Hillary's right-hand woman has been somewhat of a dark horse in the public perception of voters. Having been thrown into the spotlight due to the FBI investigation of Clinton's Wiki-leaked emails and the rumored NSFW escapades including the apparent attempted seduction of a minor, the focus is centering on her, which is making more people interested in her role as the Secretary's nearest ally. Anonymous, or at least another Anonymous went and did the math, so to speak. His research is accurate and reveals enough to make one beg for further questioning.
This thesis would be a textbook example of a strategy for defeating a much larger, militarily overwhelming foe by stealth over time. The destabilization of Syria and Libya ties into this plan as well, providing a weak neighbor for the Saudi Arabian Armed Forces to exploit at their will, with the US taxpayers sponsoring a very expensive campaign using aircraft and mercenaries that identify themselves with a full spectrum of terrorist groups. The destabilization of Afghanistan, Irak, Libya and Syria has led to further destabilization in the European Union. Greece and Italy are deeply challenged by the hords of 'refugees' flocking to their borders seeking asylum. France, Sweden and Germany have been flooded with foreigners willing to take the handouts of western governments but unwilling to show any respect for the culture or the folk that is paying for their welfare. This, being accepted by the politicians, as they impose more changes the majority would not willingly consent to would normally be high treason in a state, but since nearly all states in the world have been converted to registered businesses, it is merely another CEO pursuing a company agenda unpopular among the employees. As German Chancellor Angela Merkel was asked by Günther Jauch whether she would cease to support the European idea of common union if it were against the wishes of those governed, her immediate retort was "No!", "Under no circumstances." before relating that Germany needs a European Union with ideals like those in Germany, freedom of the press, personal freedom, democracy. This is the same woman that has recruited Google and Facebook to play a role as hate-speech police, contemplating sanctions if whatever brand of opinion is not removed within a certain amount of hours. First off, how is this 'hate-speech' to be defined? Today it might seem acceptable to block some messages, but once taken, this fork in the road will cause a lot of people to oppressed before the public realizes that free-speech, although it can be a downright nuisance to listen to sometimes, is valuable in a functioning society. How many resources are going to be necessary to filter and administrate the operation? Will the mission creep lead to STASI-like masses of company-hired private spies delivering 'intelligence' to the government? In a free country, no public discussion should be controlled by the controllers, even if that means we're going to be exposed to opinions we don't agree with. At the worst, you might turn livid with rage at the prospect of an adversary's world view, at the least, you might even say, "Well, i never looked at it from that point of view before.".
The easiest argument against accepting that your government is taking steps to limit public discourse when it runs contra to their narrative is to just remember, governments lie! If they profess to do anything for your security, it will surely reduce your liberty and fail to provide the promised securety. Quite the opposite, when the bar has been raised, before long, there will be another purported threat that enables them to "make a new offer" under the same auspices. See it for what it's become, a trade war between corporate governments and their citizenry hidden under the illusory mantle of government enabled by it's unquestioning minions and the acquiescent masses.