The Widdershins

Posts Tagged ‘Clinton Derangement Syndrome

You know the old Chinese proverb: “What a year this week has been!” Actually, I don’t think it’s a Chinese proverb, but whoever coined that term should be famous. Kanye West has gone full MAGA (again. It should be noted he went MAGA before the election, then partially defrosted, then visited Dump in the Inferno Tower right after the election.)  Dump had a bizarre meltdown on Fox and Friends show, yelling things that Michael Avenatti probably found very useful. Even the drones who host that show were staring at the camera with stunned expressions.

Screen Shot 2018-04-26 at 7.47.17 PM.png

They were stunned

But nothing could compare to the bizarre media meltdown caused by Amy Chozick’s new book, “Chasing Hillary.” Chozick has been following Clinton for two campaigns, 2008 and 2016. From what observers say about their relationship – and indeed that’s how it comes across in her book – Chozick has a pathological need to be loved by Hillary. Hillary seems puzzled by this desperate creature with mommy issues. When Hillary does not deliver the love Chozick seeks – Amy lashes out. Chozick spent months pouring over stolen WikiLeaks emails. She poured over “Bannon Cash” too, the first person at the Times to get her hands on that Nazi-funded propaganda. And Chozick wrote, article after article, about Hillary, Clinton Foundation, Uranium, you name it. That is how Amy Chozick made her career; she is in a long and proud history of media people who have made their careers exploiting – chasing – the Clintons.


Hillary Clinton with Amy Chozick in 2008

There is one Clinton, however, Amy isn’t going to be able to catch: Chelsea. Perhaps freed by the knowledge that her mom is no longer running for officer, Chelsea has been a bit freer the before to speak up. It starts with what Chozick wrote about Chelsea in her book, including the very first sentence which describes how Chelsea popped open a bottle of champagne on election night. That didn’t happen and Chelsea decided to tell Chozick so. It seems that, in fact, Chelsea was alone with her husband pumping breast milk when Chozick claims she was popping open champagne. Chelsea tweeted at Chozick, pointing out the mistake and expressing disappointment that Chozick never reached out to her to fact-check. That seems to be standard practice: either the author of the book or the hired fact-checker should check facts, which includes reaching out to the people being discussed. Chelsea claimed that Chozick never did this. Though Chozick did not respond to Chelsea’s message, in the NY Times excerpt of the book they updated the text to say that sources told Chozick that Chelsea was popping open a bottle of champagne. Chelsea repeated that her sources are wrong and reiterated that she was never contacted by anyone to confirm such details. Chelsea wrote all this in the most polite way possible: hello, please, thank you and have a nice day! Chozick remained silent. But she didn’t need to say anything. Her colleagues rode into action. Katy Tur jumped in:

The man fact checking @amychozick’s book is the same one who fact checked mine. The same one who is so nit picky that he called Delta to confirm flight times. I would bet on Chozick here, not @ChelseaClinton.

It’s unclear why Tur placed her bet on Chozick and all but call Chelsea a liar. Tur wouldn’t be familiar with Chozick’s actions and the fact that the fact-checker was so meticulous (she thinks) with her book doesn’t mean he was that meticulous with someone else’s. Chelsea wasn’t having it and she answered Tur. “Hi Katy! Neither Amy nor her fact checker reached out to me or my office at any point, about anything. I care about facts as I believe you do too.” Tur backed off: “Fair point. I can only vouch for my own experience.” Except, of course, she didn’t – she bet on Chozick.

Heer Jeet, writer at The New Republic, called the situation Chelsea’s “quarrel” with Amy and pointed out these “feuds get handed down from one generation to the next. Clintons & Times have been fighting since early 1990s.” Chelsea responded: “Hi Jeet! I don’t think asking someone in a work purporting to be nonfiction and fact checked, to not tell fictions and to factcheck is a ‘quarrel.’ How would you correct someone who told falsehoods about you? Thanks for any & all advice!” Jeet, like Tur, backed off. “I think you are absolutely justified to ask for factual corrections…”

It wasn’t just the champagne. Chozick also claims that Chelsea got her straightened with keratin. Chelsea said she’s never used keratin and this was another mistake in the book she’d like fixed. A Yahoo White House correspondent, Hunter Walker, blasted Clinton supporters for getting out of control, blasted Chelsea for “impugning” Amy Chozick, that it was really a matter of she said/she said, that why would people believe Chelsea over Chozick and he capped his twitter storm with:

And, as we point out Trump’s assaults on the fourth estate, it must be said that, albeit to a lesser degree, the Clintons have also tried to undermine the press when it suited them. Sad!

There’s a lot to unpack there. Surely Chelsea knows her hair routine better than Chozick. And Chozick – who has still not engaged with Chelsea in conversation – has also not denied not contacting Chelsea to factcheck. Chelsea addressed Hunter:

Hi again Hunter! Amy isn’t disputing that neither she nor her fact checker ever contacted me or my office. I think facts are important and hope you do too.

Hunter, like Heer and Tur before him, changed his tone. “I think it would be a pretty bad breach of standard practice if she made no attempt to reach out to you.” Yah, no shit Sherlock. That has been the point the whole time. And yet, how they love to attack the Clintons. It’s reflexive, it’s pathological, it’s a disease. There’s also a great deal of reporters forming a wall around one of their own, like cops protect dirty cops. Heer, Tur, Walker – and there were many others (CNN’s Brian Stelter was “Liking” tweets that blasted Chelsea) – have no facts and no horse in this race. And yet, they can’t help but attack a Clinton. Chozick appeared with Andrea Mitchell who called Chelsea a troll. Chozick then went on NPR and Brian Lehrer laughed at the controversy. Chozick then went on to read an excerpt from the book: the hair excerpt. Chozick then said she knows Chelsea’s hair dresser very well, which suggests she’s digging in and the hair-dresser is her source.

But Chelsea isn’t surrendering. It’s time the Clintons stopped giving a fuck and hopefully Chelsea’s insistence that her questions be answered is a sign of that. When a minor reporter attacked Chelsea and then blocked her, Chelsea wrote that she has not blocked anyone on Twitter. Christine Teigen respond: “Wait YOU HAVE NO ONE BLOCKED??? HOW ON EARTH? I have over….10,000 I’d say. Maybe 50,000. Lol.” Chelsea wrote the following response – it’s heartbreaking:

As a kid, I paid attention to what Rush Limbaugh said (he called me a dog when I was 12) & read tabloid headlines in line at the grocery store (apparently I threw myself off a roof? also at 12). I’ve always preferred knowing what’s being said, even with my alien sibling (at 13)

Teigen kindly responded: “[…] there are no words for how amazing you are and how much I (and so many others) love and respect you!!”

All this madness reminded me of a tweet from a year ago I have not been able to forget. It has festered:

Screen Shot 2018-04-27 at 1.30.53 AM.png

Politico writer Annie Karni didn’t even want Chelsea to smile on the cover of a magazine. That’s how deranged these people are. And if you follow the responses Chelsea received for her answer – well, never read the comments.




Good morning Widdershins,

2017 is quickly approaching its end. Remember when in 2016 we were all really upset because all the celebrities were dying? Well, I wish we could go back to 2016 again. To hell with the celebrities. But alas, suffer forward we must. What fresh hell 2018 will bring, only time will tell.

Over the past couple of days a few interesting developments. After I’m not sure what number accusation of groping, Al Franken is likely to announce his resignation from the Senate today. Already several of his Democratic colleagues (including Kristen Gillibrand, Kamala Harris, Claire McCaskill and Chuck Schumer) have called for him to step aside.  (Somewhere Jeff Sessions is ironing his sheets and doing a square dance.) This comes on the heels of John Conyers being forced to resign. Now, the charges against Conyers and Franken are not the same. (And Conyers appears to be more senile than your average Senator to boot.) Conyers finally said he’ll leave, but he’s not happy and he’s endorsed a family member to take his place. That’s not how that’s supposed to work, but we are living in the age of Trump where Ivanka and Jared are senior White House advisors, so why not let someone from the Conyers family take over?

Problem is Conyers is not leaving quietly. The Congressional Black Caucus is angry too. They think Conyers was treated differently. Certainly as a Democrat he has. Blake Fahrenthold is still in Congress. And Trump is in the White House. And Roy Moore will probably end up in the Senate. But Conyers must go. And now so does Franken. At this point I’m still not convinced Franken should be forced to resign. (There’s also the case of the NJ Senator Bob Menendez, who was on trial for corruption… That’s a whole other kettle of fish.) Main part of my hesitation for any Democrat to resign is…it achieves nothing except make some Democrats feel good about themselves. And that’s fine: principles, higher ground, moral superiority, blah blah. Republicans don’t care. None of this matters to them. They have managed to change the narrative from Roy Moore to Franken and Conyers. Democrats are leaving, Republicans are going in. Nothing matters. Do Democrats need to stop acting morally superior? I think there’s a case to be made for that. Enough with playing by the rules! Bring a bazooka to a knife fight! Alas…plastic utensils to a nuclear war it is. And Republicans will win every fight because they just don’t care.

In a media madness moment, consider this:Screen Shot 2017-12-06 at 11.39.30 PM.png

Chozick is a New York Times reporter. She covered Hillary’s campaign and she is now writing a book. (Of course she is. The list of people who have made money off of the Clintons is long and deplorable.) The article spends an obscene (so normal by NY Times standards) amount of time talking about Hillary Clinton. So Chozick is highlighting how Harvey Weinstein is Hillary’s fault. When people called Chozick out on this, she came back with: “Who said it was Hillary’s fault? More like a stunning # of men accused of bad behavior.” Sure sure Amy. While trying to point out how many bad men there are she naturally could only express herself via Hillary. The Clinton Derangement Syndrome is as strong as it ever was in the NY Times. I am glad to no longer have a subscription.

A few weeks ago Dump’s chief cheerleader Kellyanne Conjob said that journalists’ Twitter feeds “are a hot mess.” The obvious irony of her remark can’t be avoided, of Silence-Deafens1course. But like a broken clock, for a person who talks as much as she does, she’s bound to say something true and that might have been her one true statement. Journalists’ Twiter feeds are a hot fucking mess. I’ve been following a few, and see many more re-tweeted. And the problem with legitimate reporters having Twitter feeds is that their commentary turns them into pundits. Maggie Haberman (everything is Clinton’s fault all the time), Katy Tur (after SOTU Dump became President with Capital P) and Jake Tapper (everything is Clinton’s fault) constantly engage commenters, defending their own opinions. I don’t particularly care that they have anti-Clinton opinions, but any opinion they so openly express and defend makes them no different than Jeffrey Lord. Of course we can’t expect reporters not to have opinions. But airing them as they all do brings into question their reporting. Bill O’Reilly mixes news and opinion into one telecast. Is it really so different when Maggie Haberman files a Clinton story in the NY Times and then writes on Twitter that Clinton is obviously at fault for not pushing Trump/Russia story harder during the election? The line between Haberman and O’Reilly blurs.

The latest onslaught of Hillary bashing comes from publication of a new book called “Clusterfuck” by Fuckface Fucktard and Fuckity Fuckass. I might have gotten the name of the book wrong and misspelled the names of the authors. But it’s something like that. The book is the first in what will surely be many years of autopsies of Clinton’s campaign. The gist of it is that it’s all Clinton’s fault, and mostly Robby Mook’s fault. (Nobody was allowed to speak to Hillary except via Huma and Mook is a “professional political assassin”.) The sources are, of course, largely anonymous. And the content isn’t really surprising.

What is also not surprising are the reviews. I know a graph I posted last week showed that Washington Post’s anti-Hillary coverage was only second to Fox’s, but somehow New York Times’ has always carried much more weight. (And I wonder if Chris Cillizza’s Clinton Derangement Syndrome skewed WaPo coverage overall. He is truly demented and has transferred his psychosis to his new job at CNN. More on Cillizza below.)

Michiko Kakutani reviewed the book in New York Times:

“Shattered” underscores Clinton’s difficulty in articulating a rationale for her campaign (other than that she was not Donald Trump.) And it suggests that a tendency to value loyalty over competence resulted in a lumbering, bureaucratic operation in which staff members were reluctant to speak truth to power, and competing tribes sowed “confusion, angst and infighting.”

Kakutani has a long history of reviewing both Clintons’ books and it’s not a good history. Compare to Steven Ginsberg review in Washington Post:

Does it really matter who was pissy at whom in Brooklyn when we still don’t know what role the Russians played in the election or why FBI Director James Comey publicly announced a reopening of the e-mail investigation in late October? Those questions are largely left unexplored here, other than as targets of Clinton’s post-election ire.

I also liked this paragraph from Ginsberg:

Much of the post-election analysis has criticized Clinton and her campaign for focusing on “reach” states such as North Carolina instead of putting more resources in the upper Midwest. That view is both echoed and called into question in “Shattered,” which depicts a vexing Goldilocks-style problem for Clinton across the region.

In Wisconsin, she didn’t show up enough. In Michigan, local organizers thought it was best that she stayed away. In Pennsylvania, she campaigned as aggressively as anywhere in the nation. In all three, she lost by less than 1 percent of the vote. So what should she have done?

Charles Pierce wrote a great takedown of New York Times’ Clinton problem. It’s worth reading in its entirety. Pierce reaches back to William Safire and Whitewater, the source of Times’ Clinton Derangement Syndrome.

Several other reporters and writers also pointed to the nonsense of the book’s premise and the subsequent flogging of Clinton.

Dave Weigel of WaPo tweeted: “Obviously Clinton screwed up by forcing every cable channel to play Trump speeches live for a year.”

Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo: “Remember: Every losing campaign was run by idiots. Every winning campaign by geniuses. Rinse, repeat.”

Greg Sargent of The Plum Line: “Weird how people who cite Nate Silver constantly suddenly don’t ever cite his conclusion about Comey impact.”

And, of course, Paul Krugman: “When journos who hyped e-mail pseudo-scandal pile on over HRC campaign errors, it’s partly CYA over their own role n Trump disaster.”

I do wish Krugman would walk over to Maggie Haberman and Glenn Thrush and smack them.

A note about Cillizza. His Clinton hate is truly one of the most rabid among the media. I try to think of someone who might match it at the moment and really, I can’t think of anyone who’s not, say, Rush Limbaugh. After his latest “It’s all Hillary’s fault” article from today, an Unworthy writer Parker Malloy put together a collage of some of Cillizza’s articles from WaPo on Clinton. (The handle in the images reads CillizzaCNN, but that’s because he’s changed it to his current job; the old username from WaPo days was not archived separately.)


If you want to know what real, fearless journalism looks like, read the story of Elena


Elena Milashina

Milashina from Novaya Gazeta.  Milashina is the reporter who told the world about the kidnapping and torture of gay men in Chechnya, reports that put her life in danger. Novaya Gazeta is the same newspaper Anna Politkovskaya worked for. Politkovskaya reported a lot on Putin’s actions in Chechnya. She was murdered.

Another example of courageous reporting, also from Russia, is in this Jim Rutenberg report.

It’s important American journalists pay attention to these stories. Because Trump wants to be like Putin. And if Trump becomes Putin, he’ll go after journalists first.


Good morning Widdershins.  We are in D+36, freshly scrubbed from Sunday night’s Republican pre-Halloween grave digging.  It was as if the Headless Horseman borrowed someone’s jack-o-lantern, carved a hen’s butt for a mouth, and turned it loose for a Walking Dead audition. trump-on-debate-stage

All the polls say Hillary won the debate by double digits.  There was carping by Leftie bed wetters about why Hillary failed to put the Yam away.  Here’s why she didn’t:  Strategically, there is nothing better than having Trump as the head of the Republican ticket.

If Hillary had put the rancid, orange Vienna Sausage away, Republicans would have hightailed it like there was a fire at the two-for-one whorehouse.  A ticket led by Trump is Nancy Pelosi’s readmission to the Speaker’s Office.  Trump is going to be tied around every Republican candidate like a cheap Chinese necktie.  Unlike Obama, Hillary and her pips are playing three-dimensional politics for Democratic down ballot candidates.

Hillary flourished Sunday night, we survived, and we saw that a cornered rat is always full of fight, but still susceptible to its love of fermented diary products.  The clamorous Yam’s behavior isn’t surprising.  He can’t be what he’s not – so we can forget the possibility of a decent person miraculously appearing.

I believe what we saw Sunday night was a preview of a new cable channel – low def CDS.  It seems as if the polarization profiteers have gained absolute control of the orange gorilla’s snortables in order to go full tilt in the pursuit of salacious vulgarity.  Who are these polarization profiteers of whom I speak?

Giant Earwig

Giant Earwig

Steve Bannon, Breitbart’s pernicious earwig, David Bossie, a hissing cockroach whose entire career has involved Clinton derangement, and Chatty Kellyanne Conway, the cow killer mutillidae, the real charmer and great pretender of the insect and political world.  They have been hating Clintons since Marky Mark was still running with the Funky Bunch.

All three of these psuedo-humans perfectly mimic their diabolical insect namesakes.  When we thought they couldn’t go lower, they went all Deepwater Horizon on us.  They have learned when you ride a tiger; it is awfully hard to dismount.giant-hissing-cockroach

The most honest thing the crumb at the bottom of the Cheeto bag ever said was, “I’ll run for President and make money at it.”  That’s what we saw last night – a sneak peek of coming attractions on the CDS channel, the visual fever swamp of the Alt-right deplorables.

There will be a remake of Murder She Wrote in her Emails.  There will a soap opera Days of our Wives that times the marriages of these cretins with a sweep secondhand.  There will be a wildlife show like Animal Planet, but it will be called Animal Penthouse as a live feed from Trump’s office and apartment.  Of course, there will be Scandal updates on the hour and the news will be Fairly Unbalanced.  After hours there will be a soft-porn homoerotic, all shirtless Putin program.



Undoubtedly, Roger Ailes will be in charge of personnel, leg cameras, and skirt height.  Rudy Giuliani will have a show called The 4 Ds: Dementia, Dental Disease, and Divorce.  Chris Christie will have two shows – a new take on a cooking show called, Believe Me, I Ate the Whole Thing and Bridgegate: Stories from Prison.

This CDS channel will be the first cable channel to utilize smell-o-vision.  Tuning in will reek of regret just like its owners and stars.  These people live their lives with such iridescent regret their only outlet is spewing vituperative bile to ease their self-loathing.  Just like junkies who need more and more for a better high, they need any facade of political correctness to be stripped away so their venomous attacks can be sprayed with reckless abandon.

The CDS channel will service those who believe Fox is too polite and environmentally friendly.  Unhampered by logic or science, the CDS will be long on “feelacts” – those things that feel like facts.  All I can say is:  Since people who get their news from Fox would be better informed if they listened to no news at all; those who come to be informed by the CDS will be given two coupons for the nearest drive-by lobotomy clinic just in case the first one doesn’t take. abandon-ship

Sunday night Donald Trump did what he knows how to do – belittle, beleaguer, and degrade a woman on stage as well as four seated in the audience.  He tried to intimidate through sheer size and Lurch-like looming.  If his sentences were jigsaw puzzles, we still wouldn’t have the outer edges fitting together, but we recognize the picture on the box top – Greed and Narcissism by Trump during his orange period.

Of this I’m sure, just like Fox, Limbaugh, Hannity, and the rest, the best thing for the business of CDS is a Hillary Rodham Clinton administration.  Listen closely and you can tell it’s part of the business plan of the polarization profiteers.

What’s on your mind?


Keep Up

Atrocities Documented:

What the F*ck Just Happened?!

Victories Won:

Your Victories Against Drumpf!

Wanna Be A Widdershin?

Send us a sample post at:

widdershinssubmissions at gmail dot com

Our Frontpagers

I’m ready. Are you?

Blog Archive

June 2018
« May    

Kellyanne Conway’s new job

Take the kids to work? NO!

So similar

That moment when *your* pussy gets grabbed

You go gurl! h/t Adam Joseph

“The” Book

Nice picture of our gal

Time till the Grifter in Chief is Gone

Hopefully soonerJanuary 21st, 2021
2.6 years to go.

Mueller Time!

Wise Words from Paul Ryan

Heroine of the Resistance


Only the *best* politicans bought by the NRA

Marching for their lives

Perfect Picture

Perfect Name For Him h/t Daily News

Scary a.f.

Rudy: oh shit the pee tape IS real!


Need Reminders?