Insane Anti-Clinton Conspiracy Theories

Sword_Of_Truth

Penultimate Amazing
S
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
11,494
Something Perry Logan said in the "O'Rielly Disappoints" thread got me thinking, what crazy anyi-Clinton theories have there been that didn't quite see the light of day among more mainstream Clinton critics?

One I remember hearing back in the day when I used to hang with the CTers was that the four ATF agents killed in the initial raid on the Waco Branch Davidian compound were all ex-Arkansas State Troopers formerly assigned to the gubernatorial security detail. Arkansas, according to this theory, was the central distribution point for coccaine coming into the US. It would come in through Florida, head to Little Rock and from there it was sent to "consumers" across the US. Clinton was either directly involved while governor or was at least looking the other way and pocketing some money for his troubles. According to the theory, these agents were arranged to have been left on thier own inside the Waco compound so that they could be killed by the defending religious fanatics.

Anyone got any others?
 
Just what we need

Just what the world needs--more hatemongering about Bill Clinton.

To put it into perspective: there was a well-organized, well-financed campaign to smear the President. It was a real enough conspiracy to have a name: it was called the Arkansas Project, and involved some extreme right Clinton-haters. Most of the bad press about Clinton was cooked up by the Arkansas Project, which is documented in a book called The Hunting of the President, by Joe Conason and Gene Lyons. It has also been made into a documentary film.

Another good book is Blinded by the Right, by Joe Brock. Brock wrote the "Troopergate" story, and in his book he tells what it was like to cook stuff up about a popular President. Brock is a former perp who has come clean--always useful in proving a conspiracy.

The Arkansas Project managed to fill the news up with false accusations about an administration which ended up with a cleaner record than any two-term Presidency since Teddy Roosevelt. Clinton's was the cleanest administration of the 20th century*.

*As measured by the total number of convictions and forced resignations of adminstration members, which strikes me as a fairly objective measure of corruption.

Despite the disinformation campaign, Clinton wound up being tied with FDR as the most popular President of the 20th century, which pleases me no end.

(One moment, while Perry gloats.)

He also racked up an excellent record, though I'm not sure it's legal to talk about it. I promise you, no one in the world can list the legion of Clinton accomplishments listed on my web page.

Beyond the concerted campaign to destroy the man's reputation (and, let's not forget, the reputation of his family) is the morbid hatred which right-wingers harbor for all charmismatic Democratic Presidents. I cite rabid hatred of FDR, John Kennedy, and Clinton as proof. Wingnuts are evidently allergic to charmisma.

One of the worst offenses of the 9/11 Truth Movement is to pass on all the lies that were told about Clinton. Guys like Alex Jones might as well be paid agents of the Republican Party. This need to use disinformation to make their case proves the utter falseness of their theory.
 
Last edited:
Oh, great. More political stuff. You know, there are political forums all over the place. Why do you guys have to do this here?

It sickens me just as much to see Clinton-bashing as it does Bush-bashing. Both of them are mean-spirited, partisan, and wrong! Both sides spew half-truths and lies about both men.

You guys are skeptics? Not when it comes to this!
 
I fail to see how listing conspiracy theories about Clinton is Clinton bashing.

You guys are too sensitive. I don't see anything political about this thread, at all.
 
PerryLogan said:
Just what we need--more bad stuff about Clinton.
Click to expand...

I think you're missing the point, Perry. None of this is "bad stuff about Clinton". It's stuff about Clinton that never broke into the mainstream because it simply wasn't true.

Another good book is Blinded by the Right, by Joe Brock.
Click to expand...

I believe that was actually David Brock.
 
JimBenArm said:
You guys are skeptics? Not when it comes to this!
Click to expand...

Hey now, alamo girl (bless her little cotton socks) is a paranoid delusional conspiracy theorist of the highest order, somehow managing to spin (mostly right wing) news stories so that clinton is found responsible for everything bad that ever happened in the whole wide world.

A conspiracy sub-forum is the perfect place for such dreck. :)
 
See what I mean?

I'm not missing the point of anything. As I said in my earlier post, I'm just putting it into perspective. In the context of conspiracy theories, it's kind of relevant that there was a real conspiracy to discredit the man.

I also made a point about the Truthers. Does that make me a good boy?
 
Last edited:
*As measured by the total number of convictions and forced resignations of adminstration members, which strikes me as a fairly objective measure of corruption.
Click to expand...

I know Libby has been indicted, but have any members of the current administration even met this measurement? I can't think of any offhand.
 
Last edited:
OK, I didn't word it very well. I don't have a problem with listing conspiracies that were put forth about any president. However, I predict it will soon degenerate into a "he was the worst", "no, he was, and you're a loser for thinking otherwise" bashfest.

All presidents are men, and therefore flawed individuals. They espouse viewpoints that someone somewhere disagree with. Agreed? Not all of us here are going to agree on the political. I try to keep my viewpoints on that out of the stuff here. I also think that even if you hate the man, respect the office. Of course, that's just me.

So, I guess I did go off half-cocked, but it is a sensitive subject for me.

My apologies.
 
JimBenArm said:
All presidents are men, and therefore flawed individuals. They espouse viewpoints that someone somewhere disagree with. Agreed? Not all of us here are going to agree on the political. I try to keep my viewpoints on that out of the stuff here. I also think that even if you hate the man, respect the office.
Click to expand...

"Hate the man, respect the office," sounds fine but as with "Oppose the war but support the troops," it doesn't really mean anything.
 
There were certainly enough kooky CTs about Clinton--Mena, for example--that got mainstream conservative coverage, like WSJ, Rush Limbaugh, etc., that I'll grant Perry his point--who needs to dig to find nutty stuff. Many of the 9-11 Deniers blame Clinton for OKC. It's somewhat amusing that there are folks who think there were no Arabs on the planes but there was one at the Murrah Building.
 
JimBenArm said:
You guys are skeptics? Not when it comes to this!
Click to expand...


I take it you've never stuck your head into the politics subforum?

Politics is one thing that JREFers can't help going woo-woo over. I have to say I was a little shocked to discover the foreigners are as bad as the americans, but I'm used to it now.

Enter at your own risk!

I think Sword has a point. Perry essentially claimed that mainstream right-wingers would accept a CT as insane as 9/11 if it was aimed against a left-wing admin. This is a veiled attempt to claim left-wingers are better/less crazy than right-wingers (because mainstream left-wingers have clearly NOT accepted 9/11 CTs aimed against a right-wing admin).

Sword is investigating this claim by looking into CTs relating to Clinton that are insane, but that the mainstream right-wingers have not picked up. And from what I can see, these CTs are positively sensible beside the 9/11 stuff. Frankly the 9/11 CTs are just a whole own level of crazy. The only CTs I can think of that are comparable are the ones relating to the holocaust being a big Jewish lie and that sort of thing.

The Clinton CTs people are citing here that the right joyfully delved into, while certainly a load of [rule8] are itty bitty baby weakling CTs compared to 9/11. They're not really even insane. They're just wrong.

Thus I feel Sword's OP is correct.

IMHO as always.

-Gumboot
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom