Category Archives: American politics

The Trump Doctrine on Energy

If you go by the mainstream media’s lockstep ‘coverage’ of the US president’s first six months, he is no more nor less than a tweeting buffoon. A comforting narrative for cant-addicted newsroom hacks and groupthinkers, it handily avoids any and all mooting of Australia’s need to follow his lead

blackout state IIIOur federal and state politicians scuttle about looking for innovative new ways to strangle the Australian energy sector. But across the Pacific, America is unleashing a world-changing energy revolution. The world’s energy fundamentals are in transition. Donald Trump is liberating American coal, gas, oil and nuclear industries from eight years of Obama’s harassment and restrictions.

The consequences for us as a player in energyexport markets are dire. In an officially supportive environment, Australian energy could hold its share – intrinsically, it has  global competitiveness. But politics here involves ‘renewables’ targets and other sacrifices to please the climate gods,  bans  such as Victoria’s on normal and fracked gas exploration, official and green lawfare against every new energy project (think Adani), impromptu Turnbull restrictions on LNG exports, Sargasso seas of red tape, and  on-going fatwas against nuclear proposals.

Domestically, American industry will enjoy cheap energy inputs, while our own industry’s  energy becomes as expensive as anywhere in the world. This disparity will play out in Australian factory closures and capital flight to the US.

A banana republic couldn’t do a better job of destroying its own wealth.

The US is now estimated to have 20% more oil than the Saudis – at USD50 a barrel, a storehouse of USD $13 trillion. The US has been a net energy importer since 1953, but thanks to fracking is now likely to be a net exporter as early as 2020. American LNG could move into net export surplus as early as this year. By 2040, US natural gas exports alone could bring in USD $1.6 trillion, and generate USD $110b in wages. US gas reserves are also enough to meet domestic needs for a century. The American energy revolution – in Trump’s word, “dominance” –  seldom makes the mainstream media here, which is fixated on the schoolyard narrative of Trump as a tweeting buffoon.

Want to know what’s really important? Trump on June 29 addressed the Department of Energy’s“Unleashing Energy” conference in Washington.

His policy announcements were so shattering to the green/left ideology – he talked of “clean, beautiful coal” for example – that his message went almost unreported here. Trump said

The golden era of American energy is now underway.  When it comes to the future of America’s energy needs, we will find it, we will dream it, and we will build it.

American energy will power our ships, our planes and our cities.  American hands will bend the steel and pour the concrete that brings this energy into our homes and that exports this incredible, newfound energy all around the world. And American grit will ensure that what we dream, and what we build, will truly be second to none.

Today, I am proudly announcing six brand-new initiatives to propel this new era of American energy dominance.  

First, we will begin to revive and expand our nuclear energy sector   which produces clean, renewable and emissions-free energy.  A complete review of U.S. nuclear energy policy will help us find new ways to revitalize this crucial energy resource.  [US nuclear plants have been shuttering because of cheap gas and low power demand].

Second, the Department of the Treasury will address barriers to the financing of highly efficient, overseas coal energy plants.  Ukraine already tells us they need millions and millions of metric tons right now.  There are many other places that need it, too.  And we want to sell it to them, and to everyone else all over the globe who need it. [Geo-strategically, US coal and LNG could weaken Russian energy hegemony in Europe. Cheniere Energy  has just delivered the first U.S. cargoes of LNG to Poland and the Netherlands].

Third, my administration has just approved the construction of a new petroleum pipeline to Mexico, which will further boost American energy exports. [This New Burgos Pipeline will deliver up to 180,000 barrels a day. The US is Mexico’s main petroleum supplier.]

Fourth, just today, a major U.S. company, Sempra Energy, signed an agreement to begin negotiations for the sale of more American natural gas to South Korea.

Fifth, the United States Department of Energy is announcing today that it will approve two long-term applications to export additional natural gas from the Lake Charles LNG terminal in Louisiana.  It’s going to be a big deal.  [Currently the US exports LNG only through Sabine Pass, Louisiana, but four other terminals should come on line between 2018 and 2020, competing with Australia, Qatar and Russia].

Finally, to unlock more energy from the 94 percent of offshore land closed to development, we’re opening it up, the right areas. Under the previous administration, so much of our land was closed to development.   – we’re creating a new offshore oil and gas leasing program.  America will be allowed to access the vast energy wealth located right off our shores.  And this is all just the beginning — believe me.

Is Trump merely rhapsodising? No way. His energy track record in his first half-year — again, carefully ignored by Australia’s mainstream media — speaks for itself.

  • The Environmental Protection Agency was ordered to dump Obama’s “Clean Power Plan” designed to bump up household electricity rates by 14%
  • The long-frustrated Keystone pipeline from Alberta to Illinois/Texas got fast-tracked approval
  • Obama’s ban on new coal leasing on federal land was revoked  – these lands involve 40% of US coal production.
  • The US has dumped its Paris Climate commitments, which Trump says will save taxpayers USD3 trillion, and protect 6.5m US industrial jobs. “Maybe we’ll be back into it someday, but it will be on better terms,” he said last week
  • Hundreds of thousands of hours of red-tape energy regulations – including on fracking –  were abolished.

Trump spelt out his energy philosophy. “With [our] incredible resources, my administration will seek not only American energy independence that we’ve been looking for so long, but American energy dominance.

“And we’re going to be an exporter — exporter!” he promised. “We will export American energy all over the world, all around the globe.  These energy exports will create countless jobs for our people, and provide true energy security to our friends, partners, and allies all across the globe.”

Unlocking energy would generate millions of jobs and trillions in wealth, he said.  For over 40 years, America was vulnerable to foreign regimes using energy as an economic weapon. Americans’ quality of life was diminished by the idea that energy resources were scarce.

 Many of us remember the long gas lines and the constant claims that the world was running out of oil and natural gas.    

Americans were told that our nation could only solve this energy crisis by imposing draconian restrictions on energy production.  But we now know that was all a big, beautiful myth.  It was fake.   The truth is that we have near-limitless supplies of energy in our country.  Powered by new innovation and technology, we are now on the cusp of a true energy revolution.

We have nearly 100 years’ worth of natural gas and more than 250 years’ worth of clean, beautiful coal.  We are a top producer of petroleum and the number-one producer of natural gas.  We don’t want to let other countries take away our sovereignty and tell us what to do and how to do it.  That’s not going to happen.  

But this full potential can only be realized when government promotes energy development instead of obstructing it like the Democrats.   We have to get out and do our job better and faster than anybody in the world.  This vast energy wealth does not belong to the government.  It belongs to the people of the United States of America.   Yet, for the past eight years, the federal government imposed massive job-killing barriers to American energy development.

Job-killing [Obama] regulations are being removed. I’m dramatically reducing restrictions on the development of natural gas.  I cancelled the moratorium on a new coal leasing on federal lands.  

We have finally ended the war on coal.  And I am proud to report that Corsa Coal  just opened a brand-new coal mine in the state of Pennsylvania, the first one in many, many, many years

We’re ending intrusive EPA regulations that kill jobs, hurt family farmers and ranchers, and raise the price of energy so quickly and so substantially.

From all this are two take-home messages: in the US, you ain’t seen nothing yet. And for Australia, we can either change tack on energy madness or fall under the wheels of the US juggernaut.

Tony Thomas’s book of essays, “That’s Debatable – 60 Years in Print” is available here.



  1. Bushranger71

    See this well-reasoned argument from a ‘Greenie’ that is supportive of clean coal derived energy:

  2. Bill Martin

    This article, particularly the quotations from Trump’s speech, read like an enthusiastic song of praise to sanity. That, of course, makes it an anathema for the insane.

  3. en passant

    Trump has set out the winning agenda for any Australian political party that adopts it.

    Do not worry about the screaming trolls and the MacBot sea level rise fakery, just get on with exploiting our wealth while we are still a sovereign nation.

    Oh, and how effective are the violent screaming trolls at winning elections by shouting everyone else down? Just ask Whitlam.

  4. Ian MacDougall

    First, we will begin to revive and expand our nuclear energy sector which produces clean, renewable and emissions-free energy.

    Nuclear energy is finite. (We have not got up to controlled fusion, though there are some promising signs. Its fuel would essentially be sea water, and we are not likely to run short of that anytime soon.) But fission fuel is still not ‘renewable’, and is only ‘clean’ if one disregards the problem of how to dispose of the highly radioactive waste.
    Moreover, ‘emissions-free’ only has importance if one concedes that there is a problem with emissions in non-nuclear, conventional coal sources. But Trump as a fully paid-up member of the Ostrich School of Climatology, denies that anyway.

    He obviously needs a new speechwriter or supervisor. From Trump’s point of view, the existing staff leave something to be desired.

  5. Doc S

    You’re dead right about the almost total lack of reporting on this in the US (and thus the Australian media). A recent media monitoring centre analysis of broadcasting content in one news cycle recorded nearly 350 broadcast minutes on Trump and the Russia investigation – the next was terrorism at less than 15 minutes but every other theme of vital interest to your average American such as healthcare, education, and yes climate change (not forgetting Trump had just withdrawn from the Paris Accords) all got less than five minutes of broadcast time. Its insane. And our media here are not much better. Landmark events like Trump’s DoE address barely rate. Of course Trump realises energy security is the key to prosperity – cheaper and reliable sources of energy will be key to driving the US economy. The Finkel Review encapsulates our government’s view on energy security but is light years away from the American position under Trump (that is happening NOW) and of course not forgetting this all goes against the current climate warming narrative so beloved of the kool-aid drinkers of all political stripes including the Turnbull government. As for the ultimate clean energy – nuclear – well you can just forget about THAT sunshine!

  6. Ken

    Trump is playing the media for the suckers that they are. They spend too much time looking for nasty things to say about him and fail to see just what he has already achieved. Thinking people are enjoying the reactions of ” true believers”.

  7. Keith Kennelly

    An Aussie PM that dumps renewables and subsidies to renewables, promotes coal and gas would turn around the economy and would be PM for ever.

    Tony Abbott should replaceMalvolmTurnbull right now.


Raise High the Bolshevik Dildo

We look at own tertiary institutions and wonder how someone like Safe Schools architect Roz Ward can ever have attained such prominence. Wonder no more. Australia’s monkey-see/monkey-do universities are simply aping the debasement of once-august institutions such as America’s MIT

red robot IIHow far has academia degenerated into Left-liberal indoctrination? The once-inspiring Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) provides a case study. MIT has spawned 87 Nobel Prize winners, according to its provost.[1] They include transistor-inventor Bill Shockley (1956), who kick-started Silicon Valley. Other MIT giants include physicists Richard Feynman (1965) and Hans Bethe (1967).

Today MIT, like UCal’s Berkeley campus, is  just another hotbed of liberal  groupthink and intolerance, as the Left completes in long march through academia.

MIT Press a month ago published “Communism for Kids”, a 112-page historico-literary travesty by a person MIT describes as a scholar, Ms Bini Adamczak, 37. She “works” in junk sociology and queer-sexuality theory in Berlin. Her book is a call to arms to kids to bring back Communism, in various idealistic guises of Adamczak’s own invention. No fringe effort, the book is well-ranked on Amazon and a hot seller to librarians.[2]

I predict that our ABC will shortly swoop on Adamczak and give her rostrums galore to preach Communist idealism to Australian kids, parents and superannuated fellow-travellers. She’s tailor made as a Q&A platformer, surpassing even feminist-Muslim Yassmin Abdel-Magied.[3] Michelle Guthrie, have I earned a spotter’s fee?

MIT Press has form.[4] It remains proud of its publication in 2009 of a theft, sabotage and assassination manual called The Coming Insurrection, by an anonymous French anarcho-Left syndicate of graduates calling for “the annihilation of police forces”. Some months earlier, most of the syndicate, now known as the Tarnac 9, had been arrested by French  police, using helicopters and dogs, on charges of having sabotaged electric cables on a high-speed TGV line, disabling 160 trains.[5]

MIT describes its  author of Communism for Kids as a

social theorist and artist who “writes on the past future of revolutions”.

No, I don’t know what that means either. But wait, there’s more. As she puts it in the  book,

“The hope is that the absurdity and unnecessary brutality of capitalist society will leap out to the people of future generations, the same way that the binary gender system or flatness of the earth seems crazy to us today.”

In another must-read essay, she claims to have invented a new sexual word “circlusion” whose meaning she illustrates with the phrase, “Her dick is being circluded.” As she puts it, “O workers of the anus and the mouth, of the vagina and the hand, I say to you: be aufdringlich! [pushy].”[6] The full quote is reproduced in the footnotes below, but the following gush of po-mo prose is worth mentioning in smaller extract as both an indication of Adamczak’s mental mettle and how low MIT has fallen in lending its imprimatur to someone who produces these remarkable insights

Practically everybody has an anus, but somebody who uses theirs sexually – in conjunction with a dildo, penis or hand – becomes a bottom, a sub, somebody passive. Almost everybody can afford a strap-on or a dildo, but a person who uses one sexually, as a rule, counts as a top or a dom – as active… It’s as if making use of these parts would have disempowering effects. Maybe not if they were confronted by a tongue, but definitely so if met with a dildo…

The internet is strangely blank about Adamczak’s personal and career history,[7] but I’d bet my house that she’s never been off the taxpayers’ teat. Her self-description includes,

Bini Adamczak works (preferably not too much) as an author, performer and visual artist. Like many girls in her position, she dreams about doing something ‘real’ or ‘with her hands’ – for example, to make a revolution.”

Adamczak has no problem with doing away with capitalists, Lenin-fashion. Her book says, “The overcoming of capitalism occurs through juridicial measures and state expropriation of the capitalist class, whereby the nonproductive elements of society are removed and all human beings become workers.” Note that she exempts herself from excessive toil – see para above.

She revels in her own superiority, despising  the “petty bourgeois idea of an integrated working class pacified with homes, televisions and cars…”

The book’s co-translator is Sophie Lewis of Manchester University, whose by-line says she’s “a queer communist and sometimes politics teacher.” Lucky Manchester students! Lewis says finding a publisher in English involved more than three years and 20 rejections, until MIT Press — presumably the bottom-of-the-barrel publisher — came to the rescue with its “beautiful little red and white edition”.

Keith Windschuttle: “You can see the future prospects for the study of Western civilisation at the University of Sydney in the calibre and interests of its rising staff members.”

MIT’s Marc Lowenthal, the acquiring editor  of  Communism for Kids , thinks it hypocritical to criticise Communism without also condemning capitalism “which has brought about colonialism, imperialism, endless wars, and even fascism and national socialism.” He adds, helpfully, “I don’t personally identify as a communist.” MIT Press,  he says, would certainly not publish a book called “Fascism for Kids”, and the interviewer forgot to ask if MIT Press would do a book on Jihad for Kids. As if.

Lowenthal, an anti-Trumper, agrees Stalinism was a horror. He continues,

“But to describe communism as a ‘murderous philosophy’ is simply ignorant, and to then link it to an actual murderous philosophy like fascism is irresponsible.” (My emphasis).

He professes to be amused that people would think an MIT book titled Communism for Kids would be targeted at kids. Even the cutesy drawings are more about feminist gender-bending than kid-fodder,  he says.

This defence tops out my BS-meter. The first two-thirds of the slim volume is written in infantile prose akin to fairy tales, laying out Adamczak’s child-friendly versions of a caring Communist state. As MIT’s gorge-rising blurb says, her tale is “accompanied by illustrations of lovable little revolutionaries experiencing their political awakening… It all unfolds like a story, with jealous princesses, fancy swords, displaced peasants, mean bosses, and tired workers – not to mention a Ouija board, a talking chair, and a big pot called ‘the state.’ ”

Actually, she twice refers not to a pot but to a “potty”, apt in regard to both insanity and faeces.

For the book’s final third, Adamczak  plunges into tortuous sociological jargon about Communism’s future triumph over immiserating capitalism.

Lowenthal is able to cite her couple of milk-and-water references to Communism’s past failure. But  another book quote supposed to get her off the hook, actually puts her on the hook: “To equate Stalinism and communism is wrong, and just a way of shutting down any radical critique of capitalism.”

I waded through the 110 pages, on Quadrant readers’ behalf, marveling that any tract could be so ignorant and poorly written. Adamczak defines Communism as the system that gets rid of “all the evils people suffer today in our society under capitalism”… Under capitalism, “we have to make things – guns, for example – whether we think they’re stupid or not”.

In her idiotic model of a capitalist economy, all output is from factories, which she simplifies as making  two items – steam irons and (wait for it!) pistols. She has steam irons being made from sheet metal and (wait for it!) nails. In one of her scenarios, those who forge nails into steam irons are rewarded with movie tickets. Some workers become “hungry as hell” and are “trying to turn their irons into a stew, but that’s proving pretty pointless.”

Another of her  versions of Communism[8] involves worker-owned factories where “every morning, the people sit down together in a big circle and discuss how they want to work that day. Each person can choose what they want to do, and everyone is allowed to do everything, except there are no boss persons any more…” The autonomous workers “become much, much smarter”, unlike Adamczak.

The sales revenue goes “into a little potty” to be shared equally among the workers. If there’s not enough money, some workers mooch off to a job at the adjacent pistol factory. I have to keep pinching myself that this tripe bears the imprimatur of MIT Press.

In another Adamczak scenario, the steam iron and pistol factories become wholly automated.

“The people shout, ‘Our whole lives, we’ve been workers. From now on, we’re pleasure seekers!’ Everyone feels rich…When they open their mouths, grape juice pours directly onto their tongues, and roasted pigeons made of tofu fall from the sky…They (the workers) are almost as dumb now as they were before, under capitalism. They all grab hammers and smash everything to little pieces…”

Thereafter they pick wild berries to fend off starvation.

The purported climax of her tale has her doll-like gender-bent cartoon figures coming to life and yelling, “Stop telling our story! We decide what happens next. Because this is our story now, and we’re making history ourselves.” Yeah right, it all makes sense, not.

There follows her score of pages of pseudo-philosophical ranting, e.g.

“If communist criticism aspires to move beyond its habit of bitter negation, then it needs to add a blueprint of desire to its toolbox of analytic scalpels and rhetorical dynamite. It needs to generate desire – communist desire.” 

Her conclusion, such as it is:

“The most effective protection against the return of fascism is not to preserve the world it ostensibly fights, but to create a different [i.e. communist] world.”

One commenter on the Amazon book site writes,

“I grew up in the communism (sic) and believe me, the idea of communism will never work. This idea is based on mass murder. My family didn’t do anything against regime, and this is why they was not killed, just imprisoned and abused every day. The police break into our home every week and made a mess and break our stuff – just for fun. And this is communism.”

The above sounds authentic, but may or may not be true. Another jokes: “Will sell like hotcakes in Venezuela. They need toilet paper.” And one more commenter:

“Really diminishes the efforts of Mao Zedong, Joseph Stalin, Pol Pot, Kim Il-Sung, Josip Broz Tito, Ho Chi Minh, Fidel Castro. But hey everybody! Let’s give it one more shot; probably won’t devolve into a murderous tyranny this time!”

Tony Thomas’ book of essays, That’s Debatable – 60 Years in Print, is available here.

[1] The correct number is actually 83, as MIT includes four purported Nobel PEACE Prize winners, and MIT’s even wrong about them. I was dumbstruck to find MIT claiming Nobel Peace status for the IPCC’s Susan Solomon and Wei Hao (“shared, Nobel Peace Prize”).  The IPCC explicitly forbids its contributors from claiming Nobel Peace Prize status.

[2] Touted as in the top ten in Amazon’s “Children’s Government Books” and in “Ideologies and Doctrines”.

[3] Doubtless, she will also be invited to roles at Melbourne University’s Sustainable Society Institute and UTS’s advanced journalism school.

[4] MIT Press says its list of published books is “based in science and technology,” and it works to publish “significant works by pioneering international authors.”

[5] The ‘terror’ element of the charges was withdrawn in 2015.

[6] This MIT Press-designated ‘scholar’ Adamczak continues,

Penetration exerts its disproportionate influence over the queer imaginary too. This is evident in contemporary mainstream porn but also in BDSM and so-called post-porn. The dildo and the penis function, almost unchallenged, as practical signs of power… Dommes/doms of all genders tend to express their affinity with the figures of the dildo, the penis, and erect fingers of the hand. Subs associate themselves with the mouth, the vagina, the anus. Sometimes the vulva or the anus. Practically everybody has an anus, but somebody who uses theirs sexually – in conjunction with a dildo, penis or hand – becomes a bottom, a sub, somebody passive. Almost everybody can afford a strap-on or a dildo, but a person who uses one sexually, as a rule, counts as a top or a dom – as active…” of a domme even appears as taboo. It’s as if making use of these parts would have disempowering effects. Maybe not if they were confronted by a tongue, but definitely so if met with a dildo…

[7] Although she wears a frock, her  baritone/bass-voice in this youtube (see, for example, at 33.40 minutes) hints towards a transgender history. If so, good luck to her.

[8] As she puts it, “Of one communism, many communisms bloom.”


  1. pgang

    Or let’s throw a rock into the air and hope that this time it won’t come back down again.

  2. ianl

    My degree is from M-I-T …

    assembled audience responds by singing the well-known kids’ tune:

    K-E-Y M-O-U-S-E

    MIT’s fall from high technical grace is genuinely, horribly distressing. As is the fall of UTS, Broadway, Sydney.

    • Jody

      I rather think the operative word here is “Broadway”.

      • ianl

        No, the precipitous drop in technical standards to those of the Arts and “Soc Science” (OMG) is what distresses me. There is a very good reason that most politicians and senior bureaucrats are Arts/Law and not Science/Maths/Engineering.

        • padraic

          I wonder what George Orwell would make of “Communism for Kids”? In “The Road to Wigan Pier” he wrote ironically and sarcastically about the loopy left academia of that period and postulated about a fictitious book produced by one of them – entitled “Marxism for Infants”. How perceptive is that?

          • Rob Brighton

            One could argue quite well I expect that Orwell’s writing ought be moved to whatever library shelves are used for omniscient writers, having re read Animal Farm and 1984 recently I found myself enlightened and depressed… is almost a how too

  3. pgang

    Here’s a $100k job being advertised at uni of Newcastle. Feel free to interpret into English for the benefit of the rest of us.

    “The Team Leader, Impact and Quality will develop and deliver timely, high-quality and insightful reporting and analytics to support research planning, quality assurance and decision making across key portfolio areas of the Research and Innovation Division’s operations underpinning delivery of the University’s Strategic Plan and vision for 2025.”

    • Rob Brighton

      Exactly the role my PHD laden sister in law holds at a Qld Uni. She informs me it is critical informaion and then argues for the wage gap, patriarchy and equality of results rather than equality of opportunity.

      Happily I live some 400klm away.

  4. pgang

    I think they’re looking for a statistician to do the work everyone else is too lazy to do for themselves.

  5. Real Oz

    Oh for Gawd’s sake stop it!!! My head hurts like hell.

  6. Bryce M

    I years to come it may be discovered that all the drugs this generation and the one before it are stuffing into themselves has typically caused brain damage to varying degrees. They seem to be stuck in a kind of perpetual childhood, which is very sad.

  7. LBLoveday

    Obama agrees that homosexuality is a matter of choice.

    In his book “The Making of Barack Obama”, David Garrow, who received a Pulitzer prize for a biography of Martin Luther King Jr, claims that “Obama wrote somewhat elusively” (to a girlfriend) “that he had thought about and considered gayness but ultimately decided that a same-sex relationship would be less challenging and demanding than developing one with the opposite sex”.

  8. en passant

    I am a manic (or is it maniacal?) reader. At any one time I am reading six books across a wide range of subjects which I pick up when the mood takes me. I complete about one book per week by reading roughly 200 – 250 pages. I won’t bore you with the names of any of my current ones, but four years ago I looked around at western society and (like Rob), I had an overwhelming need to revisit ’1984′ & ‘Animal Farm’. They are indeed a ‘how to’ manual for the anti-human totalitarians who infest academia. After all, deprivation (and depravity) will never invade their cocoon. That is for the little people of no account for whom they are doing all this. I withdrew from university in the third and final year of my ‘Arts’ course as it had become pointless. I was learning nothing of use, nor was I learning how to learn as I found that independent views, questioning the orthodox consensus, reading material not on the ‘approved’ list and contrarian thoughts were all treated with hostility. Pavlov would have approved of the curriculum and the drones it was designed to produce. Instead, I am far better educated than I could ever have been had I gritted my teeth and forced myself to chant the mantra of approved orthodoxy.

    As I was driving today I listened to the ‘Science Show’ Well, it was a show all right, but there was nothing scientific in the propaganda it espoused. The main ‘interviewee’ was a 15-year-old advocating the banning of meat-eating as 1kg of meat requires 15,000 litres of water and 6kg of plants to produce. In fact, having just finished a sponsored study tour our young scientist advocated that we obtain our protein not from eating sentient animals, but from the flesh of insects. As one who has lived in the bush I have hunted and killed my own food, eaten all sorts of things, including insects, snakes and the unspeakable. Having a 15-year-old diktat my diet resulted in my immediately feeling the need to rebel by pulling into a drive-thru and order a double meat and bacon burger.

    So, having read the madness Tony has identified that has taken a firm grip of our universities I feel an urgent need for the government to defund all but a tiny slice of their faculties. I suspect we would notice if the IT, medical, engineering or mathematics departments disappeared, but would I notice if gender studies, sociology, journalism, climate change and victimhood faculties never produced another unemployable graduate? Well, maybe I would as the quality of work at my local car wash might improve; but then again, probably not.

The Utter Shame of Obama’s Iran Deal

Donald Trump has delivered bombs to the West enemies. Obama shipped pallets of cold, hard cash to Iran in a ransom deal that will do nothing to crimp the mullahs’ mischief while further heightening Israel’s jeopardy. Guess which president the media paints as the wise and heroic leader?

cashSo President Trump bombed Syria’s Shayrat air force base on April 7 with 59 cruise missiles. Compare and contrast with President Obama’s “bombing”[1] of Tehran in  January, 2016,  with pallet-loads of  European banknotes totalling $US1.7b. There was $400 million in Swiss franc notes and $1.3b in Euro notes.

Obama had organized the swap of US government dollars for the banknotes. He had a technical difficulty with the $1.3 billion because a long-standing US government rule limited payout to $1 billion. So he used his initiative and split  his $1.3b request into 13 separate requests of $99,999,999.99 and a top-up of  $10,390,236.28.[2]

The pallets of banknotes materialized at Geneva airport on January 3 ($400 million in  francs), and January 22 and February 5 ($1.3b in Euros – some accounts say that other hard-currency notes were included). Each time, the treasure was ushered into a waiting, unmarked Iranian cargo plane. The plane took the money to Tehran and only the Iranians know where it went thereafter. Let us hope not on weapons and salaries for terrorists.

It’s a racy story but what’s it all about? It’s about a weekend’s work by Obama on January 16-17, 2016,  where he consummated the anti-nuclear pact with Iran,  did a prisoner swap of four Americans in Iran for seven Iranian-American sanctions-violators in the US, and settled a debt to Iran dating back to 1979 when the populace overthrew Shah Pahlavi. All three aspects involve murky stuff which has gradually trickled into the public domain, and which I’ll try to explain.

Obama’s main goal (jointly with five other world powers) was  to thwart Iran’s rapid progress to the nuclear-bomb club.

In brief, Iran signed up that weekend to switching its deeply-buried Fordo nuclear plant to “a centre for science research”; to making its Arak plutonium-capable plant inoperable; and to halving its U235 bomb-capable uranium centrifuges at Natanz from 10,000 to 5,000. Enrichment is to stop at 3.7%, compared with the current 20% (bomb-capable is 90%). It has also promised to cap its stockpile of low-enriched uranium to 300kg (insufficient for an A-bomb upgrade) for 15 years.

Great stuff, but even the Obama-loving New York  Times expressed concern that Iran would make monkeys out of the International Atomic Energy Agency scrutineers, given “Iran’s history of evasions, stonewalling and illicit procurements.” But assuming Iran behaves itself, the US will lift sanctions against arms sales in five years, and sales of ballistic missiles in eight years.

The Iran legislators and their street mobs have responded to the nuclear deal by retaining their No 1 slogan   of “Death to America!” and re-iterating their ambition to nuke Israel as soon as feasible.

The Israeli government rated the Iran deal as  a repeat of Munich in 1938, a licence for a second Holocaust, and a sop to a global terrorism. It repeated these views last August, when Obama  claimed, improbably,

“Israeli military and security community acknowledges this [deal] has been a game changer…The country that was most opposed to the deal. By all accounts, it has worked exactly the way we said it was going to work.”

In reality, Iran the previous year had violated a 2010 Security Council resolution banning it from nuclear-capable missile tests. It did a further missile test in January, 2017, which exploited a loophole in a successor Security Council resolution.[3] The update inexplicably changed the wording from “shall not” test nuclear-capable missiles (emphatic) to Iran being “called upon” not to test such missiles (translation: utter, non-binding waffle).

The next issue is why the US owed Iran $1.7b. During   Shah Pahlavi’s US-backed  regime, he paid in advance for purchases of US military gear but was overthrown by the   populace in February  1979. The Democrat’s President Jimmy Carter  chose not to deliver the arms – including part-built destroyers –  to the new anti-US regime, but kept the cash.[4]

Iran’s leaders in November 1979 permitted the invasion and plundering of the US Embassy  in Teheran by an organised mob, a reprisal for the US giving the deposed Shah asylum for heart treatment. The regime then held hostage 52 US diplomats and citizens for 444 days. Obviously, The US could   have walked away from its debt.[5]

But President Carter  compounded the crisis in  April, 1980, with his disastrous decision to send 100-plus special forces to storm the embassy  and rescue the hostages. At the troops’ first staging post in the night-time Iranian desert, amid   logistical bungles,  one of the helicopter fleet collided with a C-130  freighter. Eight airmen were killed and the mission precipitately aborted, leaving helicopters behind for use by the Iranian air force. In the debacle’s wake, Carter in the November 1980 election lost  to the Republican’s Ronald Reagan. Carter’s bungling   left him open to Iranian blackmail. [6] Minutes after Carter’s term ended on January 20, 1981, the Iranians released the hostages, but   on Iran’s own financial terms.

Last year – 35 years later – it was déjà vu on hostages (or prisoners – the distinction is politically important). The four alleged US spies included The Washington Post’s Tehran bureau chief (grabbed in 2015), a former marine and a pastor.

US law forbids official ransom payments for US captives. [7] This makes sense –  otherwise it would be open season for kidnappers. Obama  insisted   that the prisoner swap was entirely separate from the initial payment to Iran of $400m on the same day, which was merely settlement of the old 1979 debt.

Republicans, including Trump, accused Obama of illegally paying ransom. They argued that the prisoner release by Iran was in fact conditional on the cash materialising.  Cue liberal media outrage.  But the facts back Trump more than Obama.[8]

Evidence for “ransom”:

  • Justice Department top officials (cited by the Wall Street Journal and including the head of the national security division, Obama-appointee John Carlin) objected to  Obama’s weekend deal  because it would be viewed, by Iran especially, as a ransom payment. Justice was over-ruled by the State Department.
  • One of the US prisoners in Iran, Catholic pastor  Saeed Abedini, said on Fox News that  he’d been told at Mehrabad Airport by a police officer that the 20-hour delay in their take-off via a Swiss plane had been because ‘We are waiting for another plane, so if that plane doesn’t come, we never let [you] go.’
  • Conversely, the Americans wouldn’t permit the money plane to depart Geneva until the prisoners were aloft, according to the WSJ (paywalled). Obama’s team continued to insist that the cash and the swap were organized by separate   diplomatic channels in both the US and Iran. However, officials did concede that Iran wanted a ransom-like form of words so that its  citizens wouldn’t think the alleged US spies were being released with no benefit to Iran.
  • # The clincher – after such strenuous official denials – was last August 18 in a report by The New York Times. It quoted John Kirby, the State Department spokesman, briefing on August 13 that the US “took advantage of the  [cash] leverage” it felt it had that weekend in mid-January to obtain the release of the hostages and “to make sure they got out safely and efficiently.”

Next issue is the reason for the money deal being in foreign cash. US law forbids   US-dollar   payments to Iran. So Obama’s team deposited the $400m capital debt in dollars with the Swiss National Bank, which organised the Geneva payout to Iran in francs.

Sounds a bit dodgy, eh? More so, in respect of the $1.3b interest. That required sign-off by the US Treasury guardians of the government’s “Judgement Fund” after verifying a host of conditions. These included that the payment serves the US best interests. In particular, amounts over $1b are not allowed. So guess what, the Obama team split the $1.3b into 13 separate tranches of $99,999,999.99 and a top-up of  $10,390,236.28. This extraordinary payment schedule went to the Dutch National Bank which disbursed it in Euros  to an official of the Bank of Iran.

On the January 17 Sunday, Obama mentioned the financial settlement with Iran but didn’t give figures. He merely described the settlement as a terrific discount  for the US compared with what the Hague international court on debts might have in future specified.[9]

Obama’s Secretary of State, John Kerry, in a press conference the same day, did mention the amounts. But neither mentioned   cash airlifts of foreign banknotes.

The mainstream media had bigger fish to fry concerning the   nuclear agreement and  the  prisoner-swap. It was not until seven months later, in August, that the payment issue and its many  weirdnesses blew up electorally.[10]

The   Obama team’s   obfuscation  and somersaults   were treated with respectful tolerance by most of the liberal media.  The affair got scant coverage in Australia, especially as it messed with Obama’s halo.

The mainstream media narrative today is that Obama brought the US sound, scandal-free government, while Trump is wrecking the joint. In just one example here described, Obama’s Iran nuclear deal has not only exposed Israel  to  a new order of nuclear hazard, but was accompanied by financial shiftiness on a billion-dollar scale and a miasma of half-truths and cover-ups.

Tony Thomas’s book of essays, That’s Debatable, is available here.

‘[1] The quote-marks serve the same purpose as Trump’s twitter claim on March 4, with quote-marks, that Obama had “wire tapped” him in Trump Tower. We are  not being literal.

[2] A retired Australian senior bureaucrat comments, “Breaking up a transaction into smaller components to avoid regulatory oversight is one of the oldest tricks in the books. Our Department of Finance would go berserk if that were tried here, even for chicken-feed amounts. Our Auditor General would also go for the jugular.”

[3] That re-write was  a companion to the new nuclear deal’s framework, but not part of it.

[4] It was supposed to be put in an interest-bearing account for Iran, but this was not done.

[5] The original debt was more than $400m but George H.W. Bush  repaid $200m in 1990.

[6] The Iranians had even threated to execute the hostages as spies.

[7] The US did relax the ban somewhat in 2015 by saying it wouldn’t prosecute relatives who made ransom payments.

[8] Much as the facts in Sweden have backed his recent Twitter claim of dire Muslim problems there. Car-torching riots a   night or two later, a Stockholm truck terror rampage last week with 19 casualties. Not that all his tweets are rational.

[9] According to the Obama team, Iran wanted $10b, the adjudication was likely to award $4b, and the actual private settlement of $1.7b was thus a bargain.

[10] The trigger   was a leak from a congressional aide who’d been in a briefing with Obama   officials.


  1. en passant

    They can no longer impeach the execrable Obama (as Bill Whittle said about St Obama “If he kidnapped Shirley Temple at age 6 and blew her brains out on national TV he would not be impeached …”, but they can prove he broke the law and convict him. That will be a happy day indeed.

  2. gary@erko

    There’s a silver lining. Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt and UAE have realised they have very vital security interests in common with Israel. And business interests – Israel has offered a rail link from Haifa via Jordan to the Emirates. The new Middle East isn’t only failed Arab Springs and all in massacres in Syria.

    • Don A. Veitch

      Silver lining? Pull the other one gary!
      The dark ages Saudis – they root of 9/11 and are now being sued in civil courts. They fund/facilitate the worst terrorist death squads.
      You ‘vital security interests’ is for that mob to kill-off modern, secular nation states that are an embarrasment to theocratic based states.
      This is Project De-civilisation in the Middle East, now boosted by Trumps (aka ‘The Snowman’) apparent, (who can tell what his position is on anything) default,- using fake news,- to the old mad neo-con line.

  3. Tony Thomas

    A friend in Utah writes,
    “But Obama’s mischief runs even deeper.
    His deal with the mischievous Mullahs relies on trust.
    More wise international leaders would suggest “Trust but Verify”.
    Obama’s Iran deal inexplicably excluded international oversight and verification.
    Under Obama’s deal the Mullahs get to do their own “verification”.
    Iran gets to report its own compliance to the international community.”

Hillary, the Alleged Rapist’s Enabler

She presents herself as the champion of all women everywhere, but there are more than a few exceptions — starting with the cavalcade of underlings, willing and unwilling, who have enjoyed or endured her priapic husband’s attentions. Whenever their names emerge, she leads the charge to silence them

bill and bimboOn  September 14,  2015, this message occupied pride of place on Hillary Clinton’s campaign site: “I want to send a message to every survivor of sexual assault: Don’t let anyone silence your voice. You have the right to be heard.” By February 4, 2016, the  quote had been stealth editedto and   “You have the right to be believed, and we’re with you” had been deleted.

Hillary Clinton presented herself as defender of liberal womanhood at last month’s presidential debate. She berated Trump: “This is a man who has called women pigs, slobs and dogs.”[1]

Trump should have responded: “This is a woman whose President-husband paid $US850,000 to settle a lawsuit by Paula Jones alleging sexual  harassment.[2] This is a conniving woman who has disparaged and harassed women who were sexually assaulted by her husband.”

I’d like to issue a trigger warning now that my corroborative detail may be sordid and upsetting to unsophisticated Quadrant readers. The Clinton couple exist in a miasma of sexual sleaze. Bill has indulged his sexual appetites with third-party women before, during and after his presidency. Hillary winks at it. Victims of Bill’s predations also claim Hillary has led campaigns to discredit them.

Interviewed after the debate, Trump claimed he had held back on Bill because he didn’t want to parade Bill’s vices in front of  the Clintons’ daughter, Chelsea,  who was in the audience.[3] I’d  therefore give him credit as a gentleman, especially as Chelsea is no impressionable teen but a married woman, now 36, who owns an apartment stretching across an entire block of lower Manhattan.

Here are a few names of  Bill’s other women, on whom he either forced himself or exploited their subordinate status in ways rightly banned in private enterprise and academia:  Gennifer Flowers, Paula Jone, Monica Lewinsky, Christy Zercher, Kathleen Willey, Juanita Broaddrick, Carolyn Moffett. All were Democrat supporters, all took enormous risks in going public and taking on the super-powerful Democrat machine. Their lives and reputations typically suffered irreparable damage. Who knows how many others stayed fearfully silent?

No lesser a reporter than Watergate’s Carl Bernstein wrote of Hillary’s response when Gennifer Flowers alleged she had a long-term affair with Bill. Hillary’s response, Bernstein said, was to throw herself into efforts to discredit Flowers. This included trying to persuade horrified campaign aides to bring out rumors that George Bush (Sr) had not always been faithful to wife Barbara. Nice one, Hillary!

In July last year Bernstein on CNN TV said of Hillary’s penchant for “fudging”, i.e. lying,[4] She “has become a kind of specialist at it. Why has she become a kind of specialist? It has to do I think with the peculiarity of the Clinton situation. It had partly to do with the history of Bill Clinton and women in which she’s had to defend him. It’s been very difficult to do with the whole truth and nothing but the truth.” Sorry, Carl, but this supposed champion of downtrodden women didn’t have to defend Bill, she could have defended his victimsBernstein’s biography also documents how Hillary undertook an “aggressive, explicit direction of the campaign to discredit” Gennifer Flowers.

How does the Bill/Hillary marriage since 1975 work? One needs to trawl back to 1979 for Hillary’s only candid description:

“We have, for me, an excellent marriage. I’m not sure that it would suit other people…but I’m not sure that any marriage doesn’t have their own particular kind of strains, and each couple has to work out an accommodation for whatever reasons there may be. So we’ve worked out ours and we’re very happy and I just hope that other people can work out their strains as well as we have.”[5]

Paula Jones, Bill’s victim, put it less artfully[6]: “She don’t care nothing about women. Hillary is only out for herself. Well, she stood by her man, all right.  He helps her. She helps him. And they are the perfect pair for committing all of this stuff and lies and cheating people. It’s a sickness, I think. On both parts.”

Juanita Broaddrick has made surprisingly similar claims: “I think she [Hillary] has always known everything about him. I think they have this evil compact between the two of them that they each know what the other does and overlook it. And go right on. And cover one for the other.”

Kathleen Willey writes of Hillary: “She has disgraced so many women. She has demeaned us. She has terrorized us. What she has done is absolutely horrible. She has enabled her perverted husband to keep on doing it and that’s because she doesn’t care about women. She is the war on women.” Willey launched a website against Hillary  to chronicle a “scandal a day”, calling Hillary “the most corrupt human being, the most corrupt politician that this nation has ever seen, man or woman.”

A  former Miss Arkansas (1958) and ex-lover of Bill, Sally Miller, claimed that she had been warned not to go public by a Democratic Party official: “They knew that I went jogging by myself and he couldn’t guarantee what would happen to my pretty little legs.” Miller said she’d been stalked and spied on so much that she  slept with a  loaded automatic pistol as defense against Hillary’s goons. “There is a vengeful spiteful ugliness that some women have for other women,” she said. “Hillary is just one of those women.”

Odd, that sex victims are each so virulent about the wife of their alleged predator.

Dinesh D’Souza says Hillary has never shown the slightest interest in thwarting Bill’s concupiscences. “On the contrary, she seems utterly indifferent to them,” he says. Her role has been “to protect the criminal and vilify his targets.”

Hillary’s motives in protecting and covering-up for Bill are not known but easy to guess.. D’Souza’s hunch is that Hillary from the start saw Bill’s potential to be president, with herself in tow. She saw his need for a minder to neutralize the political fall-out from his predatory sex drive. In return, Bill would become completely dependent on her and unable to throw her aside.

The Bill-Hillary relationship occasionally spun out of control, as happens with any couple. Hillary did some screamers and threw lamps and things at Bill, while they cursed each other colorfully. These fracas were relayed to the press by aides and Secret Service agents to vouch for Hillary’s indignation at Bill’s infamous behavior. This spin gave the hitherto-disliked Hillary a sympathy card, boosting her successful 2000 campaign for New York Senator by positioning her as a victim. Her rages were hardly due to shock – she had always known what Bill was up to. She was enraged because Bill had become so careless as to be caught. In her own words, “How could you be so stupid!”

D’Souza says Hillary around 1980 recruited Democrat operative and ex-bouncer Craig Livingstone to get dirt on Bill’s “bimbo eruptions.” He created the files; she assembled them into a data base for whenever such a woman became a political problem.

In 1981 she also hired Arkansas detective Ivan Duda and told him to give her the name and addresses of all of Bill’s girlfriends, so she could “get rid of all these bitches he’s seeing.” Duda’s practice was to confront the women and warn them that if they spoke out against Bill, they would be completely ruined. Most took the hint.

According to Sally Purdue, a former Miss Arkansas who slept with Bill, Hillary’s goons fired a shotgun at her Jeep, shattering the rear window. Purdue says she was so freaked out she temporarily left the country.

By 1992, Hillary had a whole team of detectives building dossiers on Bill’s women.[7]One was Anthony Pellicano, later convicted of illegal firearms possession, wiretapping and racketeering. His idiosyncrasy was to put a dead fish with a red rose in its mouth, on the windshield of the car of an uncooperative reporter. He was specifically assigned to discredit and intimidate Gennifer Flowers.

Another sleuth for the Clintons was Jack Palladino, paid $US100,000 from Clinton campaign funds. His techniques were honed while previously representing a developer accused of sex with under-age prostitutes. The developer disclosed that Palladino’s modus operandum was to gain the confidence of the child prostitutes and then talk to them for so long that they wound up giving several different accounts of what happened, D’Souza writes.

The Washington Post ran a single item about the presidential candidate’s team using private agents to surveil and intimidate his sexual ex-partners. The rest of the vast media horde covering the 1992 presidential campaign ignored the issue entirely. D’Souza says, “The media knew – but didn’t report the fact – that Hillary was the self-appointed public prosecutor of other women. The White House team also recognised that the wife was in charge of the cover-up operation for the husband. It was, one might say, all in the family.”

Hillary has seldom addressed the sex accusations about  Bill, chiefly because a compliant leftist media doesn’t ask.[8] One exception was Lisa Myers, of NBC’s Dateline, who interviewed Broaddrick about her alleged rape by Bill. At the time, mid-January, 1999, the Senate was debating the House of Representatives’ impeachment of President Bill for lying under oath about Monica Lewinsky. NBC tactfully sat on the interview until the Senate vote that acquitted Bill on February 12. Had the story run earlier it might well have tipped the scales in the Senate vote.

Bill’s sex exploits started early. When he was a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford, he had sex with a 19-rear-old fellow student Eileen Wellstone. She later claimed she was sexually harassed, while Bill said it was consensual. Whatever the truth about the coand the  nsensuality, Bill was asked to leave Oxford over the incident, according to both D’Souza[9]  the late Christopher Hitchens, who touched on the incident in his book No One Left To Lie To.  After his presidency ended in 2001, Bill was a frequent flyer (26 times) on a jet, nicknamed the “Lolita Express”, and owned by owned by billionaire developer Jeffrey Epstein, who included porn stars and under-age prostitutes on his passenger lists. In 2008 Epstein was sentenced to a year’s gaol for having pimped a minor onto the plane.

Turning now to specifics about Bill’s women, snapshots  are listed below. (One accounthas 14 women alleging sexual assaults by Bill).

Paula Jones:  A low-level Arkansas state employee, Jones was asked by Bill, the the state’s governor, to meet him at his hotel suite. She says he immediately dropped his pants and demanded fellatio, sitting down and fondling himself. Jones jumped away and said she was leaving immediately. He pulled up his pants, intercepted her at the door and said, ‘You’re smart. Let’s keep this between ourselves’. Jones saw a state trooper with a smirk on his face as she dashed out of the room. Bill, defending against her sexual harassment suit, said her account was all lies. In the course of that suit, he lied that he had never had sex with Monica Lewinsky. His defence team against Jones was allegedly led by Hillary, with a strategy to discredit Jones as a low-class gold-digger.

As one of the Clinton’s entourage said of Jones, “Drag a $100 bill through a trailer park, you never know what you’ll find.” Another Clinton flunky said Jones’ story was a “bimbo eruption”. Jones’ case was clinched by her revelation that she could describe a distinguishing characteristic of Bill’s penis, which she described as having a distinct curvature to the left — a condition known as Peyronies’ Disease. The Clintons’ payment of $850,000 “go away” money to Jones in 1998 speaks for itself, although it involved no admissions by Bill.[10]  Later, in April, 1999, Bill was fined $90,000 by the District Court for contempt of court for lying in the Jones case. He was similarly fined $US25,000 by the Arkansas Supreme Court and his law licence was suspended for five years. He resigned from practice at the US Supreme Court to head off that court’s disbarment.

Monica Lewinsky: The salacious details of cigar case, stained blue dress etc are now part of global folklore. While consensual, the sex in 1995-96 was between a US President, 49, and one of his most junior apparatchiks — a 22-year-old White House intern. His “relationship” with Lewinsky was as tawdry as this: he had her smuggled through White House security to give him oral sex, and then enabled her to exit without being observed.

Lewinsky’s life and career were ruined. She became, in her words, “the most humiliated woman in the world”. Feminist fans of the Clintons, please note. Hillary’s private depiction of Lewinsky was as a “narcissistic loony toon,” according to an aide’s diary released posthumously in 2000.  Bill survived the scandal and his infamous lie – “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, er, Miss Lewinsky”. His Democrat peers defended him to the hilt, saying that lying about sex didn’t really count.[11], which was never the issue that prompted the bid to impeach him.  It was perjury that landed him in trouble and led to his law licence being suspended. Post-presidency, Bill has strutted the world stage as an elder statesman and charity prince.

Kathleen Willey: She was a White House aide. In 1993, Willey’s lawyer husband, a Democrat fundraiser, had stolen from clients and was facing court and ruin. She came to President Clinton, whom she had long admired, desperately seeking a job to earn some family income. Clinton, she said, responded by saying, “I’ve wanted to do this since the first time I laid eyes on you.” He then placed her hand on his erect penis and rubbed his hands over her body. She was dumbfounded and seized on a third-party interruption to dash out the door to the Oval Office. The same day, her husband went into the woods, put a gun in his mouth and shot himself.

During the Paula Jones harassment suit, Willey  testified that Bill had not molested her. Willey later claimed, “My children were threatened by detectives hired by Hillary. They took one of my cats and killed another. They left a skull on my porch.  They told me I was in danger. They followed me. They vandalized my car. They hid under my deck in the middle of the night. They subjected me to a campaign of fear and intimidation, trying to silence me.”

Gennifer Flowers: During Bill’s 1992 presidential campaign, Flowers upset the apple cart by alleging she and Bill had a 12-year affair. When she fell pregnant, she said Bill paid $US200 for an abortion.[12]. The ever-compliant media sped to the Clintons’ rescue, the media cavalry  led CBS 60  Minutes producer Don Hewitt. Bill and Hillary, he said with unusual frankness, “came to us because they were in big trouble. They were about to lose right there and they needed some first aid. So they came to us and we did it.” Hewitt’s “first aid” consisted of fabricating a pretty on-air tableau of the Clinton marriage — Bill as flawed but repentant, and Hillary as the wronged wife gallantly determined to save the relationship. The CBS message was that, since this decent pair was working hard to sort out their issues, the media had a moral obligation to spare them further domestic scrutiny.

Bill at the time denied Flowers’ claims. Flowers responded by releasing her secret tapes of his phone calls.

In December, 1996, Flowers discussed having sex with Clinton on the TV talk series, The Richard Bey Show. The series was cancelled the following day — a matter of direct cause and immediate effect, according to Bey.[13]  Two years later, in 1998, Bill admitted under oath to one sexual encounter with Flowers in 1977.

Flowers in 1999-2000, represented by Judicial Watch, unsuccessfully sued parties, including Hillary, for having orchestrated a campaign to discredit her. She said the Clintons’ goons had broken into her apartment in quest of anything incriminating she had about her affair with Presidential candidate Bill, such as tapes and messages. She came home to find her house ransacked, mattresses overturned, clothes tossed around. She also read the event as a warning.  The Democrat’s private eye, Jack Palladino, then approached one of her former room-mates, Loren Kirk, and asked her if Flowers was the sort of person who would commit suicide? Flowers, a one-time Penthouse nude, seems to have made good money selling her accounts to magazines.

Juanita Broaddrick: The nursing home administrator met Bill at a convention in 1978,when he proposed a “business meeting”, insisting it be in her hotel room rather than the foyer. Bill was then Arkansas attorney-general and Broaddrick was helping his first run for governor. When he entered in her room, she said, he raped her. Bill began by trying forcefully to kiss her, and pushed her resisting and protesting on to the bed. “It was a real panicky, panicky situation. I was even to the point where I was getting very noisy, yelling to ‘please stop’. When everything was over with, he got up and straightened himself, and I was crying at the moment, and he walks to the door and calmly puts on his sunglasses. And he turned and went out the door.”

After the incident, she says, Hillary accosted her and whispered to her, “I just want you to know how much Bill and I appreciate the things you do for him. Do you understand? Everything you do.” Then Hillary tried to take hold of Broaddrick’s hand.

Broaddrick interpreted the whisper as between a plea and a threat, e.g. ‘We expect you to keep quiet about this’. Broaddrick related, “What really went through my mind at that time is, ‘She knows. She knew. She’s covering it up and she expects me to do the very same thing.’” Broaddrick complied for 21 years, until she decided to come out on NBC. She had earlier testified to the Jones harassment inquiry – as did Kathleen Willey — that Clinton had never molested her, but she said that was a lie to avoid getting dragged into the maelstrom of allegations about Clinton. Several friends corroborated that Broaddrick had described to them the alleged rape immediately after it happened, and one friend, Norma Rogers, gave her first-aid that day for a bruised lip. According to Broadrick, Bill had clamped her lower lip between his teeth to foil her escape as he pushed her onto the bed. He has always denied the episode.

Carolyn Moffett: She was a legal secretary in Little Rock in 1979, and met Governor Clinton at a fundraiser. He asked her to his room. She said, “When I went in, he was sitting on a couch, wearing only an undershirt. He pointed at his penis and told me to suck it.” When she refused, “he got mad, grabbed my head, and shoved it into his lap. I pulled away from him and ran out of the room.”

Christy Zercher: She was a flight attendant on Bill’s campaign plane. In early 1992, she says he tried to pull her into the lavatory while his pants were unzipped. Then he tried grabbing her breast from his seat, while Hillary slept nearby.

I mentioned earlier how Bill’s priapic proclivities continued after he left the presidency in 2001. As part of the corruption and sleaze involved with his Clinton Foundation, he took to travelling the world on a jet owned by billionaire Jeffery Epstein, who was later convicted as a pedophile. Bill did an airborne tour of Africa in 2002 and flight logs showed that the jet party included “an actress in softcore porn movies whose name appears in Epstein’s address book under an entry for ‘massages.’”  The actress declined to discuss why she was on the flight. On his 26 trips on the “Lolita Express”, Bill at least five times ditched his Secret Service detail to avoid official recording of his travel. The FBI began investigating Epstein  about 2006 for pimping under-age girls for sex use on to the plane. Epstein then donated $US3.5 million to the Clinton Foundation. He faced a long prison sentence if convicted for having pimped 40 girls, but somehow the FBI investigation finished in 2008 with a secret settlement and Epstein pleading guilty to only one count, for which he was sentenced to 18 months jail, of which he served 13 months. All other charges were dropped. The secret settlement only came to light when a whistleblower leaked Swiss bank records. Hillary, defender of women, has never commented on this bit of spectacular sleaze and her husband.

The Clinton couple involve   a cornucopia of lies, corruption, predation and, speaking generally, evil.[14] I wrote here not only about the corruptions with the Clinton Foundation  but Australian taxpayers’ subsidization of it. Michael Smith’s blog has a vast amount of documentation on the same theme. Today’s piece is just a few notes on the sex angle. There’s plenty more Clinton stuff to be told.

Tony Thomas’s new book “That’s Debatable” (Connor Court) is available here

[1] Trump has sometimes used such terms in response to particular women who have insulted or mocked him. Think of a mud-wrestling bout where only a female can be a winner.

[2] Jones got only $US200,000 of the $US850,000. Her lawyers got the rest. The first tranche of the $US850,000 came from Bill and Hillary’s personal funds.

[3] “I really eased up because I didn’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings … I didn’t think it was worth the shot,” Trump said. “I didn’t think it was nice.”

[4] Bernstein is a Hillary fan and Trump-basher, and author of a Hillary fan-book, “A Women in Charge”.

[5] Buzzfeed, May 12, 2015: “Watch this rare, long-forgotten interview with young Hillary Clinton”.

[6] Quoted by Dinesh D’Souza in his book Hillary’s America,

[7] Cited by David Brock, The Seduction of Hillary Rodham. New York, Free Press, 1996, p 274.

[8] Compare the media approach to the treatment of Justice Clarence Thomas. “Even if one assumes that every accusation made by Anita Hill is true, Thomas would at most be crass and a little boorish, but very minor-league in terms of sexual harassment compared to Clinton. Yet women’s groups and the liberal media pounded Thomas, almost derailing his Supreme Court nomination, and to this day ensure that his name is synonymous with sexual harassment.”

[9] Wikipedia says Bill left Oxford early without a degree, to switch to Yale. It doesn’t mention him being asked to leave Oxford.

[10] Paula Jones’ lawsuit brought to light the president’s affair with intern Monica Lewinsky and set in motion a criminal investigation that resulted in a historic House vote  in December, 1998, to impeach Clinton for obstructing justice and lying under oath about sex with Lewinsky.


[11] In contrast, Republicans themselves impeached South  Carolina Republican governor Mark Sanford for a consensual affair involving the pair even getting engaged.

[12] Even film buffs may not know that Flowers starred in a low-budget and awful Australian film Frenchman’s Farm in 1987, and another, Redheads, in 1992.

[13] “Juicy bits”Salon. September 20, 1999.

[14] Such as Hillary, as Secretary of State, permitting Russian interests to acquire 20% of US uranium resource capacity. The permission came soon after Bill “earned” $US500,000 from Russian interests for a single speech in Moscow, and Russian donations of $US2.35m to the Clinton Foundation, concealed by the fund for five years.


  1. Mark Smith

    Had no idea of the extent of all of it. I’m now more seriously disturbed by the prospect of President Hillary more than ever. Thanks for including that anecdote about Trump’s chivalry towards Bill’s daughter. Heartening, and IMO more than makes up for all his gaffs that can be too easily construed as misogynistic.

    As for all these testimonies. Would make for an awesome movie one day, although without a happy ending for the protagonists so far. If the Clintons ever come to ruin in this life, only then might Hollywood be out of reach of their intimidation.

    • Jody

      Hillary has to keep her dog on the porch, but I think that job just got a whole lot easier since his recent-ish bi-pass surgery; that would have put more or less a permanent end to his priapic habits. It’s funny the way clapped out men return home to the original enabler!!!

    • a propos

      There is already a movie – it is TV series called “The House of cards”. At least I thought so.

  2. a propos

    Once I ‘ve heard a brutally frank advise to a woman for a happy marriage: “never net your husband out of the house with empty stomach or full balls”. I guess, Bill is a well-fed man.