“How much dumber will this get?” — Hillary Clinton, 2025
That’s not parody. That’s the actual tweet Hillary Clinton fired off while reacting to a report about Trump administration officials inadvertently sharing sensitive military information in a Signal group chat, one that included a journalist by mistake. Yes, it’s dumb. Yes, it’s a problem. But hearing Hillary Clinton of all people rail against national security breaches is like Al Capone lecturing Wall Street on tax compliance.
She asked, “How much dumber will this get?”
Madam Secretary, we already have your record to answer that.
The $500,000 Moscow Speech and the Uranium One Deal
In June 2010, Bill Clinton was paid half a million dollars to deliver a single speech in Moscow. The money came from Renaissance Capital, an investment bank with ties to the Kremlin. What was that bank doing around the time of the speech? Promoting Russia’s acquisition of Uranium One, a Canadian company that owned 20% of America’s uranium reserves.
Here’s the kicker: that deal, including Hillary Clinton’s State Department, needed approval from the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States.
No signed memo states she greenlit it in exchange for the payday. But this is the same crowd that screams “Influence!” when a former Trump aide texts an old friend at the EPA.
This wasn’t a one-off. Between 2001 and 2013, Bill Clinton hauled in over $26 million in speaking fees from donors who also gave to the Clinton Foundation. The overlap between those speeches and policy access during Hillary’s reign at State triggered more red flags than a May Day parade.
Haiti: A Promise Betrayed
Few stories better showcase the Clintons’ moral grandstanding and strategic forgetfulness than Haiti. In 2010, after a devastating earthquake killed over 200,000 Haitians and displaced over a million more, the world rallied in aid. Bill Clinton was appointed UN Special Envoy. As Secretary of State, Hillary was responsible for how American dollars were spent. And the Clinton Foundation? Right there in the thick of it, fundraising and coordinating projects.
The result?
Scattered aid. Overpriced infrastructure. White-elephant projects like the $300 million Caracol Industrial Park, which promised 60,000 jobs and delivered fewer than 10,000. The park also displaced hundreds of local farmers and funneled money to a South Korean garment company. The actual Haitian government received less than 1% of the aid money. Much of it bypassed local nonprofits in favor of well-connected foreign contractors.
Haitians protested the Clintons’ involvement. Their question was as pointed as it was heartbreaking: “Where did the money go?”
It wasn’t answered then, and it hasn’t been answered now. But Hillary’s on X, pointing fingers about incompetence.
Chinese Espionage and Clinton-Era Carelessness
Suppose we’re discussing national security failures. In that case, it’s worth rewinding to the 1990s, when Chinese spies penetrated U.S. defense labs and stole secrets about the W-88 miniaturized nuclear warhead, one of the crown jewels of our deterrent arsenal.
The 1999 Cox Report, a bipartisan House investigation, laid bare the damage. It detailed how Chinese operatives accessed next-gen nuclear designs, missile tech, and classified lab programs under Bill Clinton’s watch.
What did the administration do? Not nearly enough. The story went public only after intense congressional pressure. Back then, there was no social media for a Clinton to tweet their remorse.
These breaches gave the Chinese Communist Party a technological leap forward, one that our sons and daughters in uniform may one day have to answer for. But today, we’re told the Clintons are national security hawks.
“We Came, We Saw, He Died”
Libya, 2011. The Obama administration, with Hillary Clinton pushing hard behind the scenes, helped lead a NATO campaign that toppled Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi. In a now-infamous interview, she laughed and said: “We came, we saw, he died.”
And what followed?
Chaos. Civil war. Jihadists are swarming ungoverned spaces. U.S. weapons are falling into the hands of extremists. Libya became a failed state. From this collapse emerged waves of terrorism, refugee crises, and the black-market slave trade.
But the worst moment was yet to come.
On Sept. 11, 2012, the U.S. consulate in Benghazi was attacked. Four Americans died, including Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens. Before the attack, Stevens had pleaded for more security. Emails and cables showed the State Department knew the danger was increasing. But no reinforcements came. When it was over, Clinton and others publicly blamed a YouTube video for inciting the violence.
The ensuing investigation revealed massive security failures and little accountability. Hillary Clinton eventually testified before Congress and uttered the unforgettable: “What difference, at this point, does it make?”
It made all the difference to the men who died. And it should make a difference to the rest of us when we’re told she’s an authority on safeguarding American lives.
Ethics for Sale: Foreign Money and the Clinton Foundation
Let’s not forget the millions that flowed into the Clinton Foundation while Hillary was secretary of state.
An agreement was in place: the foundation would clear any foreign donations with the State Department. But that promise didn’t hold. Algeria gave $500,000 for “Haiti relief” without vetting. Countries with spotty human rights records, such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the UAE, donated tens of millions.
Simultaneously, these same countries received U.S. weapons sales at increasing levels. Coincidence?
Maybe. But the Clintons built a fundraising juggernaut whose cash flow was so intertwined with a global influence that tracking motives became impossible.
And now we’re supposed to believe that posting a tweet gives her moral clarity?
A Legacy of Dissembling
One of the enduring features of Clintonian politics is the façade of intellect masking self-interest. These are not careless people. They are calculated. They carefully construct a brand, then posture as victims or guardians when the brand comes under fire.
Hillary Clinton’s digital outrage this week is a perfect example. She knows her audience and knows the media will amplify her message, apply no historical filter, and let the ironies go unchallenged.
But history matters. Truth matters. And context is everything.
Suppose Donald Trump had let classified material be stolen under his nose by the Chinese, enriched his spouse through foreign speaking gigs tied to government decisions, or allowed four Americans to die without sending help. In that case, they’d be calling it treason.
For Hillary? It’s Wednesday. And the media’s already moved on.
Back to the Tweet
So let’s return to where we started:
“How much dumber will this get?”
That’s a question best asked in a mirror.
This is the same woman who stored classified material on an unsecured server, deleted 30,000 emails with a shrug, and told grieving Americans that the Benghazi massacre resulted from a YouTube video. The woman who laughed off regime change, whose foundation cashed checks from governments needing favors, and who built an empire not on service but access.
It takes a particular kind of gall to fail upward this many times, only to pop onto social media and pretend to be the ultimate word on competence.
Hillary Clinton is entitled to her opinion, but the American people are entitled to context — and that context is damning.
So respectfully — and with every bit of earned exasperation — maybe it’s time for Hillary Clinton to sit this one out. No more lectures. No more tweets soaked in irony. No more trying to sell us a record we’ve already lived through.
Just… be quiet and go away.
Please.
Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy PJ Media’s conservative reporting taking on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth. Join PJ Media VIP and use the promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership!
