Speechwriters for Hillary Clinton and President Obama might have some explaining to do.
The two politicians on Tuesday delivered speeches slamming Donald Trump’s anti-terrorism proposals using language and phraseology so similar it would defy the odds to be mere coincidence, Breitbart Jerusalem has found.
CNN characterized Obama’s speech as a “tirade,” and claimed Obama unleashed his “fury, which seethed out of him in a stunning soliloquy on live television.” The clear implication is that Obama’s words were spontaneous when in fact he was visibly reading the speech from a piece of paper on the podium.
Here are some of the similarities between the two speeches.
Clinton and Obama both used the word “magic” in conjunction with “radical Islam.”
OBAMA: So, there is no magic to the phrase “radical Islam.”
CLINTON: First, he is fixated on the words “radical Islam.” Now, I must say, I find this strange. Is Donald Trump suggesting that there are magic words that, once uttered, will stop terrorists after us?
Both referenced the death of Osama bin Laden to defend the Obama administration from charges it is not doing enough to fight terrorism.
OBAMA: If the implication is that those of us up here and the thousands of people around the country and around world who are working to defeat ISIL aren’t taking the fight seriously? That would come as a surprise to those who spent these last 7.5 years dismantling Al Qaida in the FATA, for example — including the men and women in uniform who put their lives at risk, and the special forces that I ordered to get bin Laden and are now on the ground in Iraq and in Syria.
CLINTON: Trump as usual, is obsessed with name-calling, and from my perspective, it matters what we do, not just what we say. In the end, it didn’t matter what we called bin Laden; it mattered that we got bin Laden.
The two both stated that Islam has been “perverted” to justify terrorism.
OBAMA: Since before I was president, I have been clear about how extremist groups have perverted Islam to justify terrorism.
CLINTON: Since before I was president, I have been clear about how extremist groups have perverted Islam to justify terrorism.
Obama and Clinton each used similar points to attack Trump’s temporary ban on foreign Muslims entering the country until border and immigration processes can be investigated.
OBAMA: We now have proposals from the presumptive Republican nominee for president of the United States to bar all Muslims from immigrating into America. And you hear language that singles out immigrants and suggests entire religious communities are complacent in violence.
Where does this stop? The Orlando killer, one of the San Bernardino killers, the Fort Hood killer — they were all U.S. citizens. Are we going to start treating all Muslim-Americans differently? Are we going to start subjecting them to special surveillance? Are we going to start discriminate them, because of their faith?
CLINTON: Now that we are past the semantic debate, Donald’s going to have to come up with something better. He’s got one other idea. He wants to ban all Muslims from entering our country, and now he wants to go even further and suspend all immigration from large parts of the world.
Now, I’ve talked before about how this approach is un-American. It goes against everything we stand for as a country founded on religious freedom. But it is also dangerous.
But in this instance, Donald’s words are especially nonsensical because the terrorist who carried out this attack wasn’t born in Afghanistan, as Donald Trump said yesterday. He was born in Queens, New York just like Donald was himself.
So Muslim bans and immigration reforms would not have stopped him. It would not have saved a single life in Orlando.
Article written with additional research by Joshua Klein.
Aaron Klein is Breitbart’s Jerusalem bureau chief and senior investigative reporter. He is a New York Times bestselling author and hosts the popular weekend talk radio program, “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio.” Follow him on Twitter @AaronKleinShow. Follow him on Facebook.