Archive for category Democracy
The Daily Beast explains how Hillary lost the swing states. They ignored the advice they received from veteran Bernie Sanders campaign staffers.
“We were saying we are offering our help—nobody wanted [President] Donald Trump,” [Bernie surrogate Nomiki] Konst continued, noting that the “Bernie world” side was offering Clinton’s team their plans—strategy memos, lists of hardened state organizers, timelines, data, the works—to win over certain voters in areas she ultimately lost but where Sanders had won during the primary.
“We were painting them a dire picture, and I couldn’t help but think they literally looked like they had no idea what was going on here,” she continued. “I remember their faces, it was like they had never fucking heard this stuff before. It’s what we had been screaming for the past 9 months… It’s like [they] forgot the basics of Politics 101.”
As the days and weeks flew by, the Bernie delegation kept underscoring TPP, jobs, union allies, the youth vote, and the environment, and pitched multiple rallies with Sanders in states such as Pennsylvania and Michigan (a state where Sanders unexpectedly beat Clinton in the Democratic primary, and a state that Clinton actively neglected during the general).
“The math that they lost on, is the math we won on,” Konst said. “So we wrote out a plan, and sent it to them, telling them to stop thinking you’re going to get this ‘Obama coalition,’ it’s not going to happen.”
Assurances were then made with various Clinton senior staffers that they would follow through with subsequent meetings and phone calls to address these gaps and warnings. Instead, meetings were canceled and “rescheduled” into oblivion.
“We not only screamed about this, we wrote memos, we begged,” Jane Kleeb, Nebraska Democratic Party chair and another Sanders booster who was at the DNC meeting, said. “I spent a good chunk of time writing memos about how [Bernie’s surrogates] could be utilized on the campaign trail, about ‘issue voters,’ about the environment, Black Lives Matter, Dakota Access Pipeline, rogue cops, you name it… I was [also] talking specifically about rural communities, and how [Hillary] completely ignored and abandoned anything that we cared about.”
…“To them, we were a leftist nuisance, nothing else,” a former senior Sanders campaign aide said.
Glenn Greenwald: ‘Fake News is being aggressively spread by the very people most loudly complaining about it’
Craig Melvin wags his finger at purveyors of fake news, as if MSNBC wasn’t guilty too
Glenn Greenwald lands a solid punch on his website The Intercept.
“Fake News is being aggressively spread by the very people most loudly complaining about it.”
After WikiLeaks published the Podesta e-mails the first week of October, regular viewers of MSNBC heard a constant refrain that the damaging revelations (including excerpts of paid Wall Street speeches that Hillary Clinton refused to make public) were somehow fabricated. When the e-mails were released, MSNBC analyst and intelligence expert Malcolm Nance instantly declared that they were “riddled with obvious forgeries.” This claim was repeated on air ad nauseam.
I noticed at the time that neither John Podesta nor any other author of the released e-mails denied that the information was genuine. To this day, they have neither confirmed nor refuted the authenticity of the e-mails despite being asked. It reminded me of the classic Sherlock Holmes story where the most important clue was the dog that didn’t bark. All that Hillary had to do to prove the contention that the e-mail documents were doctored would have been to release the full speech transcripts, that remain shrouded in secrecy.
Greenwald has the rest of the story:
That the emails in the Wikileaks archive were doctored or faked – and thus should be disregarded – was classic Fake News, spread not by Macedonian teenagers or Kremlin operatives but by established news outlets such as MSNBC, the Atlantic and Newsweek. And, by design, this Fake News spread like wildfire all over the internet, hungrily clicked and shared by tens of thousands of people eager to believe it was true. As a result of this deliberate disinformation campaign, anyone reporting on the contents of the emails was instantly met with claims that the documents in the archive had been proven fake.
It turns out that Malcolm Nance got the idea that the e-mails were “riddled with obvious forgeries” not from his sources in U.S. intelligence or even from the Hillary campaign, but from a tweet(!) sent by fake news author Marco Chacon.
In his Daily Beast article, published on November 21, Chacon describes how he manufactured the forged Goldman Sachs speech transcript. He says he did it prior to learning that the WikiLeaks releases of Podesta emails contained actual Clinton speech excerpts to Wall Street banks. But once he realized WikiLeaks had published actual Clinton transcripts, Chacon began trying to lure people he disliked – Clinton critics – into believing that his forged speeches were real, so that he could prove they were gullible and dumb.
Sadly for Chacon, however, the people who ended up getting fooled by his Fake News items were the nation’s most prominent Clinton supporters, including supposed experts and journalists from MSNBC who used his obvious fakes to try to convince the world that the WikiLeaks archive had been compromised and thus should be ignored.
Has anyone at MSNBC issued a correction/apology for spreading fake news? No. Have they at least stopped doing it? Well, in between frequent segments deploring the prevalence of fake news all over the place, MSNBC is telling us all day every day that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump win the presidency. This story is supposedly based on anonymous sources at the CIA. Point of information: the CIA is an organization made up of professional liars. Anybody who says “the CIA has released a report” is lying. None of the other 16 U.S. intelligence agencies have weighed in, as far as we know.
Glenn Greenwald reports: Anonymous Leaks to the WashPost About the CIA’s Russia Beliefs Are No Substitute for Evidence.
Yes, I predicted the Evil Russkie theory would go away after the election because along with everybody except Michael Moore I believed Hillary would win. But I also said that if Hillary lost that this talking point would be used an an excuse. Remember that a key part of Hillary’s agenda was to re-start the Cold War for the neocons and the defense contractors.
Malcolm Nance is now on MSNBC peddling his latest book…
This was published two months ago, when Malcolm thought Hillary would win. But what the hell, Russkie bashing is still a thing.
Get out your magnifying glasses and try to look exhausted. Call in the Brooks Brothers to put on a fake riot. Find out if James Baker is still alive. This is going to be a lot of fun!
Jill Stein gives interview to – where else – The BradBlog: America’s voting integrity place to go, when all the other corporate “news” outlets let you down.
They’re going to need about 6 million dollars to get this done, and we shouldn’t take a chance that George Soros is too chintzy. It’s going up by about $200,000 dollars an hour, but I donated, and so should you.
Hillary is going to owe us BIG!
FiveThirtyEight.com election night blog tells the story – what a trainwreck!
Going into Tuesday’s election, the FiveThirtyEight model actually gave Trump a higher probability of victory than the rest. HuffPo declared Hillary’s chance to win at 98.2 percent!
By midnight Utah time, 2 am in New York, Hillary’s celebratory fireworks show was cancelled and MSNBC reported Lady Gaga and Cher were in tears backstage at the Javits Center.
“Let me be very clear. In my view, Democrats will not retain the White House, will not regain the Senate, will not gain the House and will not be successful in dozens of governor’s races unless we run a campaign which generates excitement and momentum and which produces a huge voter turnout.
With all due respect, and I do not mean to insult anyone here, that will not happen with politics as usual. The same old, same old will not be successful.
The people of our country understand that — given the collapse of the American middle class and the grotesque level of income and wealth inequality we are experiencing — we do not need more establishment politics or establishment economics.
We need a political movement which is prepared to take on the billionaire class and create a government which represents all Americans, and not just corporate America and wealthy campaign donors.
In other words, we need a movement which takes on the economic and political establishment, not one which is part of it.”
— Bernie Sanders August 28, 2015
I get a strange feeling when I look around during my morning commute on FrontRunner and think that most of the people I am looking at, fellow Utahns, willingly chose Donald Trump to be their President. But let’s face facts, it wasn’t a Trump surge that decided this election, it was the Clinton Collapse. Yes, some states implemented voter suppression. But Hillary’s enthusiasm gap lost votes just about everywhere. The media got their predictions wrong because they were almost all in the bag for Hillary.
Poll: Bernie Sanders would have beaten Donald Trump 56% to 44%
61 percent of Mormon voters supported Trump
Robert Reich: What Donald Trump’s Election Really Means
The election was a repudiation of the American power structure.
DNC Staffer Screams At Donna Brazile For Helping Elect Donald Trump
Donna Brazile: I’m sorry only that I got caught cheating with debate questions
Interim DNC chair won’t apologize for helping Clinton, recycles discredited claims that Russians altered emails.
“Violations of the Federal Records Act within federal agencies is something we take very seriously. …The House Oversight Committee will work with Mr. Gowdy and the Select Committee on Benghazi to further explore Hillary Clinton’s use of personal emails while at the State Department.”
A business card obtained by ABC News shows that Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, lists his Gmail address on his official House card.
Rep. Chaffetz is already threatening years of investigations during the Hillary administration. But it looks like he tripped over his own feet back in March 2015.
This strategy is only supposed to work if the election is close and after Americas parents had to tell their children what sexual groping was, it doesn’t look like it’s going to be.
Projecting election theft on democrats is a very old trick by now, that should embarrass the hell out of congressional Democrats who refused to expose it. There is essentially no “voter fraud” and the Republicans pimping it probably know that better then anyone else, since they are the ones who have made election fraud into an art form for many years.
It’s probably gone down the memory hole by now, but a lot of us remember the battle that took place in Wisconsin, after the grass roots there decided they’d had enough of Scott Walker, and petitioned successfully for a recall. I even went to a pretty well attended rally in Salt Lake called “Stand With Wisconsin“. Yep, that’s Utah’s state capitol!
It seems as if Wisconsin was being used as a test case for ACTUAL election fraud. Documents that were strangely ordered destroyed, showed up recently concerning a suspicious judicial race there benefiting governor Walker. It has not been reported on by the media at large. It’s obvious there was some disturbing public manipulation going on, but too complex for a media that can only focus on fake fraud, bumper sticker arguments.
“Do we need to start messaging ‘widespread reports of election fraud’ so we are positively set up for the recount regardless of the final number? I obviously think we should,”
“”Talk radio needs to scream the Dems are trying to steal the race…We need to declare victory first so it appears that the results are being overturned if they go the wrong way.”
One of the talk radio hosts that was willing to play along in Wisconsin, came clean not too long ago about his involvement in bringing America to this embarrassing and dangerous point.
Here is a detailed report from “The Guardian” about the complex matter, but I think the best way to learn about the intricacies of the story are more easily absorbed by listening to this commentary and interview that Brad Friedman did with attorney Brendan Fischer on September 15th. Not an once of sensationalism; just right to the point information from two people who followed the story judiciously, all those years ago.
Here’s the story as it appeared on Brad Friedman’s longtime archive of actual election fraud in this country. You should listen to his excellent free podcasts provided every week day, and donate like I do.
Dark money was coming in from wealthy people all over to support this undemocratic action in a state previously known for honest government, and candidate Donald Trump was one of them, unless you believe in ridiculous coincidences more then I do.
Please spend the time to listen, just in case the 2016 election is close enough to allow this sort of debauchery again.
Hillary Clinton promised in a debate with Bernie Sanders last February to “look into” releasing the transcripts of her paid speeches to Wall Street. She never released the transcripts, but thanks to WikiLeaks we know that the Hillary campaign did an assessment of them to review the most damaging quotes.
Hillary’s speech excerpts are revealed in a Jan. 25, 2016 email from Tony Carrk, the research director of the Clinton campaign, to John Podesta, the campaign chairman, and other top campaign officials. Some examples cited by Salon:
Politicians “need both a public and a private position”
In an April 2013 speech to the National Multi-Housing Council, Clinton maintained that politicians “need both a public and a private position.”
“If everybody’s watching, you know, all of the back room discussions and the deals, you know, then people get a little nervous, to say the least,” she said,
“Politics is like sausage being made,” Clinton added. “It is unsavory, and it always has been that way, but we usually end up where we need to be.”
In other words, Hillary reserves the right to have two positions on every issue – but which one is the lie? BTW the “sausage” analogy was originally made by John Godfrey Saxe, but is often attributed to Otto von Bismarck. It is a political cliché.
Dreams of “open trade” world
In a May 2013 speech to the Brazilian bank Banco Itau, Clinton articulated her neoliberal, hyper-capitalist vision of the world.
“My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders,” she said….
“Far removed” from the middle class
In a February 2014 speech to the bank Goldman Sachs and financial management company BlackRock, Clinton admitted, “I’m kind of far removed” from the struggles of the middle class, “because the life I’ve lived and the economic, you know, fortunes that my husband and I now enjoy.” She added, “But I haven’t forgotten it.”
Clinton also said, “I do think there is a growing sense of anxiety and even anger in the country over the feeling that the game is rigged,” but she stressed, “I am not taking a position on any policy.”
The Intercept highlighted another quote, in which Hillary suggests the big banks ought to write their own regulations.
Touching on her view of developing financial regulations, Clinton declared to a crowd of Goldman Sachs bankers that in order to “figure out what works,” the “people that know the industry better than anybody are the people who work in the industry.”
Last but not least, we now know that Hillary told an audience at Morgan Stanley that she supported the Catfood Commission plan for tax cuts for the rich and benefit cuts for everyone else.
We ought to remember that the content of Hillary’s Wall Street speeches, as bad as it is, doesn’t outweigh the fact that she was paid $22 million. The speeches were primarily an excuse for the TBTF banks to financially reward the Clintons for their support over the years.
Salon: In paid speeches, Hillary Clinton said she “represented” and “had great relations” with Wall Street
The Intercept: Excerpts of Hillary Clinton’s Paid Speeches to Goldman Sachs Finally Leaked
Official Transcript Clock: http://iwilllookintoit.com/
Previously on One Utah:
The $675,000 Question (February 4, 2016)
Wealth and Income Share of the Top 1%, 1913-2012
At one of the many high-dollar fundraisers Hillary Clinton held during the month of August, a personal-check donation of $100,000 would get an attendee a photo with Hillary, according to a recent New York Times article. Rubbing shoulders with the likes of Paul McCartney at a waterfront Hampton’s estate fund-raiser, Hillary “joined in a sing-a-long finale to ‘Hey Jude’.”
…Since the late-1970s, the top one percent of families have been steadily accumulating a larger share of the nation’s wealth (total assets people own net of their debts), recessions notwithstanding. In 2012 (the most recent available data), the top one percent of families (1.6 million families, each with at least $4 million in assets in 2012) held about 42 percent of all the wealth. Although still below the 1928 peak of 51 percent, the growth has been spectacular, almost doubling in close to 40 years.
“We must make our choice. We may have democracy, or we may have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can’t have both.”
— Louis Brandeis
I’m not sure we actually have to be reminded never to trust a Clinton, however recently some have praised Hillary Clinton’s economic policy speech as if it mattered. I suspect her REAL economic views can be found in the Goldman Sachs speech transcripts that we’ll never see.
What matters are the polls showing she is the less trustworthy of the two major-party candidates. Which is amazing, considering that she is running against the guy who invented “Trump University.”
Thomas Frank, writing in The Guardian, reiterates the fact that Hillary hasn’t changed.
As leading Republicans desert the sinking ship of Trump’s GOP, America’s two-party system itself has temporarily become a one-party system. And within that one party, the political process bears a striking resemblance to dynastic succession. Party office-holders selected Clinton as their candidate long ago, apparently determined to elevate her despite every possible objection, every potential legal problem. The Democratic National Committee helped out, too, as WikiLeaks tells us. So did President Barack Obama, that former paladin for openness, who in the past several years did nearly everything in his power to suppress challenges to Clinton and thus ensure she would continue his legacy of tepid, bank-friendly neoliberalism.
My leftist friends persuaded themselves that this stuff didn’t really matter, that Clinton’s many concessions to Sanders’ supporters were permanent concessions. But with the convention over and the struggle with Sanders behind her, headlines show Clinton triangulating to the right, scooping up the dollars and the endorsements, and the elites shaken loose in the great Republican wreck.
She is reaching out to the foreign policy establishment and the neocons. She is reaching out to Republican office-holders. She is reaching out to Silicon Valley. And, of course, she is reaching out to Wall Street…
Don’t expect Hillary to follow through on her progressive promises if elected. She is the status quo candidate.
As Joan Rivers used to say, “Can we talk?” Because the corporate media coverage of the presidential race is barely mentioning the issues that affect you and me.
Lately all over cable TV they are vociferously debating whether Donald Trump is paying enough respect to the family of a U.S. Army captain who died heroically 12 years ago during Bush’s illegal invasion of Iraq (that Hillary voted for as a senator), after the father of said fallen warrior aimed a gratuitous insult at the notoriously thin-skinned Trump in a partisan DNC speech.
Most likely, this is a picture of the 2016 presidential campaign for the next 100 days. Hillary using surrogates to get Trump to say something that dominates the news cycle, or trying to get Trump to lose his temper during a debate. Anything Trump says is automatically news. Hillary has not held a press conference since last year.
What could the candidates talk about? Well, here is one suggestion. There is another recession coming, sooner rather than later. How will Hillary and Trump deal with the consequences?
Instead of ending the world of banks that are “too big to fail” and preventing banks from operating in ways that could again sink the economy, we have guaranteed them that the taxpayers are ready and waiting when they make another catastrophic mistake.
The Dodd-Frank regulations are not completely written yet, and probably won’t be in effect when the Wall Street billionaires crash our financial sector again. Is the American middle class about to take another big hit? Can somebody offer a plan to help us? We haven’t even recovered from the last time.
Hillary is going to have to offer much more than her current “OMG Trump!” campaign.