"Only this time, in a bizarre turn of events, while the leftist media have pruned Martha from its own orchard, they still leave Hillary rotting and withering on their tree, only to eventually spoil the entire grove." HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAhHAhAhAhA!!!!!!
The dustup from the Martha Stewart scandal now being played out against the backdrop of Hillary Clinton’s bogus book debut provides a strikingly stark contrast between two Democratic divas who share equally ruthless personalities and suspiciously criminal backgrounds. Yet one of these women hasn’t quite enjoyed the same free pass from the cherry pickers of the leftist media the other has consistently been granted over the years.
Paradoxically, while Stewart was recently indicted on charges ranging from insider trading and conspiracy, to obstruction of justice, and securities fraud from a questionable stock tip, Hillary’s financial windfall from a dubious late 1970s cattle futures trade – standing as one of many glaring examples of Hillary’s own improprieties – has left her virtually unscathed by the law as well as her liberal media sycophants.
This clash has ultimately revealed the leftist media’s divided loyalties between two strong, liberal female titans who have shown their unwavering loyalty to the Left’s cause.
Only this time, in a bizarre turn of events, while the leftist media have pruned Martha from its own orchard, they still leave Hillary rotting and withering on their tree, only to eventually spoil the entire grove.
Inevitably, this should beg the obvious question (that notably wasn’t asked in Barbara Walters’ softball interview): Given her questionable financial dealings, shouldn’t Hillary be the one sporting an orange jumpsuit?
Shouldn’t Hillary be swapping recipes in the same cell with Martha if the ImClone charges stick; especially knowing what we already know about the Clinton’s hugely chronicled and often suppressed ties to Enron, WorldCom, Global Crossing, Salomon Smith Barney, Citigroup and untold others?
What’s more, while Stewart’s guilt still hangs in the balance, the collective question every clear thinking person also should be asking is: What’s wrong with this picture?
But to fully capture the bitter irony, as well as the utter hypocrisy of the Martha-Hillary scenario, both women must first be analyzed in light of each one’s alleged crimes and how the leftist media have chosen to treat them.
MARTHA’S GOOSE BEING COOKED IN HILLARY-LIKE SCANDAL
In December 2001, the former CEO of Martha Stewart Living OmniMedia and chief stockholder, reportedly sold almost 4,000 shares of ImClone Systems stock for nearly 0,000 the day before the FDA rejected ImClone’s application for a cancer drug, Newsmax.com reported. As a result, the stock price has plummeted.
But Stewart recently said she had “standing oral orders to sell the stock when it dropped below a share,” which, in the end, only netted a mere ,000.
Moreover, Stewart claimed she was being targeted for investigation because of her financial contributions to the Democratic Party, and that GOP members with alleged ties to similar scandals were not being investigated. Stewart has since pleaded not guilty to all charges.
Interestingly, ImClone founder Samuel Waksal, who also sold stock before the FDA’s announcement, pleaded guilty last year to charges involving insider trading and was sentenced June 10 to seven years.
Assistant Merrill Lynch broker Douglas Faneuil also pleaded guilty to lying to investigators about the reasons behind the ImClone sale. According to the Washington Post, Faneuil told investigators he informed Stewart that the Waksal family was selling the stock before she decided to sell the 4,000 shares.
Stewart’s attorneys have said in a statement that the main reason for the charges was for “publicity purposes because Martha Stewart is a celebrity? Is it because she is a woman who has successfully competed in a man’s business world by virtue of her talent, hard work and demanding standards? Is it because the government would like to be able to define securities fraud as whatever it wants it to be?”