Justifying the Fascism of Hillary’s Pay-for-Play

TDB's picture

Hillary vs. the Hate Machine: How Clinton Became a Vessel for America’s Fury … Decades of right-wing attacks turned a crusader of women’s rights into a major target of hate  “The underlying thing about Clinton and her candidacy is it’s not normal. Normal is a male candidate, a male voice, a male tie.” –Rolling Stone

This recent article in Rolling Stone makes it clear that Hillary is a flawed candidate but that her flaws are not criminal and that she is far more desirable than Trump as president.

In doing so, this article attempts to justify a kind of fascism called “pay-for-play” by minimizing its impact. And it justifies Hillary’s other criminal and sociopathic behavior by virtually ignoring it.

Fascism, classically is associated with authoritarian (governmental) control over the private sector. And certainly pay-to-play comes close to that. The government makes it possible for a specific institution or individual to carry out a given task or service that others have no possibility of performing.

In Hillary’s case, pay-for-play was made possible by the Clinton Foundation. It seems that those who sought her influence or Bill’s influence with political issues could make a donation to the Foundation in return for receiving special treatment.

If true, as it appears it is, the corruption is on an unparalleled level, dwarfing other fedgov scandals. And as we pointed out just yesterday, by running these articles, the mainstream media is significantly devaluing its larger credibility, given the apparent significance of what’s going on.

Hillary is an extremely divisive candidate and her malfeasance is well documented. But still Rolling Stone wants to gloss over it.


Following a whiff of corruption, however false, is addictive. There is, in fact, something impure, if not improper, about private e-mail servers and sky-high speaking fees and what’s known as “public-private partnerships,” an idea long touted by Bill Clinton and exemplified by institutions like the Clinton Foundation, whose annual Clinton Global Initiative conference tends to look a lot like Davos.

… Of course Muhammad Yunus, a world-renowned social entrepreneur who pioneered the idea of microcredit and microfinance, gets a private audience with the U.S. secretary of state, and so does the head of Dow Chemical, because why wouldn’t they?

During the DNC, in the park across from the Wells Fargo Center, where the convention was held, a few hundred people gathered every day … This group yearned for someone to root for who didn’t have political baggage, who was idealistic and inspiring and also a savvy packager, like Bill Clinton or Barack Obama. Mostly, they wanted a candidate who could feel their pain, which was deep and visceral and unfocused – kind of like their hatred of Hillary herself – and which they somehow felt that Clinton, despite her endless public humiliations, couldn’t understand.

In this short excerpt, we can see public-private partnerships coming of age. Not the legislative kind that are mandated by policy but the informal kind where powerful government officials meet with powerful private-sector individuals to carve various “deals.”

This is the most interesting part of the article because it seems to justify this sort of public/private behavior, or at least to minimize its impact. Yes, perhaps they are “impure” and include a “whiff of corruption” (however “false”). Such behavior is in a sense “bad” but not especially important when compared to the positives of the Clinton candidacy.

That comparison lingers throughout this article … and surrounds Clinton’s behavior generally like a miasma. In order to make a pro-Hillary argument, so much must be glossed over. Not just the emails or pay-for-play but also Hillary’s White House Travel Office abuses, the controversial death of Vince Foster, the reported decision to attack 80, including women and children, at Waco, the intimidation of the women that Clinton supposedly raped, even the apparent refusal to rescue state department officials under attack in Libya.

Hillary’s bad behaviors are to be minimized simply by ignoring them, or in the case of “pay-to-play,” by concluding that her historical mission to place a women in the White House trumps other issues.

We live in an era of dire straits and instant gratification, which is why a boorish billionaire was able to say, “Build a wall!” and millions cheered and nominated him for president. But long before all of that, in the pre-recession era, before 9/11 and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, everything felt vastly different, with one crucial exception: the national discomfort with Hillary Clinton and everything she represents, which is strong and unequivocal female leadership.

The nativist politics represented by the candidacy of Donald Trump did not happen in a vacuum – nor did the ferocious attacks on Hillary Clinton. If she loses, says the Berkeley linguist Robin Lakoff, “The line will be, ‘A woman can’t win.'”

The majority of activists in both political parties, she notes, are men, “and an awful lot of them are not enthusiastic for a woman. Hillary Clinton pulled it off by God knows how many years of steely determination. She is not ‘inevitable.’ She has been running this race since 1992.”

You see? Nothing else is so important as the ascension of the female gender to the White House. It is all very cynical because Hillary is an exceptionally public figure and one who arouses enormous controversy. She simply is not “normal.” Her behavior over the years has been atrocious. And by ignoring the ample evidence or seeking to minimize it, the mainstream US media is taking a position it is impossible to recover from.

The ramifications of having mainstream media willingly cede credibility are enormous and potentially bloody, as we pointed out (here) yesterday. Societies cannot succeed without believable narratives. But the purveyors of these narratives must be seen as credible.

Conclusion: So why is the mainstream media continuing to forge ahead with this sort of article? We can only conclude that the chaos to come is being constructed on purpose. Someone, some group, is willing to reduce or remove mainstream media credibility and in doing so strip away the larger US narrative that has been in force at least since World War II. Whether Hillary wins or loses. worse is on the way.

See also: World’s Liquidity Trap Will Not Yield ‘Surprise’ Monetary Reversals 

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
overmedicatedundersexed's picture

rolling stone..run by a jew Jann Simon wenner.. every time you look behind the curtain guess what group pops up??

long ago I laughed at jew haters who saw a jew behind every dirty deed...I now don't laugh so much, as I made an effort to see who is behind so much evil in our nation and world..

george soros is but one poster boy for the megalomaniac jew. there are plenty more at the FED,wall st , hollywood and MSM...just last night on nat geo, a story about a jew agent for

porno actors who was big man in hollywood..better i guess to just ignore the jew as the people who where never there.  raycisst much? well perhaps I now am.

METAVORE's picture

Rolling Stone has certainly shown its true colors. Even Taibbi is shilling away for Clinton. I guess the JOOs own the recording industry as well as the film industry. Rolling Stone, a lap dog of the LIKUD. What a bunch of losers.

blindman's picture

what i suspect from this discussion is that we have been sold, and bought, a false dichotomy that goes by the term "public vs. private".  is it a political nuero-linguistic cluster bomb we cannot avoid?

williambanzai7's picture

The MSM has zero credibility, except with complete morons and crony thugs.

GreatUncle's picture

There credability is worse than zero.

When they speak it is a lie ...

Now we have degree of lies ...

navy62802's picture

People who oppose the Clintons tend to get dead. That's a pretty strong motivator for most.

blindman's picture

you must have wondered why that is and how
is it possible that everyone knows it and
nothing happens to correct it, justify it
or challenge it in a meaningful way. there is
a very obvious answer to those questions.

blindman's picture

speaking of news that was blown off the schedule of
'news' for other, fresher blood, bleeding on the streets.
what happened to this story?
Part 2: The Money Trail
that wasn't it, it was this one.
"..John Swinton on the Free Press

One night, probably in 1880, John Swinton, then the preeminent New York journalist, was the guest of honour at a banquet given him by the leaders of his craft. Someone who knew neither the press nor Swinton offered a toast to the independent press. Swinton outraged his colleagues by replying:

“There is no such thing, at this date of the world’s history, in America, as an independent press. You know it and I know it.

There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print. I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinion out of the paper I am connected with.

Others of you are paid similar salaries for similar things, and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job. If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone.

The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth, to lie outright, to pervert, to vilify, to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it, and what folly is this toasting an independent press?

We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes.”" v.a.(one regional indian)
that wasn't it, seriously, it was this freakin' story
that went deeply buried in the blood of the weekend.
Clinton Foundation RAIDED Haiti! EXPLOSIVE!
From the horse's mouth; this is the man who was the former Haitian President of the Senate.
He is alleging that Bill Clinton and the Clinton Foundation effectively "invaded" the nation and attempted to bribe him. When he refused the Clintons retaliated against him.
Gee, the Clinton Foundation is all transparent, all peace and light eh? Not pieces, bribes, threats and scams?
Suuuuurreeeee it is.
just sayin' there is a method to their madness
and it has a beat, a rhythm, tenor and tone. over time you become
familiar with the predictability of the thing.

JailBanksters's picture

I kinda like the word BRIBE

You can replace the entire article with just one word

This is exactly the same as Political Donations, except that's it's a perfectly Legal Bribe.

And because it's Legal, it must be Okay, Okay

blindman's picture

pay for play is a mere tool, fraud pretending to be government,
that is the real crime.

blindman's picture

@"Fascism, classically is associated with authoritarian (governmental) control over the private sector. And certainly pay-to-play comes close to that. The government makes it possible for a specific institution or individual to carry out a given task or service that others have no possibility of performing." d.b.
this is a poorly worded, misleading and dimwitted statement.
The Italian term fascismo is derived from fascio meaning a bundle of rods, ultimately from the Latin word fasces.[14] This was the name given to political organizations in Italy known as fasci, groups similar to guilds or syndicates and at first applied mainly to organisations on the political Left. In 1919, Benito Mussolini founded the Fasci Italiani di Combattimento in Milan, which became the Partito Nazionale Fascista (National Fascist Party) two years later. The Fascists came to associate the term with the ancient Roman fasces or fascio littorio[15]—a bundle of rods tied around an axe,[16] an ancient Roman symbol of the authority of the civic magistrate[17] carried by his lictors, which could be used for corporal and capital punishment at his command.[18][19]
The symbolism of the fasces suggested strength through unity: a single rod is easily broken, while the bundle is difficult to break.[20] Similar symbols were developed by different fascist movements; for example, the Falange symbol is five arrows joined together by a yoke.[21]" wiki
fascism (n.) Look up fascism at Dictionary.com
1922, originally used in English in 1920 in its Italian form fascismo (see fascist). Applied to similar groups in Germany from 1923; applied to everyone since the Internet.
A form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion. [Robert O. Paxton, "The Anatomy of Fascism," 2004]
“Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power”
? Benito Mussolini
“If we define an American fascist as one who in case of conflict puts money and power ahead of human beings, then there are undoubtedly several million fascists in the United States.”
? Henry A. Wallace

TDB's picture

Yes, it is also called corporatism and TDB often uses that term as well. Anyway, below is a line from FEE defining fascism.

Sounds a lot like authoritarian control over the private sector ...

"There was also an economic policy component of fascism... in fact adopted in the United States in the 1930s and surviving to this day. In the United States these policies were not called “fascism” but “planned capitalism.”  


blindman's picture

it is more authoritarian control over the public and
private sectors at the hands of an elite, the core
fascists, who have taken over influence of all the elements
of "culture". production, money, distribution, communication,
the arts, sciences, education and law making. the fascists
claimed that democracy, socialism, capitalism, individuality
would evolve into the "fascist" 20th century where the world
would hail/heil the "state" as their savior, the supreme
guide for humanity.
they openly claimed the 20th century to be the century
of fascism, then wwII(roman numerals) happened. did that end
the arguments and opinions of the historical place for fascism?
i don't think it did, fascism went on the down low and stopped
using the flags of fascsim, the state as its calling card,
to most minds and peoples.
the corporate board rooms were a different story and
the playing fields/battle fields/ were different but
the philosophy was pretty similar. monopolize without
the term, search and destroy in the words of economic
markets. etc.
i see fascism more like authoritarian control of the public
sector by crony corporate elites operating from the private sector,
exercising power derived by co-opting the sovereign power
of governments including the all important legislative,
judicial and money/legal tender prerogatives therein.
the lie in the other view is that it is executed to the will
of the government or state while the real powers that be are
just using the cover of the state to enrich themselves, the
private sector, the elite that have no flag to be attacked
or burned. no particular "state" allegiance; truly private.
what would i know?

Luc X. Ifer's picture

kudos! are u american? wow!

blindman's picture

till they kill me or kick me out, ...

Kayman's picture

What's this "Pay for Play" nonsense?  Paying money directly or indirectly to a public official, in exchange for "favors" is a criminal act; on the part of the payee and the receiver of the payment.

No wriggle room- it is a criminal act.

medium giraffe's picture

yeah, but they gave it a cutesy name so now eveything is fine.

fishwharf's picture

I used to read every issue of Rolling Stone when it first came out in San Francisco.  Then they moved to New York.  Publisher, Jann Wenner, came out as gay Hillary supporter and the publication has gone to hell.  Today it resembles People magazine more than the magazine I remember from the 1960s.  Even with that I might have renewed the gift subscription someone gave me just to read Matt Taibbi, but with Wenner's endorsement of Hillary nixed that.

Kone Wone's picture

A reason not to vote for Hillary is that we think she actually will do what she says she will; a reason to vote for Donald is that we think he will not do what he says he will.

gdpetti's picture
Clinton Foundation AIDS Program Distributed ‘Watered-Down’ Drugs To Third World Countries http://dailycaller.com/2016/09/19/exclusive-clinton-foundation-aids-prog...
Is-Be's picture

Vote "Cookies" Noodleman, she's only 3/4 a man.

Grandad Grumps's picture

Rolling Stone magazine is such a disappointment to the American people. For the magazine to side with someone who has committed treason against the United States as defined by Article 1 Section 9 of the US Constitution.

"And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign State."

and then concealed this treason through the use a private email server... and then purgered herself in front of Congress and the world.

We can also assume, based on prior investigations, "the old news" as she calls it, that she has committed many other crimes. And, it is very unlikely that all of the convenient deaths surrounding her and Bill were not just coincidence. The bulk of evidence suggests that she is corrupt and an embodiment of evil.

She is constantly being caught up in her own lies and distortions of the truth and besmirching the names and reputations of people who are far better than she ... if not perfect.

For Rolling Stone to defend such a creature defies understanding.

So, Rolling Stone (yes, I am not a fan of Trump either. He hangs around with the same crows as Hillary), why in your opinion is Trump worse? Why does Hillary deserve worship simply because she is female?

. . . _ _ _ . . .'s picture

Comey never said she didn't break the law, he just said she'd get away with it.

gregga777's picture

The United States Feral government is a clear and present danger to the Constitution and the American People. The Feral government daily assaults the American People with one outrage after another; with outrageous LIES after more outrageous LIES.

The organs of state propaganda (mainstream media & entertainment oligopoly) dutifully and unquestionably regurgitate any LIES the Feral government gives them to propagate. They and the Feral government and other institutions have sacrificed their legitimacy on a foundation of LIES.

Why should anyone believe the Feral government or its propaganda organs about anything? About so–called domestic terrorist attacks that are really FBI/CIA False Flag Team attacks against the American People? About the Vietnam War? About the JFK assassination? About the MLK assassination? About the RFK assassination? About 9/11? About the illegal wars of aggression against Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria? The FBI about no intent to betray national security anything else?

Only suckers believe the Feral government and its organs of state propaganda. Only suckers believe that the Feral government obeys the Constitution or that it serves the American People. The illegitimate United States Feral government obeys its owners. The DemonRat–ReplutoRat Party political parasites are their obedient servants.

GreatUncle's picture

In the chase for globalism and a NWO governments are enemies to all peoples globally. Except those not chasign this agenda = Russia, China, Iran ... etc.

CheapBastard's picture

I just finished reading John Flynn's "As We Go Marching about Mussolini's rise to power via socialist fascism and the Obama/Clinton path is scarily similar with their violence and control of the media.

Memedada's picture

Socialist fascism is an oxymoron. Fascism is the merging of corporate and government power – the former being in control. It is not the abolishment of private ownership over the means of production. Fascism is private power taking over public power. Fascism is basically the natural end game of capitalism. When capital power (logically/naturally) have accumulated in fewer and fewer hands (now the 0,01 %) it is obvious that that capital power will extend its influence into the political sphere. Ending up – like today – with a de facto corporate coup of the state institutions. The 0,01% owns everything, including the monetary system, the state apparatus, the medias, the education system and of course all productive capital. What they don’t directly own they indirectly control (if it is important).  Closer to feudalism than socialism. But feudalism is also a form of capitalism (an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production).   


Farmer Joe in Brooklyn's picture

So, in other words, if you don't vote for Hillary you are sexist.

Got it.