In textbook Distraction Mode, the Liberal Media Superhero Weinerman rises again, sexting his junk in a battle to divert public attention away from Huma Abedin’s Muslim Scandal, proving that while size does matter, timing is everything.
Poor Huma Abedin, wronged by a faithless husband and subjected to national embarrassment yet again! That’s become the entire news cycle after “breaking news” Sunday night of husband Anthony Weiner’s latest sexting scandal. And long-suffering Huma, after years of trying to “stand by her man”, finally threw in the towel and announced her separation this morning from Anthony aka “Carlos Danger” one week to the day after sexting story “breaks.” Holy Media Coordination, Batman!!
But is the Weiner scandal an orchestrated media distraction from the damaging negative publicity directed at Huma Abedin over the past 10 days? A review of the chronology tells the story:
1. On Sunday, August 21, the New York Post broke the story of Huma Abedin’s role as editor of a radical Muslim publication “that opposed women’s rights.” This story ignited immediate and sustained media attention and criticism, including Fox News’ bombshell revelation that Huma, Hillary Clinton’s top campaign aide and close confidante, “worked at a radical Muslim journal” for 12 years.
2. The story grew and dominated much of last week’s news coverage of Hillary’s campaign. By Thursday, August 25, even the leftwing Washington Post ran the story with the lurid headline, “Does Huma Abedin have ‘ties’ to the Muslim Brotherhood?” By Friday, another ugly story broke when the UK Daily Mail headlined “Huma Abedin’s journal claims Bill Clinton bombed Iraq to distract form the Monica Lewinsky scandal”.
3. During the week, Hillary’s lead in the polls began slipping.
4. Then, Sunday morning August 28, 2016, the New York Post ran the story “Huma Abedin’s mom linked to shocking anti-women book” complete with a photo of Hillary flanked by burka clad women including Huma’s mom. The Post explained that Huma’s mom took “a pro-gender-equality stance on at least one issue: Muslim women’s right to participate in violent jihad alongside men.” Holy Burqua, Boy Wonder!
4. Enough is enough. Five years after Weiner’s initial sexting scandal in 2011, and three years after the follow up revelations in 2013, it was time for the Clinton Machine to gear up.
5. On Sunday, August 28, after exactly one full week of negative publicity, suddenly the same New York Post gets the scoop on the “latest” Weiner sexting soap opera.
6. But did you know these “new” Weiner sexts are over one year old, from mid-2015? And you may not know that the evil “other woman” in the sexting is … get this … a supposed Trump and NRA supporter (Those evil Trump/NRA women conspiring against the Clintons and breaking up families)!
7. Was the timing a bit too coincidental? Who has been sitting on Weiner’s 2015 sexts for over 14 months (no pun intended)? It had been three full years since Weiner’s last sexting scandal, But Democrats never let a good crisis go to waste. Superhero Weinerman and his junk are useful media tools once again.
8. The Weiner Sext Scandal has preempted news coverage of Huma Abedin-radical-Muslim scandal. Did you notice? The media resurrected Weiner’s sexting scandal to transform wife Huma Abedin from last week’s Sharia-supporting Muslim radical into the sympathetic “wronged woman” who must now finally divorce Carlos Danger.
9. Coincidental narrative? Think again and recall from history how Hillary Clinton transformed the Lewsinsky scandal into political advantage:
While few doubt the scandal was a deeply painful chapter in her life, it served to transform Hillary Clinton, then a controversial first lady, into a widely sympathetic figure. It also boosted her poll numbers and helped position her to win her first Senate race in 2000.
The Clinton Campaign must greatly fear negative coverage of Huma Abedin. Last week, just a few days after the Huma-Muslim story broke, Hillary delivered her sensationalist and controversial Trump-KKK speech and campaign video, refocusing attention away from her (and Huma) and back on Trump. The stark rancor of the speech implies desperation. If so, is it also related to Huma?
But perhaps all the timing is coincidental. Perhaps it really did take 14 months for these 2015 photos to suddenly fall into the lap of the same New York Daily Post that had first published the Huma-Muslim story exactly one week earlier. Perhaps the new narrative of Huma as the sympathetic-wronged-woman is just a politically fortuitous consequence of a mortifying marital revelation (or re-re-revelation, as is the case with Weiner given the number of times he’s been caught). And in a stroke of Orwellian double-plus good, perhaps media can spin Huma’s long-suffering marital woes with adulterous bad boy Weiner recalling Donald Trump’s record of divorce in a narrative designed to appeal to the women’s vote.
Perhaps the pre-emption and back-burnering of the Huma-radical-Muslim story is lucky fallout. Amid such speculating, one thing is certain: the Clintons are masters at manipulating stories or, when bad news hits, of manipulating the damage control.