Will Hillary Bring Down the Entire Democratic Party?
During this primary, there has been a word that keeps running through my mind: “Why”. It starts with “Why did Hillary have her own private server for emails?” and the thought filters through so many unknowns to “Why are the superdelegates and the Democratic party so eager to force such a fatally flawed candidate onto us?”
To begin, why did Hillary set up her own server? For convenience? She (and her entourage) have given multiple reasons why she did it. Here’s one at Democracy Now
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Well, she also said—because there’s been some speculation about why she chose to use a private email server in the first place, and apparently in November 2010—this is what the report says—she wrote to one of her top aides, Huma Abedin, that, quote, "Let’s [get] separate address or device but I don’t want any risk of the personal being accessible." What do you think the significance of that is? And that’s not what she initially claimed her reason was.
Colin Powell went through the government IT staff to get a work around. Hillary used government funds to pay someone to subvert the confidential system. link
Was Hillary just stupid or ignorant? Well, maybe. There’s a lot of buzz that she didn’t know how to use a computer when she started as SoS.
But, she did have a lot of talent on her team – wouldn’t they advise her to comply with the laws? It appears that her team could have been helping her, instead, to thwart procedures for reasons that would keep Hillary’s illegal activities hidden.
And, how many of the 30,000 deleted emails might possibly be conversations about illegal deals being managed by her husband or other Democratic politicians?
Yes, I have been puzzled trying to figure out what is going on behind the scenes in the Democratic party – Why are they protecting her?. But, after I heard about the chatter about Governor Terry McAuliffe (D-VA) and the Clinton Global Initiative, the haze seemed to lift a bit.
As part of the probe, the officials said, investigators have scrutinized McAuliffe's time as a board member of the Clinton Global Initiative, a vehicle of the charitable foundation set up by former President Bill Clinton.
Well, okay, that could explain why McAuliffe pledged his superdelegate vote to Hillary so quickly. As president, she could work to keep him squeaky clean and/or pardon any wrongdoing. What about the other superdelegates that pledged for Clinton?
Well, I don’t have the time to go through the donor lists, the corporate breakdowns and individual CEO’s etc to find the connections between donors to the Clinton Foundation and how those match up against the Democratic politicians (superdelegates for Clinton). But, I can imagine that there are others who possibly own newspapers, or who are paid by the Republican party that will piece these things together. In other words, depending on how much comes out during the FBI investigation into Clinton’s possible pay-to-play schemes, how much the Republican congress follows through on congressional investigations, and how ferocious the press becomes, Hillary could potentially single-handedly bring the entire party down as more Democrats are found in that gigantic web of financial transactions.
We only have to look at the drip drip drip from the Panama papers to see how other Democrats could be brought into the mix:
The Podesta Group, implicated in the release of the Panama Papers, was founded by Tony Podesta and Hillary Clinton’s campaign chief, John Podesta. Several other prominent donors to the Clinton Foundation have also been linked to the Panama Papers, and the Clinton Foundation itself has been frequently cited as a source of money laundering and exchanging political favors for large donations.
Is that why the Democratic party is forcing her candidacy on us? I’m just asking. After all, the republicans are already asking similar questions and that will have an impact on the General Election and the next presidency; so let's ask some questions now. Is the party backing Hillary because they need to continue to control the justice department? I’m just wondering WHY the Dems continue to push this flawed candidate on us. Do they need a corporate-friendly president to pass out pardons when the indictments roll in?
Hillary tried to erase her emails, but, the FBI may be able to salvage some. But it gets even more important to know what was in those deleted emails.
With the inference that her server was hacked, (at least one person has admitted hacking her email), is it possible that someone out there – such as a political enemy, a foreign government, or a terrorist group, or someone I can't even imagine-- has information that could be used to blackmail Hillary or some other politicians? A politician such as President Obama?
From these facts and circumstances, we must deduce that it is possible, if not highly likely, that President Obama himself has been grossly negligent in handling classified information. He discussed sensitive matters on a non-government, non-secure e-mail system that could easily be penetrated by foreign governments (among other rogue actors). By doing so, he left an electronic- and paper-trail that was outside the government’s tightly secured repositories for classified information. He also personally indulged, and thus implicitly endorsed, Clinton’s use of private e-mail to do government business.
When we start to ask “Why?” it becomes impossible to stop asking the question. The “why’s” continue on and on until one begins to imagine the whole of the Democratic party protecting her – or are they just protecting themselves? Before we dismiss this as just fantasies that will be dreamed up by the right-wing noise machine, it is important that we remember that long ago there ACTUALLY WAS A BLUE DRESS! Sometimes they get it correct.
At the very least, the preponderance of the evidence is tanking Hillary's numbers into a historic low.
Maybe I watch too much tv. Maybe the latest season of House of Cards has me thinking about political corruption and sent my imagination into overdrive. Then I remember that sometimes truth is stranger than fiction.
I'll leave it to the experts to answer the "why's". But it seems there are a helluva lot of answers still to come. Is it too late to salvage the Democratic party?
Comments
Will the "espionage act" be used against her?
A case for it here
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when we are afraid of the light.
--Plato
Hillary and computers
Yes, it did come up in testimony or somewhere recently that she didn't know how to access email on a computer. It may have been a reason given for why she wanted a Blackberry.
To me, that she was not familiar with computers in 2009, 2010, is just another way she is completely out of touch, and just has not lived like you or me and the rest of America since the 80s when she became first lady of Arkansas. She also hasn't driven a car since at least 1992. She is completely entrenched in a way of life I can't imagine.
And if she is that far inside of a bubble now,
just how bad will it be when she's president?
And -- How protected would somebody have to be to think that no one would notice 30k emails going missing?
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when we are afraid of the light.
--Plato
Panama papers quote is very sloppy
This should be implicated (in money laundering/tax avoidance using foreign shell companies) BY the Panama Papers. They were not part of the release of those papers.
This one is not as bad.
Looking the quote about keeping the 'personal' inaccessible, I was wondering if there was a health angle you were getting at. OTOH, the whole concept of someone secretly blackmailing their way to the presidency because of insider knowledge would be bizarre, if we didn't already have George H.W. Bush to look at.
p.s.
Did anyone ever see the 'blue dress'? That was IIRC, just something leaked from GJ testimony, and thus fundamentally unverifiable. Certainly the imagery of a nice Eisenhower Republican blue dress seemed suspiciously perfect for generating salacious outrage.
Good link Plato to the huffpo article
Reading the comments, it looks like many people are also following the Clinton foundation/email investigations.
People know that it was a pay to play setup between the foundation and the state department.
If this isn't a huge conflict of interest, then I don't know what is.
Bill first gets paid by a country's government to give a speech, Hillary's state department then swoops in and sells them weapons, even though they have horrible human rights violations and then those governments would donate millions to the Clinton foundation.
So how would Bill know in advance that the state department was setting up the weapons sales unless he either had access to the emails of the state department, or Hillary or someone on her staff would either tell him about it or Hillary told him.
Either of those two activities would have been illegal. Bill doesn't have security clearance anymore, so it would be a huge problem for Hillary if it comes out that these things happened.
Here's an interesting article about the Clinton foundation not disclosing 1,100 foreign donations. And she was told by both congress at her confirmation hearings and by Obama to keep her duties as SOS separate from her foundation. And she agreed to do so.
This article was from over a year ago, so it has to be obvious that many people in the government were aware of these actions, yet either failed to put a stop to them or were letting her continue to do these things or were gathering information on it. I'm hoping that it is the latter.
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-04-29/clinton-foundation...
And as I have written previously, it's not just the weapons sales and the cross over with the foundation.
The Clinton's foundation and the state department were also involved in deals in Haiti, Libya and Honduras. The Clintons have been involved in Honduras since 2001.
There were many people who had access to her emails that didn't have security clearance. That and the times when her actions disrupted sensitive military operations, should be enough to charge her with some type of criminality. And if she skates then we know that people are covering up for her.
And there was an article over at the other place that is very dismissive of the severity of this issue.
Was Humpty Dumpty pushed?
Yes, Bill's DNA was on the dress.
Tuesday, September 22, 1998
As far as the Podesta quote, I can't re-write someone else's quote.
Likewise, the "personal inaccessible" is a quote from an interview. There have been multiple reasons that have surfaced about 'why' Hillary wanted her own server. That quote is discussing how Hillary wanted to keep her personal emails off of government accounts so that no one could access them through Freedom of Information Act, etc, but her story changes. Plus, why couldn't her personal emails be on one account and government ones on the government account? None of it makes sense.
What I was getting at about the blackmail issue, is that whatever was on the deleted emails is possibly ALREADY copied elsewhere in the world when/if hackers got into it BEFORE they were deleted. So if information on the emails is so sensitive that she didn't want to turn it over to the investigators, is it something that could be used to blackmail her, her husband, or possibly other dems? Sorry if I didn't make that clear.
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when we are afraid of the light.
--Plato
This was a reply to Sandino above.
Just too late at night for me to make sense.
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when we are afraid of the light.
--Plato
I didn't mean to criticize the diary
I recc'ed it. I just thought the quote was horrible. I didn't check where it came from, nor do I blame you for including it verbatim.
I'm still skeptical on the blue dress, even if Monica did manage to keep a little cum.
There is absolutely no reason to be skeptical.
http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/clinton/lewinskydress.html
"I’m a human being, first and foremost, and as such I’m for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” —Malcolm X
I don't where it says
'Blue Dress'. The optics would have been less optimal if it had been about a 'little red dress', or a burger king napkin, for example.
I'd like to address the question in the title of this
(quite well done) essay, namely, whether Clinton's candidacy and subsequent (possible) presidency bring down the Democratic party.
I would vote yes, and further, that it will only complete the process her husband began.
From the linked article:
The article goes on to mention the losses in state legislatures and governorships, all of which were instrumental in right-wingers' ability to gerrymander districts following the 2010 census.
What this shows is that by continuing the "zombie lie" the linked article mentions (that Billy-boy brought the Dems "back to life"), hack journalist pundits perpetuate the thinking among the Dem party faithful that tacking to the center-right by way of choosing center-right candidates is the way forward. Election after election has consistently shown that you choose a center-right candidate as your standard bearer, and the consequent corruption (a product inherent in catering to corporate interests), you lose.
We all lose.
"Our society is run by insane people for insane objectives. I think we're being run by maniacs for maniacal ends and I think I'm liable to be put away as insane for expressing that. That's what's insane about it."
-- John Lennon
Another question
Are Democrats and therefore the party so corrupt that the "way forward" means the way forward for them personally? With their fear mongering and vote blue no matter who, they've certainly assured their futures. People nod like little sheep and vote for the wolf in fear of the monster Trump.
People need to make this party earn its vote. If they can't get into the WH or Congress, WS won't be interested in buying them.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
Of course.
"I’m a human being, first and foremost, and as such I’m for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” —Malcolm X
Best logic to make the party change!
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when we are afraid of the light.
--Plato
Who signed that MUO between State and the Foundation?
HRC or another officer? And were there punitive actions listed in that Memo? I looked, it's buried in the Bloomberg article. It was Lindsey who signed, with Valerie Jarrett cosigning. Was that about the time Chelsea was brought in or after, too many time lines.
Hey! my dear friends or soon-to-be's, JtC could use the donations to keep this site functioning for those of us who can still see the life preserver or flotsam in the water.
MUO signed by Bill Clinton's lawyer
Dec 12, 2008
Memo of Understanding
The discussion about the Clintons breaking the agreement has been ongoing. Here's an article from a year ago that discusses the run-around:
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when we are afraid of the light.
--Plato
Another article that discloses more information
Obama had prohibited Bluementhal from working for the state department and Hillary knew that. So she hired him to work for the foundation and paid him $120,000 per year. And he sent a lot of classified emails and he marked them classified, but she ignored that and forwarded them to other people and who knows if they had security clearances?
Her arrogance of ignoring things regarding the rules that congress and Obama set up showythat she thinks that she doesn't have to follow them
Was Humpty Dumpty pushed?
The Clinton timeline is a very interest place.
They are practically trailing her lunch schedule.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
$120K is chump change to these people
Seriously. Any lawyer worth their salt or a halfway decent programmer can make that.
One of the bits of "wisdom" I give my kids goes
Was he really that cheap or was there something else going on?
We can’t save the world by playing by the rules, because the rules have to be changed.
- Greta Thunberg
He had that company in Libya
That won a contract for providing security subcontractors or some such ...
And didn't he get $16 mil for a ceremonial position
with Laverne International University, ow whatever the exact name is? Which received increased funding from the State Department when Hillary was SOS. Now, that's real money. And a real conflict of interest.
Corporatism Will Have The Final Say
Too many people let the media do their thinking for them. We already know that the corporate media made Trump the GOP nominee. Will it be any different just because Hillary has declared herself to be above the law? No. The same people who sold us Barack Obama will sell enough lame brains on the "It's HER Turn" meme to overcome any assault on Hillary, even if she has one coming for being a criminal.
We also can't be certain that Bernie isn't really winning the election, for the tabulations are already suspect in too many cases. There is no way to verify that any election held today isn't just an elaborate scam, with those in the smoke-filled boardrooms deciding for us who we voted for no matter what. They can't afford to risk letting the people actually have power. We'd take away their wealth.
"It's a Big Club, and you ain't in it" was never more true.
Vowing To Oppose Everything Trump Attempts.
The "Big Club" has been emptied out several
times in recorded history. Problem is the emptying has always been very violent. A lot of innocent blood has been and gets shed. That has always been a great fear of mine. Couple that with the gun culture here. It gets even scarier. Rec'd!
Inner and Outer Space: the Final Frontiers.
I don't think "It's Her Turn" is a meme.
At the end of the 2008 campaign, which she fought to the bitter end, Obama needed her supporters. So, yes, she was given an important job, BUT, Obama also appointed DWS (co-chair of Clinton's 2008 campaign) as DNC Chair...a position he has shown some regret in giving her, but notice she is still there. That's a Yuuuuge implied promise that, if Clinton went along and played nice with an Obama Presidency, that she would in fact get her turn. Further, I am certain that a verbal promise was given, but of course we will never know.
"I’m a human being, first and foremost, and as such I’m for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” —Malcolm X
She didn't play nice.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I think she just wanted to protect her conversations
from Republican attempts to create scandals, and created one by doing so..
Dem politicians supported Hillary because she had almost 70 percent favorable ratings and finished second to Obama in 2008.
Hillary is wrong on issues and accepts the corrupt campaign financing system.
The whole Hillary and Bill are criminals thing sounds too much like Newt Gingrich to me. I know it's an article of faith to many here.
Hillary's biggest "crime" was supporting the invasion of Iraq.
hate to break it to you Tom
but they are peddlers of influence and they represent the worst of our political life. imo.
“There are moments which are not calculable, and cannot be assessed in words; they live on in the solution of memory… ”
― Lawrence Durrell, "Justine"
What a weird cimment.
Peddlers of influence. The horror. Compared to voting for the AUMF.
You're not breaking anything to me.
Whether it's Hillary or someone else, it is the system that is the problem.
On Daily Kos they know worship Hillary and many here attack her. Both miss the point.
The System Is the Problem
Blaming the system is like blaming bullets for killing people. Clinton has free will, so do her minions, and excusing them for their behavior won't cut it.
Tom...
It's perfectly fine to support Hillary here and honestly I'm glad that some folks do to keep this place from becoming an echo chamber. It makes for good honest debate, but we try to refrain from being judgemental of other members opinion.
agree JtC
we don't want no stinkin' echo chamber . . .
“There are moments which are not calculable, and cannot be assessed in words; they live on in the solution of memory… ”
― Lawrence Durrell, "Justine"
What, what, what, what, what......
Why, why, why...
Deny, deny, deny, deny......
You really need to review her role in the illegal Libya war.
She and Obama are de facto war criminals for their part in that alone. There is a ton of evidence that they lied just like Bush and his admin lied about Iraq to get their "No Fly zone" thru the UN and even her emails tell the real reason for the attack on Libya, for gold, oil and to prevent Gaddafi from implementing an African currency, not to mention for Israel. There's a good book called, "Slouching toward Sirte, NATO's War on Libya and Africa", which outlines the runup and reasons for that war. Clinton and Obama are responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people and had a large part in creating the refugee crisis of millions. I would say that's her biggest crime and it is inexcusable.
https://www.amazon.com/Slouching-Towards-Sirte-NATOs-Africa-ebook/dp/B00...
i shudder at it all, truly
“There are moments which are not calculable, and cannot be assessed in words; they live on in the solution of memory… ”
― Lawrence Durrell, "Justine"
What?
Clinton's support may have been a little louder, but she has that vote in common with the preponderance of senate Democrats. Except as an indicator of her behavior as Secretary of State, the "vote" is entirely symbolic.
I'm not sure what you mean by crime. Clearly a public vote in the senate isn't within the legal scope of crime. I will provide, briefly, my reasons for opposing her nomination.
Hillary Clinton may have been the most hawkish member of Obama's cabinet. She pushed the intervention in Libya. Libya is now a failed state. The number of people who are dying is greater than any worst case scenario of the number of people Gaddafi, admittedly a brutal dictator, would have killed in his next 10 massacres.
After Gaddafi was beaten, sodomized with a knife, then murdered, there was that frightening "We came. We saw. He died." clip of a gleeful Clinton laughing proudly. I can't imagine Dick Cheney doing that. It's frightening.
In Honduras, Clinton supported a coup. It's hard to know whether she went beyond Obama. It's more clear that she was among those most supportive of those behind the coup in the Obama Administration. Honduras has become a place of horror and assassination. It's also become a great place to invest.
She was among the most hawkish in advocating American involvement in Syria. She advocated a "no fly" zone that would have demanded that Russians stop flying in Syrian air space. I'd rather not think about how she planned to enforce it.
She is the biggest cheerleader for Netanyahu in the Democratic Party. She offered unequivocal support during the Gaza bombing. She was praising Netanyahu while bombs were still falling on Palestinian babies and Obama was pressing for restraint.
She did her best to undercut the agreement with Iran and has suggested ways it could be undermined if she becomes president.
Then there is Haiti. Maybe she doesn't want any emails to come out that shed light on the relationships among Bill Clinton, investors in Haiti demanding repeal of Haiti's increased minimum wage, the contributions of those investors to the Clinton Family Foundation, and the State Department's actions to pressure, successfully, the Haitian government to reverse the minimum wage increase.
Those are the foreign policy low lights. After reading everything can find on Hillary Clinton's position on Social Security, I still fear that she can find a way to increase benefits to people occupying the right place in her hierarchy of identity politics at the expense of others, probably cutting total spending at the same time. How hard is it to say "I won't cut Social Security benefits, or the rate of increase for Social Security benefits currently in statute, nor will I increase the age of eligibility." Bill Clinton and Barrack Obama were involved in efforts to cut and even privatize Social Security benefits. I see know reason to believe Hillary Clinton won't do the same. It's OK though. The Republicans will make her do it and she will protect key elements of her identity politics coalition. Plus she will make social security solvent for our children.
Fortunately, the garden calls. I could add the TPP, fracking, and endless others.
The Iraq vote is a nearly inconsequential piece of my opposition to the candidacy of Hillary Clinton.
hard to find fault with your position
i know i certainly agree with every point...
“There are moments which are not calculable, and cannot be assessed in words; they live on in the solution of memory… ”
― Lawrence Durrell, "Justine"
Still haven't seen that clip
Of HRH HRC cackling at the dismemberment of Gadaffi. Not sure I will be able to bring myself to view it.
Beware the bullshit factories.
At minimum she violated Federal Law
more likely she put our country at risk (the Russians and Chinese have all her emails) and hid pay for play
Much speculation.
I agree with Bernie. The emails are a sideshow.
If you thought Hillary was completely honest but had the policies she did, would you support her?
Oh well, it's like Daily Kos. Love Hillary, hate Hillary, ignore the system. Fuck it.
The Emails are a Sideshow
No. The emails are the smoking gun, leading to the iceberg, that will sink the Democratic party, the Obama administration, and the ship of state. Sorry about the mixed metaphors but they succinctly sum up crooked Hill and Bill and how everything and everyone they touch gets corrupted.
Hell no I wouldn't vote for her policies if she
was Mother Teresa. Unfortunately, she lies so much no one really knows what her policies really are. If we use her record as Co-President and SoS, hell no I wouldn't vote for her based on her track record alone.
This place is anything but "like daily kos". For one thing, we are talking about the system; and no one is getting personal with you. For another, you haven't been flagged and sat in a corner for being blue no matter who.
Jimmy Carter says democracy is dead: You need at least $200 million to run for president of US ‘oligarchy’
Carter thinks it is pay to play too. Do you think his criticisms of the system are an article of faith to him too?
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
Was that intentional?
Not sure if you meant to do that, but comparing Hillary to Mother Teresa is apropos. They both have a cult of personality surrounding them which treats them as saints, but when you dig below the surface you find lots of ugliness.
If you didn't mean it that way, you should read up on Mother Teresa. There's lot of criticism of her out there; the reality is not quite as saintly as many think.
i thought the same thing
because I've read a lot of unflattering things as well...
“There are moments which are not calculable, and cannot be assessed in words; they live on in the solution of memory… ”
― Lawrence Durrell, "Justine"
Wait just a cotton picking minute!
First thing, I have no freaking clue what Hillary Clinton's policies are because her stated policies change on a regular basis. What I do know is her record. And I cannot support her based upon her record. Hillary Clinton is a neo-liberal through and through. She and Bill have been the Democratic party's primary promoters of the neo-liberal ideology. For the last six weeks, every Wed in the Wed Open Thread, I have written about neo-liberalism and the damage it has and is doing to us and the world.
Going hand in hand with neo-liberalism is neo-conservatism which is the strong arm ideology as promoted by PNAC. Robert Kagan who was one of the principal architects of PNAC is a close advisor to Hillary Clinton's campaign. Hillary and Bill Clinton are very close personal friends with Henry Kissinger and regularly vacation with the Kissingers, hardly a proponent of peace, himself.
Hillary Clinton is huge proponent of regime change. We have watched just how well regime change is working in the world. Between 500K and one million Iraqi civilians have died as a result of regime change. Clinton pushed for regime change in Libya and we all see how well that has worked out. She was one of the primary proponents of regime change in Syria. She has publicly said that she would obliterate Iran if they threatened Israel. She was the biggest hawk of all the Presidential candidates and she scares me to death.
I have spent the last five years involved in a weekly Peace vigil. Sadly, our participants have decided to end it recently due to health and age issues. But that does not stop my commitment to the idea of ending these unnecessary and brutal wars. There is no way that I could ever support Hillary Clinton because of this one issue even though there are many other issues I have with her.
The emails are not a sideshow. The Benghazi hearings were a side show, but the problems associated with Clinton's thumbing her nose up at the security of State Department business and the co-mingling of "personal" and government business on her private server is a big issue. It goes to who she is and her arrogance toward the citizens of this country. There is absolutely no excuse for what she did and how she continues to lie about it. It is not a side show. It is very revealing of her lack of character.
Last, as a founding member here, I take personal exception to your swipe at us. We bend over backwards to accommodate differing opinions here without having a thumbs down or flagging system. We treat people here as adults and expect them to act as such. This place may not be for everyone and that is fine.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
right on gg!!!!
“There are moments which are not calculable, and cannot be assessed in words; they live on in the solution of memory… ”
― Lawrence Durrell, "Justine"
Thank you for this post.
More importantly, thank you for your commitment to peace.
"Just call me Hillbilly Dem(exit)."
-H/T to Wavey Davey
peace vs. HRC
Heard that! After a generation of mostly girls (GenX), our family's starting to toss boy babies again. No way in (rhymes with "clucking bell") am I voting for a warmonger!
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
Social issues are the real sideshow
Both parties use them to distract us from the looting of the treasury through tax breaks, revolving doors and government contracts for war materiel.
We can’t save the world by playing by the rules, because the rules have to be changed.
- Greta Thunberg
I truly believe
hillary and bill are criminals in every sense of the word. They are just above the law and most likely will never be held accountable. Now I could copy and paste a ton of stuff here attesting to that and if 1/100 of it were true they'd be classified as criminals. But what's the point. Hell, concerning bill, you need look no further than the primary in Mass when he was electioneering. That's a crime. There are no laws in the clinton household. Hillary's basement server is proof of that. And hillary's excellent adventure as SOS. Look at Honduras, Libya and Syria. Her actions were crimes against humanity.
I used to be a clinton defender but I couldn't do it any longer without looking like a stooge. I'm done with them. My only decision come November, should clinton be on the ballot, is whether to vote Green or whether to vote Green.
BernieOrBust...
You Are Correct, They Are Master Crooks
and after they eliminate Hillary from the election the Feds should open a far reaching investigation into The Clinton Foundation a.k.a the rats nest
Clinton/Obama
Another line of attack to Hillary occurred to me. She always said Bernie was critical of Obama and how horrible that was. Well, she is sure tarnishing the Obama Administration with her various lapses of judgment and highly questionable behavior.
Why did he let her get away with breaking the MOU? Did he know about her email server? How could he not? Did he know Blumenthal worked at the Foundation, and was privy to classified info? How Obama must have sent to and received classified info from her unsecured email system. [What other questions are there?] Start spreading the mud from her onto Obama. See how Obama and the party likes being dragged into and dirtied by another Clinton scandal.
I read that there were some emails between Obama and
Clinton that will be withheld until he leaves office ...
Just another data point.
In the sense that the corporate esp FIRE
(Financial, Insurance, Real Estate) but also big Pharma, are dictating policy the Democratic party is already destroyed. I fear beyond repair.
Even though I live in a state w a closed primary (CT) I'm leaving the party after the convention.
As e. e. cummings once wrote
Don't believe everything you think.
e.e. cummings
Did e.e. cummings really write that, or did you in his style?
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
"Will Hillary bring down the entire Democratic Party?"
I am hopeful.
"I’m a human being, first and foremost, and as such I’m for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” —Malcolm X
Yup
It would be nice to have the space to build something good and genuinely progressive.
“To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.” -Voltaire
Remember that you're talking about a thirty-six year bad habit
of voting for the neoliberal Democrat to avoid electing the neoliberal Republican. Hillary Clinton is going to bring all this down in one fell swoop? It's not likely.
“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
I partially agree. While she won't be bringing it down herself,
she could very well be the proverbial straw that broke the parties back.
If she loses, the fact that the party put it's thumb on the scale for such an obviously terrible candidate (from a winablility standpoint alone.) despite having the choice of a Candidate that didn't have her baggage and had a long history of supporting traditional democratic policies and positions, it could indeed break the party providing we have another REAL progressive party for it's members to flee to.
Kinda like the political version of the whole GOS/C99P situation.
Sure, the party itself will probably continue to exist, but it will be as but a shadow of its former self with an acceleration of it's already rapidly shrinking membership.
If we play our cards right and have a viable alternative party to run in the 2018 midterms and take a bunch of state and local level offices it will place us in the perfect position to mount a challenge in 2020 against both the parties that currently have a stranglehold on our political system.
The only thing that is certain though is that this is gonna take a metric shit-ton of work to accomplish.
However that being said, after seeing what we have been able to accomplish in just a few short months with the Sanders campaign I think, with a solid standard bearer and support of the burgeoning growth of "Berniecrats", we CAN do this.
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
Well of course I like the idea.
I'd like to see it gain some traction though.
“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
The People's Summit
in July in Chicago.
Life is strong. I'm weak, but Life is strong.
People across the board are sick to death of this shit.
It's not just about the server.
It's not just about left vs right.
It's not just about Dems vs Repubs.
People across the board are sick to death of this shit.
The only way she gets in is by cratering voter turnout, spiced up with some voter purges here and there, and maybe a soupcon of outright election fraud (adjusting vote totals). That said, of course she could manage that, but the cover story/alibi has worn exceedingly thin. Plutocrats like to hide behind the idea that the will of at least some of the people has lifted them up, and that is becoming increasingly hard to assert.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Without the support of Black people over 45 in the South--
She'd have nothing, but nothing to explain why she's the "frontrunner."
That's why her campaign is mega-focused on accusing opponents of racism--well, it's one reason, anyway. Because the "Black people support Hillary Clinton and racists don't" story is the only story they've got to explain why someone that is distrusted and disliked by a near SUPERmajority of Americans is the fucking frontrunner.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
If she brings down the Democratic party,
it will not be by accident. It will be the direct byproduct of her arrogance and hubris. It will be because she cared only about herself, her ambition and her "place" in the history of this country. She has known since the outset, that the installation of her own private server was in contravention of U.S. law. Was it to facilitate the 'gray area' dealings between foreign nationals and the Clinton Foundation? Probably that and other reasons.
More importantly, she has surely known for months and months that she could be indicted or at the very least implicated in federal criminal charges. Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton and probably 2 or 3 others in the inner circle know the EXACT extent of her exposure. As does the FBI. We (the other +/- 320 million Americans) are left to speculate.
IF she is indicted, or implicated as an unindicted co-conspirator and not charged, she can blame the Rethugs or Bernie or Nader or Fox News or FBI Director Comey or Trump or anyone she chooses...but it will be hollow to anybody besides her lockstep supporters. SHE KNOWS. She knows now, as I sit here and type this post, she knows the true extent of her exposure. If she's charged, it will devastate her, but it will not surprise her. The fact that she has pressed on with her quest to be POTUS, in the face of this, tells me that it is about Hillary Clinton, not America.
If she destroys the Democratic party, then so be it. We of the liberal/progressive persuasion often delight in pointing out how far the Rethugs have drifted from Lincoln, T.R. and even Ike. When we look in the mirror and see how far the Democratic party has gotten from FDR and those who carried his banner, we don't have much room to taunt them. Maybe it's time to burn it down anyway.
"Just call me Hillbilly Dem(exit)."
-H/T to Wavey Davey
^^^This!!!^^^
I love this comment. Thank you!
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
The Clintons have been destroying the Democratic party
since roughly 1986.
The only question, for those who care, is whether it was intentional sabotage, or a by-product of mercenary self-aggrandizement.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I don't care.
But go for latter.
Hey! my dear friends or soon-to-be's, JtC could use the donations to keep this site functioning for those of us who can still see the life preserver or flotsam in the water.
I don't actually care much either--
but it's an old habit of mine, as an academic, to poke at any unresolved question I find.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Former academic ( mildly bitter)
I do as well.
Hey! my dear friends or soon-to-be's, JtC could use the donations to keep this site functioning for those of us who can still see the life preserver or flotsam in the water.
It is systematic
The Clintons are the ones who brought neo-liberalism into the Democratic party on a wholesale basis. The Democratic party has become the party of Clintonism. It was intentional sabotage to change the direction of the party from one of a champion of the poor and labor to one representing the meritocracy. The Clintons have definitely benefitted financially as a result of Clintonism because they are part of the meritocracy.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
Of course,
it will be Bernie's (and the progressives') fault. /sn
There are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know.
Everything is subservient to her career
It seems that it is impossible for her to have any perspective except how anything fits into her career. She stays with Bill because they are completely in sync on this and that overshadows any flaws. There is no person there capable of empathy. Her method is to play to power and thus attain power. There are no guiding principles for her. Ask a question and the answer is always the same. War or peace-how does that effect my career? Social justice - how does that effect my career? Climate crisis-how does that effect my career? No wonder she never leads on anything. No wonder that she cannot feel empathy for the 100s of thousands of people who have died and been maimed in wars that she encouraged. She will sell out on any issue if it furthers her career. She has no principles that I can see.
Capitalism has always been the rule of the people by the oligarchs. You only have two choices, eliminate them or restrict their power.
Probably not
There is virtually nothing in the recent history of the USA that would indicate our government is capable of a robust investigation with prosecutions for the powerful. While Hillary will continue to keep the Democrats in the pocket of the vested rich, that will only perpetuate the party not bring it down. If the evidence gets to ugly and obvious for the AG to ignore, HRC is smart enough to have plausible deniability and have an underling take the fall should it come to that.
The Clinton's wrote the book on how to be evasive, squirrely, self serving pricks. Maybe this is the time they took one step too many - but I don't think so.
This is one of the many reasons I support Bernie. He wants to tear down the two tiered system of justice. Rich people hiring attorneys to evade rules doesn't cut it and is setting us down the path of being a banana republic. Bernie has his eye on the ball and if/when the D party investment he has made goes bust, he will provide a new direction.
Happy Memorial Day
just want to point out another angle
If she ends up in the White House and protected from prosecution for prior crimes, there is nothing - NOTHING - that would stop a continuing investigation into the Clinton Foundation, right up to Bill Clinton and many others being subject to criminal charges or loss of charity status. Revealing the full extent of pay-to-play may not sway her supporters, but if it ruins the Foundation and her husband, how would she be more than one-term?
Although I honestly think that all those trips he took on the pedophile sex plane must have resulted in some video, somewhere, that can be used to curry favor/blackmail. A person's private life is their own, but someone who behaves like a sex addict is open to all kinds of pressure. What would they do to keep things like that from being revealed?
Bring down the entire Democratic Party ?
’Tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wished.
</s(hakespeare)>
Seems pretty "down" to me already.
It didn't need Clinton for that.
The Clintons have been heavily involved
in the "downing" of the Democratic party for the past 25-30 years, if it comes to that.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
The Clinton wing MUST be reinstalled in the top seat of power
Or "it" all falls apart... And some mighty powerful politicans and their private partners may well be indicted for high crimes.
IMHO the Clinton emails are a sideshow and a window into the "shadow" state department the Clinton's have been running which has it's base in the Clinton family foundation.
The $$$ quid,pro quo was never in the donations to HRCs campaign... But in the $$ going through that foundation.
Follow the foundation money trail and you will find out why the party and the party politicans fight tooth and nail to make sure only an insider is elected.
Orwell was an optimist
I think of them as less of a side show. A better analogy would
be that the email debacle is just the Camels nose poking underneath the tent.
Sure, from inside the tent, if you never saw a camel you would be like, "Wow, that is an odd looking little creature, but nothing of significance." right up until we step out of the tent and see that what is on the other side is a whole lot bigger than that tiny little nose would lead one to believe.
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
About a good article that was deleted from a MSM website ...
There was a good article that was deleted from the (corporate, anti-citizen,) MSM website the Hufingtonpost that ended with the sentence:
"... the DNC itself may be in jeopardy of accusations of either being an accomplice or of being complicit in racketeering."
The article, Hillary Clinton to be Indicted on Federal Racketeering Charges, has been archived. While the article is short on sources, and may jump to conclusions in the text, and obviously presents conclusions as fact in the headline (which was probably written by an editor and not the author,) it is very much worth reading.
The archived article (which "doesn't exist and never happened") has now spawned numerous other articles, among the first was: Hillary Clinton to be Indicted on Federal Racketeering Charges
(I personally am still fond of the final sentence, and the parenthetical thought it leaves in my mind, that therefor the DNC is also engaged in an "ongoing criminal enterprise engaged in money laundering and soliciting bribes in exchange for political, policy and legislative favors ...")
Author: he has sources that Hillary will be indicted
The story that the article was taken down from huffpo is actually getting bigger than the original piece.
Snopes
breitbart *
*(sorry for using a putrid link, but it is part of the story)
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when we are afraid of the light.
--Plato
Regarding the "why"
I believe it was Oliver North who discovered that an electronic presence leaves tracks. He deleted emails not realizing they were recoverable from backups. I think the Clintons were trying to avoid a similar situation by thinking they had control of the server which could be truly wiped clean (digitally). However, I read somewhere (probably KFS) that their internet provider (?) kept backups which have been subpoenaed by the FBI.
Too late to salvage
Well, they could line up behind Bernie Sanders and embrace the mid-twentieth century version of the Party platform--and follow through on it. That would be pretty much the only way they could be "salvaged." Because otherwise--what's to salvage?
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Agreed.
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when we are afraid of the light.
--Plato
IMO, the PTB in the Democratic party
really do not care about the party as a whole. They only care about keeping their own individual gravy trains running and that means sucking up to big money.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
A"crazy" thought just occurred to me.
what if Hillary wins? Then the Rs take the senate in a landslide in '18 (because Hillary's favorables are lower than Cheney's) and the impeachment trial becomes a reality rather than an R fundraiser? It would be ironic as can be if the deciding vote in the senate were Bernie's. (assuming the VP wasn't a Democratic Agnew)
On to Biden since 1973
If Hillary gets the presidency, and the R's impeach her,
I bet that there would be a million voter march to cheer on Bernie (and the rest of the senate) to vote for her removal. But, it needs a 2/3 vote.
And from what has been found so far, it looks like the impeachment process could begin on day 1 of her (cough cough) presidency.
link
If she gets the presidency, impeachment would be our only ray of hope...
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when we are afraid of the light.
--Plato
And the superdels should consider that if they give us Hillary,
it would be better to support the opposition in the midterms: a vote for a dem would be a vote to save Hillary from impeachment and/or removal. Much better to do whatever is necessary to get her (and hubby) out of power.
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when we are afraid of the light.
--Plato
That would depend on the VP
We really don't want a double impeachment and President Paul Ryan.
Frankly, I see little chance of an impeachment. The possibility of the Rs getting 67 senators are pretty slim, even with a worst case Hillary presidency. Well, something could happen to make the Ds abandon her - like an email from Richard Blum saying "thanks for the contract, your unmarked bills are in the lobbyist's briefcase", naming a corporation mostly owned by the Chinese military. (actually a legitimate possibility) Then 5 million people would march with torches and pitchforks and the senate Ds would give a "patriotic" (cowardly) thumbs down. But I was pretty much joking when I suggested that Bernie could be the 67th vote.
On to Biden since 1973