On Thursday’s Breitbart News Daily, SiriusXM host Alex Marlow asked guest Roger Stone about the Vogueinterview with Hillary Clinton’s aide Huma Abedin, who said her Muslim faith helped her get through the sexting scandals of her husband, disgraced former Congressman Anthony Weiner.
“It’s an attempt, of course, to clean Huma up, and make her respectable, even sympathetic, for voters,” said Stone. “Vogue has been a great enabler and advocate for Hillary Clinton, which is ironic, in view of Hillary’s role in bullying, intimidating, and threatening the various women who have been her husband’s sexual assault victims. Are those the actions of a feminist, or an advocate for women? I think not.”
“It is funny, yesterday there were quite a few Tweets online saying, oh, Steve Bannon and Roger Stone, they are advocates for the conspiracy theory about Huma,” Stone observed, referring to Breitbart News Executive Chairman Stephen K. Bannon, who has become the chief executive officer of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign.
“No conspiracy theory – this is really simple,” Stone explained. “Her parents were funders of the Institute for Muslim Minority Affairs, also active in the World Muslim League – both funded by the radical sheikh Omar Abdul Naseef, who also founded the Rabita Trust, identified by the Department of Justice as one of the funders of the attack on America on 9/11. Those are indisputable facts.”
“It’s ironic that Huma also comes out of the Institute for Muslim Minority Affairs, as did Mr. Khan, who of course got quite a bit of press at the Democratic convention last week. Two radical Islamic organizations,” he continued. (The Democratic convention was held July 25-28.)
“Why is Huma’s background important? It’s very simple: we know, since she went through all of Hillary’s email, to determine what we should see and what we should not, that she has therefore had access to Top Secret classified documents. How did this woman ever get a security clearance, given her very clear ties to a radical offshoot of Islam?” Stone asked.
He said that both Clinton and Abedin are women who have been “publicly humiliated” by their husbands, “but they stay for the power, and the money, presumably.”
“At least, that’s how it began with Anthony Weiner,” he added. “That was a prestigious marriage. Also, given her radical background, marrying a Jewish fellow, that’s pretty good cover, if you ask me.”
“In both cases, the women are humiliated, but they do nothing whatsoever about it. I find that interesting. Maybe they’re kindred spirits,” Stone speculated. “Now, from what I hear, from my Democratic friends, is that HIllary’s furious that Anthony Weiner is back in the paper again, because it reminds people of the philandering of her husband. The whole thing, I think, is a P.R. nightmare for the Clinton camp.”
He found it amusing that Abedin praised her mother as a “respected feminist” in theVogue interview, because “her mother was the leading advocate for genital mutilation in the Islamic world. That does not sound very feminist to me.”