Hillary Clinton ignited a firestorm this week after suggesting during a television interview that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu may have deliberately ignored warnings ahead of the Oct. 7 Hamas attack in order to later “come down hard” and shore up his political standing.
Speaking Thursday on MS NOW’s Morning Joe, Clinton referenced a recent report in the Israeli press alleging Netanyahu had been personally warned by a UAE official that Hamas was planning an attack. “I think we’ve got to be very clear of the messages we send, hopefully to the Israeli people, especially after this bombshell that came out in the Israeli press,” Clinton said, before adding that Netanyahu either did not believe the warning “or — it’s horrible to say — he wanted to see what they could plan so that then he could come down hard and it would enhance his position.” She went on to call it “a failure of leadership” and “a failure of protecting the people of Israel.”
The remarks were quickly clipped and spread rapidly online, drawing sharp criticism from both the left and right. Independent journalist Ken Klippenstein framed it bluntly, writing that “Hillary Clinton suggests October 7 was an inside job,” and predicted she would soon walk the comments back.
Conservative CNN commentator Scott Jennings was especially pointed, asking, “Is Hillary the biggest conspiracy theorist in America? Still thinks Russia stole the 2016 election & now says Oct 7 was an inside job. Good grief.”
Even some on the left pushed back. The Nation’s Jeet Heer, while noting he was uncomfortable defending Netanyahu, argued Clinton’s theory wasn’t supported by the facts, contending Netanyahu’s broader record — including allowing funds to flow to Hamas for years — suggested he believed Gaza had been “contained,” not that he wanted an attack to occur. Heer argued the deeper failure lay with Israel’s security establishment more broadly, not a single deliberate choice by Netanyahu.
Other commentators, including Israel-focused writer Arieh Kovler, argued Netanyahu had “zero reason” to let the attack happen given how badly it damaged his reputation and left him politically hobbled for months afterward.
The episode marks the latest example of Clinton drawing fire for entertaining speculative political theories, with critics noting the irony of a figure once accused by conservatives of pushing unproven claims about Russian election interference now facing similar accusations from across the spectrum over her Netanyahu remarks.
[READ MORE: Fox’s Steve Doocy Chokes Up Recalling Daughter’s 9/11 Heartbreak: ‘Sally Thought I Was Dead’]
