It Does Matter

Hillary Clinton, whose email saga of lies and distortion placing the safety and welfare of America in danger continues to engage in Chinese water torture on her fledgling campaign, got into a testy exchange with Ed Henry of FOX News the other day.

As usual, Ms. Clinton was dripping in arrogance, displaying the warmth of a dead fish all while laser beaming Ed Henry with condescension.  It was quite a spectacle. Take a listen:



It appears Ms. Clinton's emails were not secure, and among the items that potentially got out to those with ill intentions against America was the activities and location of one Chris Stevens, our Ambassador who was murdered in Benghazi. Did Ms. Clinton's lackadaisical treatment of information presented her result in the death of our Ambassador and fellow service men who attempted to rescue him?  Sure looks to be the case.

Ms. Clinton, as we have noted many times, is a progressive socialist who thinks America as founded is the problem, and as she learned well under her mentor Saul Alinksy, she would seek the reaching of her goals by any means necessary, legal or not.

In listening to the exchange with Henry, something caught my ear.  I had recently read a very interesting piece by a guy I had previously never heard of, and found it extremely compelling.  We posted some analysis of the piece on our Facebook page at BAHL Revere.

The piece was titled The Disturbing Line Hillary Clinton Quoted from Her Favorite Book—and Why It Matters. It asked the following question: Is the presidential hopeful living out a theme from Dostoevsky?

The author of the piece has really discovered something extraordinary. He noted a previous interview with Hillary Clinton where "five words leapt of the screen, where they almost verbatim mirrored a key phrase in Dostoesky's book The Brothers Karamazov."

The phrase was "Everything I did was legally permitted."  This phrase also turned up in the exchange with Henry, which you can go back note 0:33 seconds in.  She made it a point of emphasis.

In the article, brilliantly put together by Matthew Becklo, he noted the following correlation which comes in a passage described as being about the connection between morality and a belief in immorality:

…were mankind’s belief in its immortality to be destroyed, not only love but also any living power to continue the life of the world would at once dry up in it. Not only that, but then nothing would be immoral any longer, everything would be permitted, even anthropophagy. And even that is not all: he ended with the assertion that for every separate person, like ourselves for instance, who believes neither in God nor in his own immortality, the moral law of nature ought to change immediately into the exact opposite of the former religious law, and that egoism, even to the point of evildoing, should not only be permitted to man but should be acknowledged as the necessary, the most reasonable, and all but the noblest result of his situation. (Emphasis added by the author Matthew Becklo)

This certainly implies Ms. Clinton has no belief in immortality and therefore concludes everything would be permitted.  That would explain why Ms. Clinton does not feel obligated to be constrained by the laws you and I must adhere to, or feel compelled to obey any of the laws of governance in America, inclusive of laws she participated in legislating.

Enter the email scandal, where she acted with any means necessary to accomplish her objectives and deemed her actions throughout were legally permitted. Got it, thanks to Becklo.

Our language is being rewritten by the progressives. Seemingly innocuous phrases have meaningful and dangerous connotations few if any actually comprehend. Matthew Becklo caught Hillary, and it indeed does matter, as everything is not permitted.

Keep your ears open!