Hillary Does Breitbart A Favor

From 8-26-16 episode of The Rob Zicari Show LIVE 10-1pm M-F

Breitbart News owes a YUGE debt of gratitude to Hillary Clinton.

If you didn’t know what Breitbart.com was, you did after Hillary’s speech Thursday afternoon in Reno, Nevada. If you weren’t aware of the site, you went to it immediately.

A little advice for the Clinton campaign. If you tell people about a website that is deplorable and horrible and is full of wacky conspiracy theories and racist ideology, you better make sure that site is exactly what you say it is. If you rattle off a bunch of titles of opinion pieces written by Milo Yiannopoulos, you better make sure every single story on Breitbart is like an op-ed by Milo. But that’s just not the case.

When Hillary Clinton was talking about Breitbart and this nefarious “Alt-Right” movement, people went to the site and saw a story about Hillary’s love and admiration for ex-Ku Klux Klan Exalted Cyclops Robert C. Byrd.

If you’re on the left and already in Hillary’s corner, you’re not going to be swayed by anything on Breitbart. If you’re on the right, you already know about Breitbart. Her speech was aimed at people who are in the middle. I call them tweeners. If you are a tweener and hear Hillary talking about how Breitbart is this journal that embraces extremist ideas and racist ideologies and you go to the site and see a picture of Hillary practically french kissing a Klansman, which way are you going to be swayed?


If you’re a tweener and you didn’t know about Breitbart, you are going to check out the rest of the site.  You’re seeing something that is not full of chemtrails and Jade Helm conspiracy theories. There’s not a bunch of white supremacist Nazis burning black churches down and lynching African Americans. You see legitimate news stories about a former KKK member who was a prominent member of the Democratic Party.

So I don’t know how effective trying to demonize Breitbart.com was, except that it changed the news cycle. It made CNN and MSNBC shift focus away from the Clinton Foundation and all the stories that are coming out about financial improprieties and Hillary soliciting donations during her tenure at the State Department. By talking about the Alt-Right green dragon, Hillary managed to turn attention away from her own her racist history. It’s easy for the media to shift focus. They’re all in the tank for Hillary and the Democrats.

If you’re a tweener who went to Breitbart after Hillary’s speech, not only did you see Hillary kissing a Klansman, you saw a story from 2008 that was in the Huffington Post. You’re seeing Flashback: HuffPost Blogger Blasts Hillary’s ‘Racism and Hypocrisy’ The article talked about the persistent racism in the Clinton campaign and racist dog whistles used during Hillary’s primary fight with Obama. It was written by Geoffrey Dunn:

Desperate and willing to do anything to win, the Clintons resorted to a naked form of racism aimed directly at white working-class voters in the rural portions of the state. Their message: Barack Obama cannot win because he’s black.

In the early stages of the campaign, it was Clinton’s cadre who kept playing the race card. In New Hampshire, Clinton’s co-chair, Billy Shaheen, accused Obama of being a drug dealer; then there was the photograph of Sen. Barack Obama in Somali garb leaked to the press by Clinton’s staff. 

Remember, that’s where the whole birther movement originated. It wasn’t Donald Trump. All Trump did was pick up on something Hillary Clinton started.


In the aftermath of the South Carolina primary, former President Bill Clinton compared Obama’s victory to those of Jesse Jackson in 1984 and 1988. His message was clear: Obama was a marginal, black candidate.

This is an article that wasn’t written by anyone at Breitbart. It was written by a liberal journalist back in 2008. So when Hillary describes Breitbart as a despicable white supremacist hate site, tweeners will see stories by liberals and they’ll see articles about Geraldine Ferraro. I had completely forgotten about the Geraldine Ferraro controversy.

Then came the disgraceful remarks of Geraldine Ferraro, who could not, and would not, shut her mouth. “If Obama was a white man,” she charged, “he would not be in this position.” And she was adamant and unapologetic amid the resulting outcry. “Every time that campaign is upset about something, they call it racist,” she proclaimed. “I will not be discriminated against because I’m white.”

So not only do Democrats use the race card against Republicans, they also use it against each other.

To anyone who has followed the Clinton campaign closely, it is all too apparent that her top political strategists — reeling from losses from coast to coast and badly miscalculating the grassroots power of the Obama movement — made a tactical decision to go negative, as that would be the only way for Clinton to stop Obama and somehow allow her to steal the nomination.

And go negative they did — with a subtle yet consistent racism underscoring every turn. The now notorious red-phone-at-3:00-a.m. television ad used by Clinton during the Texas primary, as Harvard sociologist Orlando Patterson noted in the New York Times, was reminiscent of D. W. Griffith’s racist film Birth of a Nation, which helped revive the Ku Klux Klan.

Again, this isn’t chemtrails or Jade Helm or David Duke. This is an article from 2008 in the Huffington Post that Breitbart used to illustrate the racism of the Hillary Clinton campaign and to point out the hypocrisy of her playing the race card against Donald Trump. It showed that Democrats use race baiting rhetoric during every election cycle.


In Pennsylvania, Gov. Ed Rendell, who headed up Clinton’s campaign, was publicly saying that white voters in the Keystone State would not vote for Obama because he was black. Rendell’s remarks were racist from the get-go, but no one in the white media called him on it. Indeed, the media began playing the game.

ABC’s George Stephanopoulos — who worked as Bill Clinton’s press secretary and lied through his teeth on Clinton’s behalf (where’s the journalistic “objectivity” here?) — brought up Obama’s relationship to former ‘60s radical Bill Ayers. And the rest of the media went bonkers over Obama’s all-too-honest remarks about conservative white voters hanging on to God and guns.

I don’t get Hillary’s strategy. Did she think that millions of people would go to Breitbart and be outraged by right wing conspiracy theories and racist rhetoric? That’s not what Breitbart is. It’s legitimate stories that aren’t covered by CNN and the rest of the media because they’re controlled by Democrats.

I had forgotten so much of this stuff. I forgot about Geraldine Ferraro and Ed Rendell and how many racial components were infused into Clinton’s fight with Obama. But thanks to Hillary’s speech on Thursday, I went back and spent quite bit of time of time perusing Breitbart.com and being fascinated by things I never knew about or had forgotten.

If this article was written by an “Alt-Right” blogger or it was published in The Hill or on Drudge or some other site that leans Republican, it would be dismissed as right wing hogwash. But this article was in the Huffington Post, and you can’t get more liberal than HuffPo.

If you’re a tweener who goes to Breitbart, you see an ad for the Clinton Cash movie. You click on the banner that says WATCH CLINTON CASH FOR FREE ON BREITBART.COM. You’re watching something that maybe you’ve heard about or seen bits and pieces of, but now you’re seeing the whole movie. You’re watching a movie that has stuff that the Washington Post, the New York Times and the AP have reported on about her scandals. This movie is on a website that Hillary Clinton says is full of wacky conspiracy theories and racist rhetoric.

Maybe Hillary wasn’t reaching out to the tweeners. Maybe it was all about deflecting media attention away from the Clinton Foundation questions. But it’s a pretty big risk, because when you mention a website like Breitbart.com to a national audience, a lot of people are going to go to it. They are going to see stories that are legit and real, not conspiracies and hate speech. I don’t know how helpful it is going to be to Hillary’s campaign to send millions of readers to Breitbart.com to read legitimate articles, many of which have not been covered on CNN or MSNBC. Like when Bill Clinton belonged to an all-white golf club. That story was originally reported in the New York Times, by the way.

Sending tweeners to Breitbart.com was a down right stupid move. All Hillary’s speech did was give the media something else to talk about other than the Clinton Foundation. Millions of tweeners will now go to a site that will give them factual information that the Clinton News Network (CNN) won’t talk about. If they went to Breitbart Thursday, they’re now going to it all the time. They’re now seeing the truth.

Nice going, Dummycrats.

Trump 2016


Follow us on Twitter: @RobZicariShow and Instagram: therobzicarishow