Last Night I Spoke to Ashley Wolthuis, Bernie Delegate Behind Claim Sanders Was Coerced to Endorse Hillary
Yesterday, on Twitter and Facebook a post was making the rounds that Bernie had been "threatened" by the Clinton campaign" with losing all the concessions he achieved on the DNC platform, unless he endorsed Clinton. Here is a screenshot of the text of that post:
Last night, after reaching out to many of the people who had either posted or tweeted this statement, I tracked down the original source, Ashley Wolthuis, a Sanders delegate from Utah, who was kind enough to return my "cold call" to her cell phone. Here is what she told me.
The basic thrust of the post shown above is accurate, she said, but the use of the term that Bernie was "threatened" she explained was overblown. She did indeed have conversations with various delegates associated with both campaigns, and she said it was "common knowledge" among most delegates that the Clinton campaign was insisting on Bernie making an endorsement prior to the convention if the more progressive parts of the platform would be retained. The talk among her the those with whom she associated, both Clinton and Sanders supporters, was that Bernie understood Hillary needed Sanders' supporters and that was the only reason she made any concessions at all regarding the positions on the DNC platform for which the Sanders campaign fought.
So, yes, Bernie made the decision to "endorse" her yesterday. However, in her view, Sanders ambushed Hillary on stage with the speech he gave, which forced her to, as I said yesterday in my video, give a "Bernie Sanders speech." She directed me to read this article by Chris Cillizza in the Washington Post, which she felt best explained what happened on that stage the two of them shared yesterday.
[A]ll of the speeches Sanders delivered up until today's in Portsmouth were aimed at explaining to Democratic voters why he would make a better nominee than Hillary Clinton. The speech today was, ostensibly, an endorsement of Clinton's presidential campaign.
But, really, it wasn't. Yes, I know that's how it was billed by the Clinton and Sanders camps. And, yes, he did say this: "I have come here to make it as clear as possible as to why I am endorsing Hillary Clinton and why she must become our next president." (It was the only time that Sanders used the words "endorse" or "endorsing" in a speech that ran 2,161 words...) [...]
... Clinton stood by his side throughout this recitation of his successes, nodding her head politely with a smile etched on her face. But it's hard to imagine that she or her campaign team were thrilled with Sanders touting just how well he had done — and how much better than everyone expected! — as the lead-in to his long-awaited endorsement.
But, surely, Sanders was simply touting his successes as a way of winding up to the big moment when he acknowledged — even subtly — that Clinton's more moderate, cautious and pragmatic definition of "Democrat" had trumped (ahem) his more liberal, populist one?
Nope! Not really. What followed in the speech was a laundry list of Sanders's talking points and policies supplemented with the phrases "Hillary believes" or "Hillary understands" or "Hillary knows" stuck in front of them.
According to Cillizza, Clinton put up with all of this because she knew she needed Sanders endorsement of her, though I also cannot imagine that she was very happy with the tone and content of Bernie's speech. Certainly that was what Ms. Wolthuis took away from what happened at that event yesterday.
Then she spoke to me about the conference cal that Bernie had with his delegates last night. Audio of the call, which can be heard here. But here are the main points of what he told his delegates, as Ms. Wolthuis stated to me,m and which mahakali_overdrive2 posted online at the Kossacks for Sanders reddit:
1. Sanders did not suspend his campaign. He said "absolutely there will be a roll call vote" at the convention, and he wants all his delegates at the convention to vote for him. Said the he and other of his surrogates will speak at the convention.
2. He praised the work of his representatives in obtaining significant changes to the platform that Clinton and DNC representatives opposed.
3. He said that he "knew the math." In other words, he knew he could not win the nomination in light of Clinton's lead in delegates and super delegates, but that he did not intend to give up the fight to advance progressive causes.
5. Said that within the "coming weeks" he will announce successor organizations to his campaign with the sole purpose of continuing the "political revolution" and promoting progressive causes and candidates in all fifty states. Does not want the energy of the progressive agenda to wither away. Said he will remain as figurehead of the movement, and that he will run again for his seat in the Senate in two years.
6. Said progressives need a 50 state policy to win back not only Congress, but also state houses and governorships from Republicans, and for that reason that he intends to support progressives both logistically and financially. Said he hopes to endorse, campaign for and support at least 100 progressive candidates in this election cycle, if not more.
7. He said his main goal in the short term was to fight to transform the Democratic party into a grassroots party and not a party controlled by big money donors. Said Democrats need less super delegates and more open primaries and much less dependence on big money donors. If this cannot be won in the Rules Committee, he will fight for it on the floor of the convention.
8. Said the after the convention, he believes Trump must be defeated and that will be his major effort, despite the big differences between Clinton and Sanders on many issues. Said he wants for personal reasons to have a Democratic Party majority in the Senate and House after the election.
9. Said he got Clinton to agree on the record to support free tuition for students attending public universities for families earning less than $125,000 per year. And also a program to help with student debt.
10. On health care coverage, he got Clinton on the record to commit to a "public option" under the ACA and a "opt in" for Medicare for people 55 years old or older. Also he said she agreed to double funding for community health centers, which includes dental care, mental health care and low cost prescription drugs for 15-20 million people across the country.
11. Regarding his campaigning for Clinton, said that part has not been worked out yet.
12. On TPP, he says it should not come up in the lame duck session. Says our job is make all current elected Democratic Senators and Representatives to openly oppose the TPP. Wants Clinton to more forcibly oppose it. Said we have to wage a national fight with every ally we can find, even with those Republicans who have doubts about it, to stop the TPP from being passed in the lame duck session. We need as much pressure on Obama as possible.
Sanders delegate Ashley Wolthuis was very upbeat after getting off the conference call last night. She was especially pleased to hear that Sanders will continue to head up the fight for progressive change and a political revolution, and in her words "remain a thorn in the side of the Democratic Party."
For me, I will wait to see what happens at the convention, but I will not vote for Trump or Clinton in my state of New York. In any case, I am glad to hear that Bernie has not given up the fight for a political revolution.
Comments
Only to those who have said fuck you to Sanders
for doing what he has always said he'd do: Support Clinton if she won the nomination in order to prevent Trump.
She hasn't won the nomination yet.
And who is saying fuck you to Bernie?
Yes, she has effectively won the nomination.
Is there a 1 in a million chance that something happens to ruin the nomination for her?
Guess so, but.... She's effectively won the nomination.
Would add:
Hill has effectively won the nomination by hook or by crook.
And I have no idea what pretending otherwise gets anyone.
I'm voting for Jill and leaving the dem party after
being a lifelong member. I'm sorry I didn't do it sooner.
I'm a registered Dem, but have never
considered myself to be a Dem - have always been left of the Dem party.
But I live in FL so have to be registered either Dem or Repub to vote in the primaries. Jill was on Fox - I think it was last night - she held her own. It's on youtube.
No, we need to hold them Accountable
"The left would have a larger demographic than the right if we would drop the habit of turning on our own when someone has the gall to do something with which we disagree."
No, we would actually get a say if we would do it more. The Left has not held the Democrats accountable for decades because we keep buying the tripe of 'the Republicans would be worse.' During this time, the Democrats continued the march to the Right. Look at what the Teahadists did to the Republicans. Did we not see in 2014 when they destroyed Cantor for paying only lip service to them. The base got Fed Up with the BS of the Republican establishment. At first, the Teahadists were and AstroTurf campaign, but TPTB couldn't contain it. It is time we did this on the Left. That or start a new party since the Democrats don't want us.
War, War Never Changes - Fallout Series
2 separate issues:
1) Yes, we should be the lefts' version of the t party - sort of.
2) Sanders always said he'd support Clinton if she won. To be hateful towards him now about this is absurd.
Nobody's being hateful
to Bernie personally or kicking him to the curb. He's a pol and a pol is a pol, to get so invested in his persona seems to run counter to his message. He's now joined Them and it's up to us to continue the movement he gave voice to. Yelling at people who have heard and seen with their lying eyes his concession/endorsement and are coming to grips with the fact that he threw in the towel before the convention is just obnoxious to the people here.. Shades of dkos.
The left is not eating it's own in fact it's at last standing up and saying no way. I learned the hard way not to put my faith in a pol even a decent one like Bernie. At the end of the day he did sheep dog his supporters to the rotten to the core Democratic party which was always something I thought might happen. I am not a Democrat as of 2012 and have no interest in being the left's tea party. I want the Democratic party to be gone daddy gone. It's irredeemable as we have seen yesterday. Even the progressives we elect fold like cheap tents when push comes to shove. 'Don't follow leaders and watch the parking meters' To call out people on the left as hating on Bernie after he folded is absurd.
Well said.
.....
Bernie: If I loose the nomination I will "fold" and support whatever Dem wins, as no way will I concede to a Repub, especially Trump.
You: He folded. How dare he?
"Folding" was always part of the Sanders package. While I'm going to now support Jill Stein, if she looses - which I'm 99.9999% she will, then I may or may not vote Clinton. I haven't decided.
But considering our circumstances, to judge folks according to whether they "fold" in regard to Clinton or not seems silly. Seems to me that, given the circumstances, reasonable and reasonably good folks can reasonably have a difference of opinion about the issue.
Sanders did not "sheep dog" his supporters. He always said where he stood.
If you feel sheep dogged by him, then really, I have no idea what to say except: Geeze, he always said what he always said.
You're not being honest.
Bernie said he would support the nominee. We don't have a nominee yet. He should have waited to endorse until we actually have a nominee.
Yes, he folded. He really made a huge mistake yesterday.
Yes, we have a nominee.
Yes, there's a snow balls' chance in hell that something might happen to Clinton to derail the fact that we currently have a nominee.
But aside from that snow balls' chance in hell, Clinton has won the nomination.
Agree with you on "sheepdogging."
I don't feel any pressure at all from Bernie to support Hillary (nor will I support her). He said what he felt he had to say given the power politics that's going on. Anyone can disagree with his choices, but to use emotionally degrading judgments of him as "he folded," "he's sheepdogging," "he's just like every other pol," etc., isn't supported, imo, by the facts.
I've not seen any politician in my lifetime accomplish what Bernie has accomplished. He has ripped the lid off of what the Democratic Party has become in a visceral way that has left many of us abandoning the Democratic Party and establishment politics generally. I would agree with the assessment that he's sacrificing himself for that and have little respect for those who personally judge him as weak or being a "betrayer" in any way in this situation.
But I know that's not going to matter when feelings are this strong. Just expressing my own feelings for the record and adding them to the mix.
Beat in the USA.
Thank you. Feel the same.
Exactly.
I'm a die-hard Bernie supporter, AND there's no fucking way I'm voting for Hillary in November (should she actually be the nominee) -- regardless of what he said yesterday.
He knows this. He always did. He was the first to say that he could never tell his supporters how to vote.
Anyone who feels "sheep-herded" needs to find their resolve, and/or re-examine what his stated goals were in the first place.
Shahara, wow, just fucking wow, thanks ---
I love the way you can write and articulate your perspective --- I covet your gifts, talents, abilities, etc etc etc. Thanks for writing what you wrote --- profound words and much appreciated by me! You've helped me heal!
I would suggest that folks read (or reread) Glen Ford's essay--
'cause it seems that the main point may have been missed. (this is not directed at you, Shaz)
My understanding of Glen's article is that there has been a designated liberal/populist candidate who has run in practically every election cycle, for decades.
And, without fail, they've attempted to bring (or keep) the Dem Party Base into the so-called 'veal pen,' when they lost.
It had little to do with the formal (or informal) endorsement of the Dem Party candidate, as I recall.
Mollie
“I believe in the redemptive powers of a dog’s love. It is in recognition of each dog’s potential to lift the human spirit, and, therefore, to change society for the better, that I fight to make sure every street dog has its day.”
--Stasha Wong, Secretary, Save Our Street Dogs (SOSD)
National Mill Dog Rescue (NMDR) - Dogs Available For Adoption
Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong.
Bernie had to endorse to
Bernie had to endorse to avoid being stripped of delegate power and shut out where he couldn't carry the campaign to the convention or continue to fight for the people. We haven't yet seen anything that he may have in his sleeve compartments but he's always got a strategy to do the best he can for The People. The towel is still in his possession, and I'll bet it's soaked with nutrients and ready to flick.
He also has stated that his supporters cannot be handed over like the possessions the corporate Dems think they are, although I can't at the moment recall exactly what was said. But Hillary has still to dodge charges regarding multiple other of her sins of which she has quite a pile, and Bernie will be in position to catch the nomination when some of the accumulated tons of spit she's splattered at the fan finally knock her out. She's being still propped up by TPTB (and shouldn't) at this point, having had billions invested in her, but a plausible General win even against Trump is a fading nightmare with more people becoming more aware of the evil she represents - and I would hope that any attempt to fake her into winning the General or appoint another and unprimaried Dem Presidential candidate over Bernie would be recognized as the last straw by the American people.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
2 separate issues:
1) Yes, we should be the lefts' version of the t party - sort of.
2) Sanders always said he'd support Clinton if she won. To be hateful towards him now about this is absurd.
What is absurd is your spin.
Spin? Um, there's all kinds of video
proof of him stating what he's stated regarding "any Dem is far better than any Repub".
Look, you can't just create alternative realities out of whole cloth.
Oh wow I "like" your picture :)
That cracks me up! Text below it could say Fuck every time I click on it like how I feel about facebook and data miners in general. Good one!
F*ck you, too!
Go back to TOP where you obviously belong. Here, I've been schreeched at, had my thoughts called "BULLSHIT!", and told to STFU. And this place, which obviously has no moderators, allows the same loose cannons to abuse people who feel betrayed, lied to, abandoned, confused, are still grieving, over and over again. I give it one month. So much for harmony and the so-called revolution. By the way, does anyone here, anyone at all, know how the revolution is going to be accomplished, now that Bernie gave up all his power and abandoned the only people who actually supported him?
peace brothers and sisters
Let's not act this way. Disagree but with reason not emotion please. There are moderators here, although I'm not one.
As to what to do after Bernie, I have an idea:
“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
Billions of dollars are spent to divide us
Our unity is our power and it can be a very big power.
Beware the bullshit factories.
Thank you! It seem so obvious
Thank you! It seem so obvious to me, as well, that the only thing to do, if Bernie doesn't manage to pull off one of his miracles, is to vote Green.
Voting for evil only gets you evil - and an evil taking you for granted as a supporter no matter what's done to you by it.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
And always voting the 'lesser' evil means the 'Party' knows that
they can throw us a shit candidate with a totally worthless platform and as long as they're just a little' less evil' hand have a D after their name, we'll vote for them.
EDIT: they're/their
I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks
Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa
Lesser evil voting is what gave the world Hitler.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_von_Hindenburg
Vote von Hindenburg, y'know, because otherwise Hitler will win.
“When there's no fight over programme, the election becomes a casting exercise. Trump's win is the unstoppable consequence of this situation.” - Jean-Luc Melanchon
Never spent much time at TOP.
But those who have done things like accuse Sanders of being a secret dark horse to throw the election to Clinton, etc.... deserve to be called out.
He hasn't abandoned anyone. He has always been the same guy who has always said he'd support Clinton if she won the nomination.
Ah hahahaha
If he was a secret dark horse, then the plan backfired.
"I can't understand why people are frightened of new ideas. I'm frightened of the old ones."
John Cage
Please link where you've read that
people accused him of being a dark horse to get Hillary elected. Thank you.
There was a short diary yesterday on C 99 for one.
You said:
You said:
After you said:
munches popcorn
Ironic, huh : )
Cloudbaby,. LOL, I busted out laughing when I read
"munches popcorn". Oh lord, thanks, I needed some comic relief!
Cut it out! Katie, please refrain from addressing members
in a vulgar and uncivil manner.
(If others have done so, and I missed it--this also applies to you.)
For those who don't know, this is a nonpartisan blog.
Views from all political perspectives, expressed in a thoughtful and civil manner, are welcome at C99P.
No one here is required to take a loyalty pledge to any candidate, or to any Party.
Period. End of story. Full stop.
Mollie
“I believe in the redemptive powers of a dog’s love. It is in recognition of each dog’s potential to lift the human spirit, and, therefore, to change society for the better, that I fight to make sure every street dog has its day.”
--Stasha Wong, Secretary, Save Our Street Dogs (SOSD)
National Mill Dog Rescue (NMDR) - Dogs Available For Adoption
Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong.
katie...
emotions are running high and the admins/mods have been allowing extra leeway for folks to express themselves, but your "fuck you" is over the top so please dial it down.
First post I have seen from you in a minute JTC, back from
your vacation?
Hope you had a peaceful, fun and relaxing time and glad to see you back.
(On a side note I have several items ready for that project if we want to get moving on a trial run soon, hit me up when you are fully back and ready to go.)
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
Yep...
I've been back for a couple of weeks. I've been purposely laying low until things settle down a bit, so we can get back to the business at hand.
I'm ready whenever you are, send me a PM.
LoL, I don't blame ya there! :)
I am just getting ready to step out but I will grab some pics and shoot them over to you either in a PM or that existing convo when I get back in front of the computer.
Have a great day!
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
i was disheartened to see people turn so quickly on Sanders
i don't have a crystal ball to know Bernie's mindset nor the negotiations going on behind the scenes with Sanders vs. Clinton campaigns. therefore, i have generally kept from setting any opinion until i see some guidance from Bernie. i had hoped he would carry it to the convention but, who knows, maybe his endorsement was a maneuver to maintain what little strategy he had left in his cards. i continue to hold no opinion until after the convention, other than dropping my Democratic registration, and maybe not even then. the election of 2016 has been unusual and anything could happen between now and November.
i AM glad to see that Bernie will not just let his movement die away as he claimed Obama did once he was in office. that Obama move appears to have been intentional after using progressives to elect him and then ignoring any progressive reform afterwards. i don't see Clinton operating any differently but this time i will not be giving the presumptive Democratic nominee my vote in November.
We can defintely do without the Fuck You
not necessary, at all. Vent your anger at those of us who got pissed off all you want, tell us we're dumb for doing it all you want, but you don't need to cuss us out for having our own opinions on stuff. We are entitled to disagree with you, you know?
Only a fool lets someone else tell him who his enemy is. Assata Shakur
dons moderator hat
I am now speaking in my moderator voice. We ask people here to treat one another with respect. Please keep this in mind before you tell another member her "f*ck you." Thanks.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
Just to be fair, I don't think that was a personally directed FU
Granted, I certainly agree we should all try to be kind and understanding and not inflammatory.
But I read her comment as "fuck you to haters" in the way I'd say "Fuck the DNC" not ever thinking anyone reading it would take it to apply to themselves.
But I could be wrong.
Of course, I am not disagreeing with you, GG. I think we're always better off not saying "fuck you" as a general rule of life, although I've certainly been guilty of it.
We can vigorously disagree
without being disagreeable to one another was simply the point I wanted to make as these things can deteriorate rapidly and destroy the ability of us to argue our points effectively.
Other than that, you are probably right, Miss Yellow Hair.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
Exactly. Thanks.
But since I talk like a sailor, and that disturbs some folks, I'll tone it down.
I've never really understood the objection to some of our words, but understand others feel differently : )
If I wanted to be told "FU"
I would still be at the other place.
It is rude. It is not what we do here.
Thanks for the additional info
I appreciate your work Steven.
I had been hoping for the Foundation scandal to come out, but I see now that is very unlikely.
First I saw this:
http://yournewswire.com/fbi-leak-hillary-clinton-foundation-guilty-of-tr...
But I believe this may be a better explanation.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/feb/10/hillary-clinton-foundati...
from riverlover:
“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
Very Interesting Link Between Comey And HSBC
Thanks for connecting those dots.
Donnie The #ShitHole Douchebag. Fake Friend to the Working Class. Real Asshole.
Fucking unreal
It's all making me sick to my stomach!
Something really funny in the Guardian article
is the fact that the Clinton Foundation got a 1m dollar donation from Richard Caring, the British retail magnate, for Bill Clinton's attendance at a lavish costume charity ball organised by Caring in St Petersburg, Russia.
That's lovely, a costume charity ball in Russia, St. Petersburg. So how many Russians in nice costumes and masks over their faces have been playing "spies" on that costume ball? It makes me laugh and shake my head. Was Bill Clinton stupid, or what? Oh, I know, I am stupid and my childish imaginations always bubble over the top. But, really, I had a good laugh reading that.
I think the Guardian article just wrote something that smells like rotten fish drowned in exquisite French perfume.
The Comey connection to HSBC bank?
Oh, yeah, another proof that facts are so much more exiting than the best fiction novels.
https://www.euronews.com/live
What's the news on the Clinton Foundation?
Where to start? Newsweek reported that one of the Clinton Foundation’s largest donors—Ukrainian oligarch Victor Pinchuk—was doing business with Iran between 2009 and 2013, while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state.
Wow. Wouldn’t that violate U.S. sanctions?
Probably. Non-U.S. companies can face penalties under the law for trading with Iran, and have in the past.
Who was in charge of determining which non-U.S. companies get penalized?
Thanks for asking. The secretary of state oversees the list of foreign companies deemed in violation of U.S. sanctions against Iran.
Wasn’t Hillary Clinton secretary of state during this time?
That’s right.
Oh.
Yeah.
What else?
Well, there’s book called "Clinton Cash" by Peter Schweizer. It provides examples of Clinton Foundation donors receiving favorable treatment from the State Department.
Peter Schweizer? Isn’t he a raging wingnut?
Media Matters certainly thinks so, and other Clinton operatives are aggressively pushing this narrative. It’s true that Schweizer has worked for Republicans in the past, but his research has targeted politicians of both parties.
Are media outlets looking into the Clinton Foundation’s finances?
The New York Times and the Wall Street Journal published reports detailing the State Department’s role in approving the sale of a Canadian-run uranium mining operation in the United States to the Russian government. From the WSJ report:
The $610 million sale of 51% of Uranium One to a unit of Rosatom, Russia’s state nuclear agency, was approved in 2010 by a U.S. federal committee that assesses the security implications of foreign investments. The State Department, which Mrs. Clinton then ran, is one of its members.
Between 2008 and 2012, the Clinton Giustra Sustainable Growth Initiative, a project of the Clinton Foundation, received $2.35 million from the Fernwood Foundation, a family charity run by Ian Telfer, chairman of Uranium One before its sale, according to Canada Revenue Agency records.
According to the Times, other individuals with ties to the Uranium One sale contributed millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation during that time.
Were the donations disclosed?
Nope.
Wait. Didn’t Hillary Clinton sign an agreement with the White House to publicly identify the foundation’s donors?
Yes, she did.
What was Bill Clinton doing while all this was going on?
Good question. Renaissance Capital, an investment bank with ties to the Russian government, paid the former president $500,000 to give a speech in Moscow shortly after the Russian nuclear agency announced its intentions to acquire Uranium One, a company whose stock was being promoted by the Russian investment bank. Go figure.
Can we back up for a second? One of those reports mentioned something about the “Clinton Guistra Sustainable Growth Initiative.” Who’s Guistra?
Sure, thanks for asking. Frank Guistra is a shady Canadian mining tycoon who has pledged $100 million in donations to the Clinton Foundation, on top of the $31 million he donated 2005, shortly after Bill Clinton accompanied him on a trip to Kazakhstan.
What were they doing in Kazakhstan?
Guistra was trying to win lucrative mining contracts from the government there. The two men attended a lavish banquet hosted by authoritarian president Nursultan Nazarbayev, whose abysmal human rights record had been criticized by Hillary Clinton, among others.
Did Guistra get the contracts?
Duh.
Sounds pretty sketchy.
It is. And that’s not all. The Clinton Foundation straight up lied to a New York Times reporter about a secret meeting of Kazakh officials at Clinton’s mansion in Chappaqua, New York. Guistra had arranged the meeting, which the Clinton Foundation denied had ever taken place, until they were presented with photographic evidence that proved otherwise.
So, who approved the deal allowing the Russians to buy those U.S. uranium assets?
It’s called the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States. It is comprised of some of the highest-ranking officials in the executive branch, including the secretary of state. The committee’s job is to review transactions that involved a foreign entity taking control of American business or assets, such as uranium, deemed vital to U.S. national security.
Uranium is a pretty important asset, right?
Right. It’s one of the major components of nuclear weaponry.
Hasn’t Russia been helping Iran to develop its nuclear infrastructure?
Yes.
Does the committee normally approve these deals?
Not always. In 2009, a Chinese state-owned company tried to buy a majority stake in a Nevada gold mining operation located on a site that also contained uranium. This was one of several reasons cited in the committee’s decision to reject the deal.
Did anyone raise concerns about the Russian uranium deal?
Yes. Senator John Barrasso, a Republican representing Wyoming, site of Uranium One’s largest U.S. operation, wrote a letter to President Obama noting that the deal “would give the Russian government control over a sizable portion of America’s uranium production capacity.” Some members of Congress even drafted legislation to stop the deal.
Why do you think all those people connected to the deal made donations to the Clinton Foundation?
Good question. Here’s the answer the New York Times received:
A person with knowledge of the Clinton Foundation’s fund-raising operation, who requested anonymity to speak candidly about it, said that for many people, the hope is that money will in fact buy influence: “Why do you think they are doing it — because they love them?” But whether it actually does is another question.
Did Hillary Clinton’s campaign respond to the story?
Yes. Campaign spokesman dismissed suggestions of a quid pro quo involving the Clinton Foundation, its donors, and then-Secretary of State Clinton as “utterly baseless,” noting that no one “has ever produced a shred of evidence supporting the theory that Hillary Clinton ever took action as secretary of state to support the interests of donors to the Clinton Foundation.”
But these donors clearly thought their money could buy them favorable treatment. That seems pretty obvious, right?
It does.
So maybe the Clintons just duped all these oligarchs into giving them money, even though it had no bearing on the decisions involving the State Department?
Yeah, maybe.
Why don’t these reporters dig through all the emails Hillary sent as secretary of state? Maybe there’s something in there?
Because this headline was widely reported: Emails Deleted From Hillary Clinton’s Personal Server Late Last Year.
Oh
Yeah.
This is a lot to take in. I’m almost afraid to ask: Is there anything else?
Actually, we’re just getting started.
Seriously? Can we take a break?
No.
Fine. What’s next?
Let’s talk about Bill Clinton. ABC News reported that his public speaking fees “often double or tripled” after Hillary became secretary of state. Additionally, he received millions of dollars from groups with “interests pending before the State Department.”
Wow! - The Clintons really love money, don’t they?
They do.
I’m sure none of these groups were trying to curry favor with a sitting secretary of state. They were just trying to make a difference in the world. Maybe this is an example of market forces at work?
Yeah, something like that.
Did any of the groups that paid Bill Clinton to speak also give money to the Clinton Foundation?
Yes. The Washington Post reported that Bill Clinton received at least $26 million from organizations that have also donated generously to the Clinton Foundation. That’s about one quarter of his total speaking revenue since leaving the White House. As we have noted previously, there are many fun ways to buy access to, and curry favor with, the Clintons.
It must be a pain to report all these donations to the IRS, especially the foreign ones, don’t you think?
Glad you asked. As it turns out, the Clinton Foundation didn’t report any foreign government donations for from 2010 to 2012, according to a Reuters review of the foundation’s tax returns. Following the revelations, the Clinton Foundation announced it would refile at least five years worth of tax documents to account for the millions in foreign government donations received during that period.
Seems like a pretty big mistake. And they’re just noticing this now?
Yep.
That’s weird. Doesn’t Chelsea Clinton work for the foundation? And doesn’t she have a reputation “as a data nerd who will dig into briefs to see if money is being spent efficiently and effectively”?
Yeah, she does. Apparently.
By the way, how does the Clinton Foundation spend all that money? Saving lives?
That’s what they say. But who really knows? Another review of the foundation’s tax documents found that the Clinton Foundation raised more than $500 million between 2009 and 2012, but spent only 15 percent of that money ($75 million) on grants to charitable organizations and causes. More than 25 percent ($135 million) went toward employee compensation, benefits, and travel expenses. The rest was classified as “other expenses,” whatever that means.
What does Hillary Clinton think of all this?
When asked about this during a campaign stop in New Hampshire in 2015, Hillary dismissed the barrage of troubling revelations as mere “distractions and attacks.” You know, the sort of benign hysteria that every political candidate has to deal with. She has yet to say anything more than that.
Has any major newspapers followed up during the primaries?
Ya, about that, both the New York Times and the Washington Post endorsed Hillary..
Love your self questioning and self answers : )
Fun to read and good info!
Great work, thank you, Jalus! But . . .
Great work, Jalus! But please supply links
Steven D posted about the Russian deal.
Thank you, dkmich, Alphalop,gulfgal98, HaikuKitty - et al
for your encouraging words . How very kind of all of you.
I now have the list of moderators:
JtC
joe shikspack
gulfgal98
dkmich
Unabashed Liberal
lotlizard
kharma
enhydra lutris
Gratefully,
Jalus
Namaste'
Jalus, you didn't break any rule.
If I'm interpreting this right, all cronewit is asking for is the link to the Newsweek article you referenced. As a rule of thumb, people generally link to any article they are referencing in a comment or essay. It is a convenience for others who just want to follow up for whatever reason. You are fine. Don't worry about it.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
FYI to everyone
When I post in my role as a moderator here, I will always identify it clearly that I am acting in my moderator role, usually by saying, "dons moderator hat."
On a personal note, to Jalus, please keep posting here. I find your comments enlightening.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
This is my Happy and Thank you Dance
laughing
and a humble bow of gratitude to teachers,
Jalus
Namaste'
Same here....
If I don't identify myself as a moderator in my comment, I'm just speaking for me.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
Yes, I agree, I enjoy your comments Jalus!
And your sense of humor!
Heart-thanks for your words of encouragement.
Here's something for
HaikuKitty
Do not shed a tear
For I am always with you
My hair on your pants
Love the format and the content. Great piece!
I really enjoyed the fine blend of Snark and information!
Great stuff, thanks so much for sharing it with us.
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
Click to hear the conf call for delegates
Whoops, it says to NOT share on the web...
'What we are left with is an agency mandated to ensure transparency and disclosure that is actually working to keep the public in the dark' - Ann M. Ravel, former FEC member
He endorsed a cheater
No matter how people spin this, it looks bad to me. And how much is that platform worth anyway with a serial liar like Clinton? I'd be surprised if it meant much at all, but keep dreaming.
Vote Stein!
... but Bernie always said he would endorse Hillary.
He has said it consistently throughout his campaign. I honestly don't know why people are shocked, except that the endorsement came before the convention, and that pissed me off. I originally (and still kind of) think that fucks his delegates at the convention.
I miss Colorado.
He said he would endorse the nominee.
There is no nominee yet. And yes, he most certainly screwed over his delegates.
shiz
I thought that at first too but apparently no because... he did not concede... so he's still in the running and he did not release his delegates, and won't until the bitter end.
True, true.
And I'm really glad he didn't release his delegates. I know several people IRL who already have plane tickets to Philly and they woulda been PISSED AS FUCK and not gone if he had conceded, etc.
In the end, at least for me, Bernie Sanders is a stand-up guy who is just trying to do the best he can for everybody. It is an impossible task.
I miss Colorado.
you can say that again
its a catch 22 scenario.
Im thinking a lot of us have GOS Pie Wars PTSD and The Left in general has at least a mild case of Battered Spouse Syndrome I swear. My willingness to trust is this big > .
What Im thinking - Ive been mostly in the subreddit and some facebook Bernie group - Bernie, well, first of all, the man ain't stupid. He has survived and fared well in some ways in COngress for umpteen years as an INDEPENDENT. We bragged about him, that alternet article about they call him The Amendment King. Dude knows how to play the fvcking game for maximum benefit, he is not playing Winner Take All (or Lose All), thats not how he rolls. jeezuz.
Not Me Us... we are his leverage now. His delegates, and the throngs of supporters who've been tweeting and blogging and showing up at his rallies en masse for a YEAR.
The blatant steal of the Cali Primary was a big blow, he needed that last push for the best advantage (leverage) going in to the Convention. But he's still going and he's still fighting....and he needs us more now than ever. He needs his delegates to show up loaded for bear and I think the rest of us bitchin' a blue streak and #NeverHillary also helps him in Philly.
Its only two weeks FFS.
After Philly, we'll see.
There is no catch 22 if you're being honest.
It also came after
a 'shocking' fixed, rigged primary. I'm not shocked the politicians don't shock me anymore after Obama colossal bait and switch, I am shocked at the degree of how corrupt our electoral system is. we have no vote it's a shocking farce. Endorsing Hillary in the face of how the Clinton's stole this primary seems to negate what the movement he engendered was and is about. How does a pol with integrity ignore what went on within this farce of a primary and says I always said I would bring it home for The Mad Bomber as a candidate, before they even crown the bitch at their fake convention.
Face it he lied on that stage yesterday he called the lame useless platform 'the most progressive platform in history.' It's not. He could have conceded without pumping the bs. about The Mad Bomber's liberalism but he didn't. It not only fucks his delegates but it is an attempt to sheep dog the movement which was supposed to be about us back to the Democratic veal pen. My sincere hope is that all the people who were involved and supported this movement will ignore his advise and not vote for the Clinton crime family. He is now them not us.
you have to admit that this was a great "encdorsement"
speech" that showed how he could manipulate HRC in "understanding" his platform.
I think it was his best way "arm twisting" HRC by embracing her arms and twisting her mind...
Really, why not waiting how far his "campaigning with her and for her" really goes, before judging. Still waiting for what happens next.
https://www.euronews.com/live
Steven, a heartfelt thanks to you my friend!
But, I'm not buying the bullshit! It's all a fucking facade! I've come to the conclusion that politics is a big fucking game to keep the peasants occupied while the 1% steals our country right from under our noses.
We are the clowns for our wealthy rulers. I've been hearing in my head Judy Collins singing "Send in the clowns.... don't bother they're here" all day today.
Just remembering to leave the music :)
I know two Sanders delegates pretty well,
and they were FB messaging a group of us local Bernie supporters last night when the conference call was going on. They heard everything presented in your piece, Steven, but what they additionally (and especially) heard was "FLOOR FIGHT"!
Their takeaway was that Bernie wants them to show up in Philly for the platform and the issues, not for him. He wants them to fight tooth and nail against TPP and everything else that Clinton won't concede. And they're ready to fight like hell for it, believe me.
I am extra worried now that they really will need bail bondspeople. :/
Also too, I got unfriended on FB last night by a rather famous blogger for saying #JillNotHill. Fuck her, man. (I won't tell you her name, but her initials are MSOC. :P)
I miss Colorado.
Bernie is not submitting a minority report as he once said
he would. TPP won't be brought up.
DWS may not bring up TPP, but I can guarantee you
that my friends will bring it up. Whether or not it gets any attention or gets a vote is another story.
I miss Colorado.
Says who?
CNN?
No, his top policy advisor.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/07/12/bernie-sand...
This part is
of the article put a shinny gloss over the issues Bernie's people got into the platform. In fact the whole article is unite behind Clinton pin. However it does verify that his campaign will not further hassle the queen.
I somehow think this is lipstick on the pig of a platform that does not actually do any of this. Dag these people have a lot of nerve shoving The Mad Bomber down our throats as some kind of candidate of the people. All these claims are patently false and like everything the Clinton's and the Democratic establishment say is double speak. Every time a Dem. pol says reform word you just know your getting screwed.
he decided
he decided he got the most he was gonna get wrt Platform. We all know its not good enough and it is not binding anyway and plus its Hillary making "promises" so that and a couple bucks will get you a pack of bubble gum.
Its been explained all over the place and you can choose to believe it or not, but the idea is he basically is doing what he needs to do so that he lives to fight another day, another battle, get to the convention in one piece. He's moving on to fight for more progressive and better Rules, thats what's up next. I am not terribly optimistic he will be able to get more than crumbs there (if that) but he is fighting that fight and the end results of all this is that America gets to see on full display just exactly how Hillary and her DNC are full blown neoliberals who are NOT interested or willing to fight for the 99% and who will, in fact, do everything in their power to defeat and destroy anyone (and its Bernie this round) tries to stand with and gain ground for We The People. HRC and DNC are all in for the 1%. Bernie's campaign for the past year has done more than all of us put together have shown or convinced any non-believers by blogging at GOS or whereever for the past decade. And marching and occupying and everything else we do and have done. For years.
He has pulled back the veil. He has exposed the rot. Lots more people are seeing that now than would have otherwise.
Man, I really dont have time to give this my full attention just now...
I agree Lady
I and most of us appreciate his campaign. To me the most hopeful and amazing aspect of it was the people who created the movement. Bernie gave the movement that has been in the making for decades a voice which could not be ignored. They had to cheat to stop him from winning. I'm sure whatever his reasoning is about conceding and endorsing he did what he thought was right. He is however a pol and is now a Democratic pol at that. Good luck to him 'revitalizing' the Dem. party as imo it's deader then a doorknob and the current Democratic party is a zombie party. I'm moving on and will try to 'revitalize' the Greens and vote for Jill Stein. Caucusing with the Democrat's is a big waste of time, energy and sadly does not lead to even a lesser evil. It's the same evil without the theocracy.
Everybody without a washed brain knows that the good guys lost...
Midland Subaru Owner's Club?
Oh, come on, Shiz! Don't leave us hangin' now
PS, yes, Green. I have to take a leap of faith that enough of us voting Green can't be fucked with. I don't have all the faith I need yet, but I'm working on it, particularly since I keep feeling like Trump is gonna bail on the Repugs...
LOL, ha ha!
Ya know what, l.c.? I am actually a pretty good example of a voter that Democrats can usually "fuck with". In the past, I have always caved and voted for them.
I suggest you use me as a barometer.
Anyway, yeah, I feel like Trump is gonna bail, too. At some point, he's going to get fed up and say "screw this" and just dump the entire campaign. He's a capricious, narcissistic asshole like that. And I don't think he would lose a minute of sleep that millions of voters will have no way forward if he bails.
That last paragraph made me smile a lot more than it should've. Heh.
I miss Colorado.
TRUMP JUMP
I have had that feeling too shiz. He is in it to pick a VP candidate that was NOT CRUZ, or the other Teapuppet, religious nut jobs, and then when he has installed his imminent successor, he jumps ship, and voila!!...the entire primary process is rendered moot
know your friends or know you enemies, what's more important?/nt
https://www.euronews.com/live
Both are equally important in my opinion.
It would be like trying to decide to give up oxygen or food.
You must have both if you want to survive for very long.
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
I really hope there is
a floor fight. With 45% of Democrat's having voted for Bernie we should not take this sitting down. Stronger togther my ass. I don't want a strong clinton nor do I want unity with a bunch of Vichy Dems.
Bernie's endorsement speech
... Clinton stood by his side throughout this recitation of his successes,
About his reciting his campaign successes during the endorsement speech, they had to let him do that. In all cases I'm aware of, before Bernie, a candidate does not endorse if they are still running. They would have given a concession speech thanking supporters and talking about their accomplishments at an earlier date. And then, they might endorse someone.
Bernie had to do both at once. He couldn't just come out and endorse without first effectively conceding and saying Hillary won and thanking supporters. He even thanked Vermont, and this was in N.H. It was a concession/endorsement speech.
If he "formally" suspends his campaign, that releases his delegates. I believe this is why he is saying he has not suspended. So, he's trying to have it both ways. Concede and Endorse, while also still a candidate and keeping his delegates committed to him. I guess it's possible because he is doing it. Ha.
He wants a floor vote at the convention so that the accomplishments of his campaign and supporters will be acknowledged and recognized. I believe he expects the first vote to be his 1900 delegates voting for him, and then the 2nd vote, many will switch to Hillary. ? I don't know how it works. Anyway, I believe it is for show, to make a point, to gain recognition for his supporters. But, then as he said, and he did say this: Hillary will come out of the convention as the nominee.
Pages