Tag Archives: Hillary Clinton’s health problems

Now it’s her eyes: What’s wrong with Hillary Clinton’s eyes?

She has:

Add her uncoordinated eyes to the above list.

On Monday, Sept. 19, 2016, Hillary Clinton was in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and gave a speech to, as described by UPI, “a crowd of about 200” at Temple University.

Here’s a video of her speech. Watch her eyes, especially her left eye:

Here are screenshots I took from the video:


Her eyes are not aligned: the left one drifts to the inner corner, while the right eye looks straight ahead.

Here are some hilarious comments on the video’s YouTube page:

yveslo lou: “blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah”

Kyle”o”Ran: “One eye staring you down the other eye looking for those deleted emails.”

Darren Dandridge: “she was following a fly with that eye to catch with her lizard tongue”

Tod T: “I won’t trust this woman to wipe my ass or yours”

ObamaSmellsBad: “They should always pan out to verify it is her by showing her huge fat ass.”

Trump 2016: “Her left googly eye. Look close enough and you may spot her nictitating membranes.”

Blister Chicken: “Kind of wonder if they have some “Disney Robo-President” thing hooked up to her and someone in a van down the street is controlling her in VR. Like maybe when the eyes go all cross, it’s because of interference or a power surge. (of course I’m just kidding.)”

jacob gabriel: “Vote for me. I’ll give you free shit thats not actually free”

LisaDawnn: “I believe reptilians have differential eye movement too. I’m waiting for her to start molting.”

FauxPawn: “Had to mute it. I kept expecting her to snap at a fly. Sorry I’m not more kind. I’m deplorable, so I’ve been told.”

Darren L: “She’s obviously possessed by Satan.”

Dr Phucker: “One of the ball bearings behind the integrated hydraulic optical control system is probably seized. Just needs a little silicone spray for lubrication. The newer models utilize composites which aren’t as prone to seizing.”

18661873: “Better question: What is wrong with her mouth? Nothing comes out of it but lies.”

Jay Patriot: “Holy shit one eyes moves independently than the other shes a fucking cyborg!!!”

Commenter Tubosworld thinks Hillary’s drifting left eye is due to Parkinson’s disease, which is also the diagnosis from the Secret Service and many physicians (who have not treated her):

“Patients with Parkinson’s disease have difficulty correcting for slight drifts of the two eyes, according to Dr. Feldon. Patients’ most common ocular complaint is double vision, which is difficult to correct, he said. ‘A lot of people have a tendency for their eyes to drift either inwards and outwards, but most of us can correct for it because we have fine motor control of our eye muscles. So as soon as our vision sees that the eyes are not aligned, a signal is sent out to the brain to move things into alignment,’ Dr. Feldon said. ‘But the fine motor control for Parkinson’s patients is not there, so they tend to have more trouble with double vision.’ Patients with Parkinson’s also have problems with lack of blinking, causing dry eye and blurred vision, he said. Link: http://www.healio.com/ophthalmology/neurosciences/news/print/ocular-surgery-news/%7B83ee5159-fea0-4b30-beb8-8595bbf23efe%7D/neurologic-disorders-have-varied-ocular-symptoms

A commenter named Sponge thinks Hillary has nystagmus:

“Nystagmus is a term to describe fast, uncontrollable movements of one or both eyes that may be Side to side (horizontal nystagmus), Up and down (vertical nystagmus), Rotary (rotary or torsional nystagmus) The most common cause of acquired nystagmus is certain drugs or medication. Phenytoin (Dilantin) – an antiseizure medication, excessive alcohol, or any sedating medicine can impair the labyrinth’s function. Other causes include: *Brain injury *Inner ear disorders such as labyrinthitis or Meniere’s disease *Stroke *Thiamine or vitamin B12 deficiency Any disease of the brain (such as multiple sclerosis or brain tumors) can cause Nystagmus if the areas controlling eye movements are damaged.”

Commenter tickyul concurs:

“I am a forensic Feline-Neuropsychiatrist and I concur with your opinion. If I was treating Hillary, I would be carrying an auto-injector of fast-acting Haldol…and have 500-CCs of ringers-lactate on standby.”

To which Bengal Ghost writes:

“maybe carry an auto injector full of cyanide by mistake”

And David Bruce Banner chimes in:

“maybe carry an auto injector full of cyanide by mistake on purpose”

Commenter Trump Mafia notes that:

“only 200 people were there and most were bussed in high school kids for a field trip – ie they HAD to go. actual temple students didnt go. it was also closed to the press – all staged”

By the way, on the same day that Hillary was in Philadelphia, Trump was at a rally in Fort Myers, Florida, which was attended, not by 200, but by thousands. The Germain Arena was filled to capacity (approx. 9k), and thousands more could not get in.


Dilbert cartoonist & hypnotist Scott Adams in 2015 predicted a Hillary health crisis

Scott Adams is creator of the Dilbert comic strip. According to his self-description, Adams is also a hypnotist of many years, trained in observing people and subtle nuances in appearance and body language.

He also seems to be the only person who’s noticed Hillary Clinton’s strange and drastic changes in her facial appearance, which I had blogged about in “Hillary Clinton’s teeth, tongue-hole & now-you-see-it-now-you-don’t wrinkles” and “Chameleon Hillary Clinton is back to looking like sh*t — and the return of her medical handler“.

Hillary Clinton before & afterhillary-clinton-july-28-vs-sept-11-2016

Below is Adams’ post of September 11, 2016, “Checking My Predictions About Clinton’s Health,” which was republished by Russia Insider:

In a blog post I wrote on December 27th, 2015, I said this…

Bonus Thought 1: One of the skills a hypnotist has to master is reading people’s inner thoughts based on their body language. That’s a common skill for people in the business world too, but hypnotists go deeper than looking at crossed arms and furrowed brows. We learn to look for subtle changes in breathing patterns, tiny changes in muscle tone, variations in skin color (blushing or not), word choice, pupil dilation, and more. I assume law enforcement people look for similar tells when doing interrogations.

As regular readers know, I’m a trained hypnotist. And to me, Hillary Clinton looks as if she is hiding a major health issue. If you read Malcolm Gladwell’s book, Blink, you know that so-called “experts” can sometimes instantly make decisions before they know why. In my case, I am going to make an “expert” hypnotist prediction about Hillary Clinton without knowing exactly which clues I am picking up, or whether I am hallucinating them.

Prediction: I’ll put the odds at 75% that we learn of an important Clinton health issue before the general election. That estimate is based on my own track record of guessing things about people without the benefit of knowing why. I think Trump is picking up the same vibe. He has already questioned Clinton’s “stamina.”

On December 29th, 2015 I blogged that Trump would be seen as “running unopposed” before election day. I mentioned Clinton’s health as a possible reason.

While I’m on the topic, I’ll add another prediction to the Master Persuader series. I predict that by the time Trump is in the general election and running against Clinton, you will start hearing that Trump (Lucky Hitler) is – for all practical purposes – “running unopposed” as Clinton’s poll numbers plummet.

That can happen in a variety of ways. One way is if Clinton’s health or legal issues rise to the point of being disqualifying, and Trump persuades us to think about those things more than we think about anything else. Once you imagine there is one candidate in the race who is eligible and one who might not survive the term, or might be in jail, you start to imagine it as a one-person race.

And you will. That’s how you get a landslide.

Look for the words “running unopposed” in pundit articles and quotes within a few months of election day. And it still counts if it started here, because it won’t catch on unless it actually fits.

On April 29th of 2016 I expanded on the thought in this post.

I have blogged and tweeted that Hillary Clinton looks unhealthy to me. And I have mentioned on Twitter that one of the skills of a hypnotist is identifying subtle bodily changes. Observation is a huge part of a hypnotist’s skill. You look for micro changes in muscle tone, breathing, posture, and anything else that can tell you whether your technique is working or you need to quickly pivot to a new approach. Think of it as rapid A-B testing on humans. And like any skill, one gets better with practice. I have more than three decades of practice for this specific skill.

What I see in Clinton’s health is an unusual level of variability. Sometimes her eyes bug out, sometimes they are tired and baggy. Sometimes she looks puffy, sometimes not. It would be easy to assume fatigue is the important variable. And that is clearly a big factor. But notice that the other candidates have little variability in their physicality. Trump always looks like Trump. Cruz always looks like Cruz, and so on. Sometimes we think we can detect fatigue in their answers, but visually the other candidates appear about the same every day.

Clinton, on the other hand, looks like an entirely different person every few days. That suggests some greater variability in her health. And that’s probably a tell for medications that are waxing and waning but rarely at the ideal levels. Or perhaps the underlying conditions have normal variability. Or both.

Under normal circumstances it would be deeply irresponsible for a cartoonist to give a medical diagnosis to a stranger he hasn’t met. I trust you to ignore my medical opinions. I do this to build a record of my persuasion-related predictions and to show you the method.

I give Clinton a 50% chance of making it to November with sufficiently good health to be considered a viable president. Judging from her performance on the campaign trail, she is managing her health effectively to get the job done. But I would think most people who run for president end up sacrificing their health in some measure. The big question is how much buffer she has left.

To be clear, there is no dependable evidence of Clinton having an undisclosed major health issue. But it looks that way to observers.

~End of Scott Adams’ article~

H/t FOTM’s josephbc69


Hillary at 9/11 looks worse than the corpse in ‘Weekend at Bernie’s’

If you don’t know why some in the Alternative Media refer to sickly Hillary Clinton as “Weekend at Bernie’s,” they mean a 1989 comedy movie called Weekend at Bernie’s, about two low-level financial employees, Larry and Richard, at an insurance corporation in New York City who discover their crooked boss, Bernie, dead in his Hamptons island beach house. Before Larry and Richard can call the police, guests arrive for a party that Bernie would host every weekend. To Larry and Richard’s amazement, the guests are too engrossed in their partying to notice their host is dead. Fearing implication in Bernie’s death, and wanting to enjoy the luxury of the house for the weekend, Larry and Richard decide to maintain the illusion that Bernie is still alive.

Here’s a poster of the movie. The man in the middle is dead Bernie, being propped up by Larry and Richard.


Coincidentally, Hillary Clinton too was wearing sunglasses at the 9/11 memorial ceremony at the World Trade Center yesterday, which she left early and almost collapsed to the ground before she was whisked away in her “ambulance” van. (See “Hillary Clinton collapses at 9/11 memorial – mysterious metal piece falls out of her pant leg“)

Below is a shocking photo of her at the 9/11 ceremony, looking more dead than alive.


Just 1½ months ago on July 28, 2016 on the last night of the Democratic National Convention when she accepted her party’s nomination for the presidency, Hillary had looked like this (below left):


How can her appearance change so drastically in such a short time? Even her nose looks different in the two pictures. (See also “Chameleon Hillary Clinton is back to looking like sh*t — and the return of her medical handler”)

In fact, Hillary at the 9/11 memorial ceremony looked worse than Bernie the corpse in the movie:


Some commenters on FOTM say they feel sorry for Hillary and that they will pray for her.

While the natural response of humane people when they see someone struggling with ill health is one of empathy, I’ve thought about Hillary’s case. Using my head instead of my feelings, and having examined my conscience, my position is that I do not feel sorry for her because:

  1. She can put an end to the ongoing and torturous-to-watch public spectacle of her ill health — the incessant coughing, struggling to walk up just a few steps, and collapse at yesterday’s 9/11 memorial ceremony — by dropping out of the presidential race. But she refuses to.
  2. Even worse, she and her campaign, as well as her willing accomplices in the MSM, not only have dismissed those of us in the Alternative Media who’ve blogged and made videos about disturbing signs of her ill health, we are called “ridiculous,” crazy and malicious “conspiracy theorists”. See, for example, here.

If you want to pray for Hillary Clinton, pray that she repents before it’s too late. As for me, I have limited time and energy, and so I don’t pray for Hillary, but I do pray for God’s mercy that we not be punished with a President Hillary.


WaPo says talk of Hillary Clinton’s health is ‘ridiculous’, but 71% of U.S. physicians surveyed say it could disqualify her for POTUS

After dismissing the Alternative Media’s reports on the many troubling signs of Hillary’s ill health as “conspiracy theories,” the MSM are getting desperate.


In a September 6 article for The Washington Post plaintively titled, “Can’t we just stop talking about Hillary Clinton’s health now?,” the newspaper’s political blogger Chris Cillizza not only redoubles on characterizing concerns about Hillary’s health as “conspiracy theories,” he airily declares her health to be “a totally ridiculous issue” and “a surefire loser” for Trump and “his Republican surrogates,” and dismisses Hillary’s on-camera brain seizure (see below) as just her being “goofy”.

Hillary having a brain seizure

Hey, Cillizza! Next thing you’ll say is that Hillary was just being “goofy” when she had to be helped up the stairs by two men (the one on the left is her medical handler who carries a Diazepam auto-injector pen).

“Just one more step, and then we’ll go inside and plug you in for the night.”

“Just one more step, and then we’ll go inside and plug you in for the night.”

And here’s Hillary being “goofy” again, having two men prop her up. Silly woman!

Hillary propped up by man in L.A., April 2016

And here she is, acting “goofy” again by wearing a catheter ’cause catheters and urine/feces drainage bags are such fun!

Hillary Clinton catheter

Sadly, a majority of U.S. doctors disagree with Cillizza, who has no medical training whatsoever nor even common sense.

In an online survey of hundreds of U.S. physicians conducted by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), 71% believe “serious” concerns about Hillary Clinton’s health “could” disqualify her for the position of President of the U.S.

20.54% of the 224 respondents said the concerns are “likely overblown,” but nevertheless insist that those concerns “should be addressed” with the full release of Hillary’s medical records, which she has refused to do. Only 2.68% (or 6 respondents) said the concerns are “just a political attack” and are of no concern because they have confidence in a 2015 letter from Hillary’s physician.

Other findings of the survey:

  • 91.16% are aware of questions raised about the impact of past and current medical conditions on Hillary Clinton’s fitness to serve as President.
  • 78.58% think the news media have not given enough emphasis in their coverage of the questions about Hillary’s health.
  • 66% believe that if a physician has a concern about a candidate’s fitness to serve for health reasons, he/she should make the concerns known to the public.
  • Of Hillary’s various health issues, 81.60% of those surveyed are aware of her concussion; 58.8% are aware of her cerebral sinus thrombosis; 52.8% are aware of her deep venous thrombosis.
  • Nearly 73% (72.97%) say that any of the above three health conditions (concussion, cerebral sinus thrombosis, deep venous thrombosis) can influence their vote for President.

H/t ZeroHedge

Here are the embedded links to the posts I’ve done on Hillary’s health:

See also:


If Hillary Clinton dies or is incapacitated, Nov. 8 election may be delayed or scrapped

It’s not paranoia if it’s true.

We already know Hillary Clinton is ethics and morality challenged. In fact, were it not for the equally corrupt FBI, this woman should have been arrested, tried, and serving time in prison for violating U.S. laws in having an unsecured — and illegal — private email server as Secretary of State.

The fact the the Democrats could overlook her legal and moral failings to select her as their presidential candidate is not surprising, which is in itself a testimony to the corruption of Democrats and their party. (See “After Hillary’s Benghazi hearing, 100K new donors flood campaign with money”)

Moral considerations aside, there is the matter of Hillary’s health. Why would  the Democrats select as their presidential candidate a woman who is clearly very ill, who —

Hillary being helped up stairs 2016

Some of us in the Alternative Media even speculated if this is Obama’s way to stay in power beyond the constitutionally-prescribed two consecutive presidential terms of office — that he might just suspend the November 8 election if and when Hillary is incapacitated.

Our worst fears turn out to be real.

Steven Nelson reports for U.S. News and World Report, August 30, 2016:

The presidential election could be delayed or scrapped altogether if conspiracy theories become predictive and a candidate dies or drops out before Nov. 8. The perhaps equally startling alternative, if there’s enough time: Small groups of people hand-picking a replacement pursuant to obscure party rules.”

Nelson writes that while the possible last-minute replacement of a candidate attracts some cyclical coverage, “this year the scenario would play out after consistent conjecture about the health of” Hillary Clinton, who will be 69 this October, and — referring to “apparently unfounded speculation he will drop out” — the “hidden agenda of” Donald Trump who, at age 70, would be the oldest person elected president.

Prominent law professors have pondered what might happen if a presidential candidate dies or drops out before the election:

  • University of Notre Dame law professor John Nagle says “There’s nothing in the Constitution which requires a popular election for the electors serving in the Electoral College“, meaning the body that officially elects presidents could convene without the general public voting. “It’s up to each state legislature to decide how they want to choose the state’s electors. It may be a situation in which the fact that we have an Electoral College, rather than direct voting for presidential candidates, may prove to be helpful.”
  • In a 1994 article in the Arkansas Law ReviewYale Law School professor Akhil Reed Amar considers what he calls the “far-fetched” possibility of a special presidential election being pushed to after Jan. 20, with the speaker of the House serving as acting president until an election could pick “a real president for the remainder of the term.” Amar recommends an up to four-week postponement of Election Day if a candidate dies just before voting, or even if there’s a major terrorist attack.

The Role of Congress

Congress does have the power to change the election date under Article II of the Constitution, which allows federal lawmakers to set dates for the selection of presidential electors and when those electors will vote. But Congress would be up against a de facto December deadline, as the Constitution’s 20th Amendment requires that congressional terms expire Jan. 3 and presidential terms on Jan. 20. Though it’s conceivable to split legislative and presidential elections, they generally happen at the same time. And if the entire general election were to be moved after Jan. 3, Congress effectively would have voted themselves out of office.

John Fortier, director of the Democracy Project at the Bipartisan Policy Center, says he’s not certain that Congress would reach consensus on moving an election date if a candidate died, meaning parties would need to formally – or informally – decide on a replacement. If the election date was moved by Congress, ongoing absentee or early voting would make for a mess.

The Role of the Parties

Both the Democratic and Republican parties have rules and guidelines for presidential ticket replacements:

  • If Hillary were to fall off the ticket, Democratic National Committee (DNC) members would gather to vote on a replacement. DNC spokesman Mark Paustenbach says there currently are 445 committee members – a number that changes over time and is guided by the group’s bylaws, which give membership to specific officeholders and party leaders and hold 200 spots for selection by states, along with an optional 75 slots DNC members can choose to fill. But the party rules for replacing a presidential nominee merely specify that a majority of members must be present at a special meeting called by the committee chairman. The meeting would follow procedures set by the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee and proxy voting would not be allowed. But DNC member Connie Johnson, a former Oklahoma state senator who supported Bernie Sanders, says it would be most appropriate for the DNC to give the nomination to the runner-up if Clinton were to die or drop out before the election. Johnson writes in an email: “I believe that’s why Sen. Sanders stayed in the contest. As to whether the party would adopt what would appear to be a common sense solution in the event of [Clinton] no longer being able to serve – that would remain to be seen. There was so much vitriol aimed at Sen. Sanders and his supporters by [Clinton supporters] that they would likely want ‘anybody but Bernie’ in order to save face and maintain control.”
  • In the case of the Republican party, Republican National Committee (RNC) rules potentially allow for greater democratic input, but don’t require it. If a vacancy emerges on the ticket, the 168-member RNC would decide whether to select a replacement on its own or “reconvene the national convention,” which featured 2,472 voting delegates, that met over the summer. If RNC members make the choice themselves, the three members representing each state, territory and the nation’s capital – a committeeman, committeewoman and the local party chairman – would jointly have “the same number of votes as said state was entitled to cast at the national convention.” RNC rules allow for state delegations to split their vote and for members to vote by proxy.

According to John Fortier, though not legally required, parties may decide on an easy fix and encourage electors to support their existing vice presidential nominee. A party legally could pick someone else, but a desire for legitimacy in the eyes of the public may force its hand.

Richard Winger, editor of Ballot Access News and an expert on presidential election history, says state election officials likely would be compelled to accept a major party’s request to swap candidates, citing precedent set in 1972 when states allowed Democrats to replace vice presidential nominee Thomas Eagleton, who was revealed to be a shock therapy patient, with Sargent Shriver. In 1972, every state but South Dakota also allowed the prominent 1980 independent candidate John Anderson to swap his vice presidential candidate Milton Eisenhower for former Wisconsin Gov. Patrick Lucey.

The Role of the Electoral College

In the end, whatever the decision made by the DNC or the RNC, it is up to the Electoral College. 

If the DNC or the RNC were to select an unpalatable pick, it’s possible many of the Electoral College could bolt. Ohio State University law professor Edward Foley explains that “the Supreme Court has never ruled that electors can be forced to obey their pledge” to vote for a particular presidential candidate, leaving open the door for mass defections or, in the event of a post-election candidate death, an en masse vote flip.

With more than two centuries of history, the U.S. does have some examples of candidate deaths, though none with a catastrophic impact:

  • In 1872, presidential candidate Horace Greeley died about 3 weeks after winning about 44% of the popular vote as a Liberal Republican supported by Democrats against incumbent Republican Ulysses S. Grant. Presidential electors chose between various alternatives, but because Greeley had lost, his death did not sway the election’s outcome.

H/t FOTM‘s Bongiornoc


Hillary Clinton uses an ambulance van

Remember this pic of Hillary Clinton in this strange mismatched outfit at a Cher-hosted fundraiser on August 21 in Cape Cod?

Hillary in hospital gown for Hollywood fundraiser

I jokingly called her outfit a hospital gown. (See “Hillary Clinton wears hospital gown at Cape Cod fundraiser”)

It turns out there’s much truth to it.

Take a look at the vehicle Hillary uses:

Hillary's ambulance van

Here’s another view of Hillary’s van:


On April 20, 2015, Ronnie Schreiber of The Truth About Cars wrote about Hillary’s reliance on the bubble-top van since as far back as her campaign for the U.S. Senate.

Hillary’s first bubble-top van was a GMC van used in her campaign for the U.S. Senate seat from New York state. When she was secretary of state, she used a taxpayer-paid bulletproof version of Chevrolet’s Explorer Van.

But wait!

What if Hillary’s bubble-top van were painted white instead of black?

It’s an ambulance van!

Chevy ambulance vanHere’s YouTuber “Barry Soetoro” on the significance of Hillary Clinton being transported around in a black ambulance van:

Remember that pic of Hillary in her designer hospital gown getting into her bubble-top van?

This is what the pic really should look like.

Hillary's ambulance vanH/t “Barry Soetoro” and Will Shanley.


Dr. Drew’s TV show cancelled, 9 days after he raised concerns about Hillary Clinton’s health

A month to the day after she said on camera to a reporter that “Obama is gay and Michelle is a tranny,” Joan Rivers was pronounced dead from a routine endoscopy. (See “RIP – Joan Rivers”)

Now it’s Dr. Drew Pinsky — board-certified internist, addiction medicine specialist, and media personality who has a TV talk show called Dr. Drew On Call on HLN.

On August 16, 2016, Dr. Drew broke ranks with the MSM’s lockstep denial of the many disturbing signs of Hillary Clinton’s health problems. In an interview on KABC 790AM’s McIntyre In The Morning, Dr. Drew called the symptoms displayed by Hillary “bizarre” and said he’s concerned about the antiquated level of health care she’s receiving, especially the anti-coagulant Coumadin she’s prescribed.

Asked about Hillary’s health, Dr. Drew said:

“The fact is she released her medical records some time ago, and if you listened to my show last week, I just called a friend of mine, Dr. Robert Huizenga, who is an excellent internist pulmonologist. We just dispassionately sat and evaluated the medical record that she had released, and based on the information…her doctors have provided, we were gravely concerned, not just about…her health, but her health care…. Both of us concluded that if we were providing the care that she was receiving, we’d be ashamed to show up in a doctors’ lounge — we’ll be laughed out. She’s receiving sort of 1950-level of care, by our evaluation. So here’s the basic facts, and by the way, before I launch into it, and if your saw the New York Times this morning, the science section, a front-page article about the so-called Goldwater Rule for psychiatrists being urged from an ethical perspective not to ‘psycho-analyze’ political figures — people that they don’t have a chance to evaluate. I would put in that…this thing needs to change — it may be even our ethical obligation to evaluate leaders. There’s a giant difference between psychoanalzing somebody and looking at medical symtoms that are apparent as a result of people’s behavior.”

Next, Dr. Drew defended Donald Trump, arguing against the KABC host who said Trump is a malignant narcissist. Dr. Drew said that children of malignant narcissists flee and don’t want to be around them, but Trump’s children don’t flee from him and are “well put-together”. Dr. Drew does concede that Trump may have hypomania, given his speeches, his tireless energy, and his getting and needing only 4 hours of sleep a night. But Dr. Drew says hypomania may be exactly what we want from a president. Then Dr. Drew returns to the subject of Hillary’s health:

“So we took a look at her record, and here’s the basic fact — she had two episodes of what’s called deep venous thrombosis. Common problem: blood clots in the leg. She also has hypothyroidism and she’s being treated for hypothyroidism with something called armour thyroid, which is very unconventional and something that we used to use back in the ‘sixties (1960s). And both he and I went, ‘Hmm, that’s weird.’ And by the way, wow, armour thyroid sometimes has weird side effects. Oh well, okay, she’s on Coumadin. That’s weird, because Coumadin really isn’t used anymore. Now we use Eliquis or Xarelto, or things like that. I’m assuming a presidential candidate would get one of the newer anti-coagulants. Then she falls, hits her head, as a complication of that, something called a transverse sinus thrombosis. This is an exceedingly rare clot. I’ve only seen one of these in my career, which is a clot in the collecting system for the cerebral spinal fluid, and essentially guarantees that somebody has something wrong with their coagulation system. Well, she’s had two clots, a transverse sinus thrombosis. What’s wrong with her coagulation system? Has that been evaluated? And oh, by the way, armour thyroid? Associated rarely with hypercoagulability! So the very medicine the doctors are using may be causing this problem, and they’re using an old-fashioned medicine to treat it. What is going on with her health care? It’s bizarre.”

Later that day, KABC deleted Dr. Drew’s interview from its website.

On August 25, 2016, 9 days after Dr. Drew’s KABC interview, HLN, the sister network of CNN, cancelled Dr. Drew’s TV show.

Such is the long arm of Hillary Clinton, who isn’t (yet) elected President. Imagine what a President Hillary would do . . . .

See also: