Medicare-for-All Single Payer), Keystone XL Pipeline, reticent on $15 minimum wage, wearing a $15k designer jacket while giving a speech about income inequality.

  20. Democrats will swallow anything. It’s hubris in mega doses.

    They spend sooo much time crafting and maintaining their “Narrative”, that they did not realize most Americans have tuned them out.

    If Blacks and Latinos ever figure out what the Dems have done to them, which is unlikely, then the rotten party will collapse. The Democratic Party only exists for its own sake. Like George Orwell said,

    “The [Democratic] Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power. Not wealth or luxury or long life or happiness: only power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from all the oligarchies of the past, in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were- cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives.

    They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just round the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means, it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?” (3.3.14, O’Brien)

    http://www.shmoop.com/1984/power-quotes-5.html

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

    2. Trump: “I could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and no one would care” . He’s is proven he can shoot our Constitution full of holes and his supporters don’t care. The GOP Congress has shown that their lust for power is without limits However, no matter how bad Trump is and he’s bad, Hillary needs to go away.

      1. The LIAR Obama is the one who tried his best to destroy (transform) America, its LAWS and its Constitution. I’m a PROUD Trump supporter. All you “Deplorable” Dems have got are WHINERS. HIllary is a horrible human being…not to mention a woman with no conscience, no morals, and no policy! She LOST because she is…..a LOSER and so is your party. GET A GRIP!

      2. His support fs falling and the number of people that are calling for impeachment is rising.

    3. Squeeky, you hit it on the nail head, your paragraph about the blacks and latinos is so, so true.

      There was a time when I thought highly of the Dems but they have been hijacked and must be minimized before this nation goes to hades

    4. Squeek, many young Latinos went for Bernie — and I am amazed at all the blacks who left the Democratic Plantation – Tim Black, Robert Brown, Jamarl Thomas, Benjamin Dixon all have growing audiences on FB and YouTube. So there is hope! =),

Comments are closed.