Donald Trump is right about Hillary Clinton rigging the election; however she isn't the one sabotaging his campaign.
She's been giving him the best chance that he could ever have of becoming president by putting him up against a horrendous candidate.
Neither candidate could possibly have a chance of winning the general election unless they were up against an atrocious candidate on the other side; and on top of that they have to brainwash the majority of the public into believing they should accept the lesser of two evils argument every time, never voting for someone that intends to actually represent the majority.
The one sabotaging Donald Trump's campaign and ensuring that he has little or no chance of getting elected is clearly Trump himself.
Edit: As it turned out Hillary Clinton did give Donald Trump his only chance of winning, at least the Electoral Collage; however since the media only gave obsession coverage to candidates that supported Wall Street interests, even though the two leading candidates were under major civil or criminal investigation that should have disqualified them the results either war aren't legitimate and preparations are, as they should be, already under way to call for the impeachment of Donald Trump.
Calls for the impeachment of both nominees began even before they finished rigging the primaries, partly by obsessively rigging the coverage so that decent candidates couldn't get name recognition, to ensure that two incredibly corrupt candidates ran against each other. Thanks to an enormous amounts of grassroots pressure they gave Bernie Sanders enough coverage to do much better than expected; and if they didn't rig the primaries even more, through several methods, including not allowing independents to vote in the Democratic Primary in several states, putting the states giving Hillary an advantage first to make her seem inevitable, and even rigging at the polls in at least 18 states, as I reported previously, among other things.
If they had allowed him as their nominee without cheating he could have easily beat Trump, or any other Republican in a landslide.
At least it is obvious to progressives how horrendous Trump is but the mainstream media is trying to convince us to accept him, even though there's no evidence to indicate that he won't be a total disaster and has already provided enormous grounds for impeachment like Hillary!
And, as important, if not more, we need to totally reform the election process and take it out of the hands of those that gave us these two incredibly corrupt candidates and told us they were our only choice!
Could Trump Be Impeached Shortly After He Takes Office? 04/11/2016
‘Prediction professor’ who called Trump’s big win also made another forecast: Trump will be impeached 11/11/2016
This may sound like an absurd conspiracy theory; however this conclusion is based on public knowledge posted all over traditional media, which is increasingly becoming as absurd as many conspiracy theories and less rational than the best researched conspiracy theories. This is evidence of an increasingly common tactic that used to be used only for the most far fetched claims; they're releasing some reliable information through the most unreliable sources, and mixing it up with exaggerated claims and outright lies.
Intentionally or not, Donald Trump is playing the part of a radical and unreliable conspiracy theorist helping to create stereotypes about conspiracy theorists enabling them to dismiss the more reliable researchers that don't get nearly as much attention from the traditional media. However, for better or worse the official version of truth is becoming increasingly unreliable and it is obvious that it isn't much more reliable than the worst conspiracy theorists like Donald Trump or Alex Jones. Alex Jones who the mainstream media is trying to discredit more often, has never been my favorite researcher and a lot of his claims are seriously flawed; however, if people look closely, a few of his claims might occasionally be close to the truth.
Anyone that paid close enough attention to alternative media outlets might have known long ago that the election was blatantly being rigged for Hillary Clinton and the most obvious evidence wasn't something they did; but that they refuse to provide any coverage for potential candidates unless they collect enormous amounts of bribes thinly disguised as campaign contributions.
This ensures that only candidates that cater overwhelmingly to the richest people get the name recognition they need to get elected. It also ensures that they will spend far more time making promises that they never intend to keep to get votes; but, there is no need to keep these promises, since the candidates that really do address grassroots concerns never get the coverage they need.
If there was any doubt to people that relied mostly on traditional media that she was incredibly corrupt the Podesta E-Mails leaked by Wikileaks should remove those doubts, assuming they read them. Unfortunately, even though the traditional feels compelled to cover them they may not be covering some of the most important ones; and they're trying to spin them and convince the public they still have only two choices.
One thing that the traditional media has neglected to mention is that the leaked transcripts have been authenticated by at least three different Notary Publics, Carolyn T. Sullivan, Rita Persichetty, and Patricia T. Morrison. This doesn't guarantee, alone, that they're authentic but it does mean that if they wanted to either confirm or refute the legitimacy of these transcripts they could at least partially do so by either interviewing the Notary Publics or by asking the participants.
Not only have they not come right out and flatly denied that these are the accurate transcripts, but they haven't confirmed or denied that transcripts were actually taken and motorized. If they didn't make motorized transcripts then it would be easy to flatly deny these are them, so by not doing that they're at least implying that there are transcripts and that these could be them; not only could they be accurate but they almost certainly are.
Instead they use carefully crafted language to neither deny or confirm that they are legitimate which clearly implies they don't want the public to know for certain, and are trying to raise doubts without making claims that could potentially get them in legal trouble.
The E-Mails could also be authenticated or refuted, if they wanted, since it is all on their own accounts which are saved and each E-Mail provides times and dates to trace them.
The reason they're not doing this is almost certainly that many of them are accurate and even if they can refute a few they would be confirming many embarrassing ones which they consider damaging.
This means they think it's in their best interest to confuse the issue, essentially meaning they don't feel the public needs to know how they're being manipulated, when they cast their votes, which blatantly contradicts basic principles of democracy.
Amazingly Obama is threatening to launch counter cyber attacks to intimidate anyone that threatens to expose their own corrupt activities. It is hard to believe that he would threaten to bring back cold war tensions in retaliation for exposing corrupt activities but that is exactly what he's doing publicly, acting as if it is justified to keep corruption secret but not to expose it.
These E-mails disclose epidemic levels of fraud, including evidence that tehy knowingly financed Qatar and Saudi Arabia when they knew they were also funding ISIS; that Bill Clinton was collecting a million dollar donation from Qatar while Hillary was overseeing arms sales to them; that Hillary Clinton was collecting money for Haiti her brother was involved in scams to profit off of gold, and the money she did collect went to corporations that had political connections so Haitians didn't get the help the money was intended for; limiting debates for the benefit of Hillary; enormous amounts of collusion with many reporters; intimidation of anyone who didn't endorse her; and so many other things that I can't keep track of them all.
It discloses the fact that our elections are essentially a farce and they only allow rich people or those that represent rich people to get any coverage at all and it even shows that people like Michael Bloomberg or Lloyd Blankfein or Hillary Clinton would automatically get serious consideration for political campaigns or appointments as Secretary of State, while the rest of us couldn't get any coverage at all. In one of her speeches Hillary suggests that Lloyd Blankfein open a soup kitchen if he want to run in the future, getting brownie points for helping the poor; and Bloomberg has been covered as a viable candidate, and according to one of the E-Mails he might be interested in being Secretary of State, which he would be eligible for, not because of his qualifications but because he's rich and has political connections. Even when a grassroots candidate like Jill Stein gets an enormous amount of support from people that no longer rely on traditional media they refuse to give her more than a token amount of coverage, virtually rigging elections so that only members of the ruling class have a chance.
As I indicated before the obsession coverage of Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton and the absurd behavior of both seems to imply the possibility that Trump is running for president as a bizarre conspiracy to help Clinton get elected. There is no hard evidence to support this theory and it has problems, like the fact that they clearly know how to rig elections without resorting to such an absurd and fringe idea; but with their behavior it seems reasonable to some people.
However something almost as absurd may be true. As I reported in my previous article Impeachment Begins With Lesser Evil Choice Counter punch reported that their strategy plans from the beginning helped Elevate Trump even though they weren't specific for his candidacy. They said in one of their strategy PDFs, "We need to be elevating the Pied Piper candidates so that they are leaders of the pack and tell the press to [take] them seriously." The media gave Trump all the coverage he needed to win the nomination whether it was a result of collusion or not.
Since then further evidence has come out to support this absurd theory, including moving the Illinois primary so that moderate candidates wouldn't have a chance to come back from losses in the South where Trump did very well as indicated in the following E-Mail.
Fwd: Urgent: IL call 11/30/2014 "The overall goal is to move the IL primary out of mid March, where they are currently a lifeline to a moderate Republican candidate after the mostly southern Super Tuesday. IL was a key early win for Romney in 12."
The front loading of the primaries was done because they thought it would give advantages to conservatives on both sides of the aisle; and these E-Mails disclose that it was done intentionally as part of an effort to benefit those catering to establishment candidates.
As I indicated as long as they refuse to either confirm or refute any of these E-Mails most of us should assume that tehy're mostly accurate, or at least that they have something to hide, however there are still people that might doubt the legitimacy of these E-Mails. Even if that is the case there are an enormous number of scandals from additional sources including the traditional media and the court system and even the FBI, including the written questions that the Clinton campaign recently responded to by saying that they "can't recall" 21 time to 25 questions; and a recent story, Investigator Claims ‘No Agent Working The Case’ Agreed With Comey’s Decision to Let Clinton Off Hook 10/12/2016
And now the FBI has disclosed that Patrick Kennedy offered a 'quid pro quo,' which is what they've always said would be required to constitute a bribe, however according to, Chaffetz: New Clinton files contain allegations of 'quid pro quo' with FBI, 10/15/2016 and the Clinton follow up they now claim it doesn't apply even though it is written clearly in the FBI documents, on page 26, now released phrasing it just that way.
FBI declassified documents possibly alleging quid pro quo 10/17/2016
This is part of a pattern of behavior where one whistle blower after another exposes epidemic levels of corruption and there is little or no investigation into the corruption but thorough investigation into perceived crimes by the whistle blower, clearly intended to intimidate future whistle blowers, and indicating that the current political establishment has little or no legitimacy. Barack Obama may try to imply that all of us looking into this are like Donald Trump and should "quite whining" but it isn't even in their own best interests to sweep this under the rug, since the damage will pile up until it potentially explodes.
Jimmy Carter is one of the few public figures that has the courage to come out and say the truth. He's also admitted that we have a system that runs on "bribery" or "legalized bribery," as he updated it in his autobiography; that our elections wouldn't meat the criteria for his own inspections; and that the United States is already an oligarchy that no longer has a functioning democracy.
If we choose one of these two incredibly bad candidates it is inevitable;e that impeachment will begin almost immediately, and even though I almost never agree with the most extreme right wingers, they're right on this issue, although possibly for the wrong reasons. There is also a real possibility that it will incite violence especially with Donald Trump making false claims of rigged elections, ignoring the legitimate ones that he is actually helping out with. However even, though Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and many other politicians and media pundits are setting the stage to blame Trump if this happens, it will be as much their fault as his; since, they're the ones refusing to report on the legitimate corruption by the Clinton's and Democratic Party nearly as well as they could and should; and more importantly since they're the ones that refuse to provide any reasonably fair coverage for candidates that aren't incredibly corrupt.
If we had a media establishment that actually covers sincere candidates, instead of a consolidated media oligarchy of six conglomerates, then our political system wouldn't be nearly as corrupt!
This is just a minuscule amount of the corruption that has been exposed so far. The following are some additional stories exposing recent scandals followed by some of the most important E-Mails that I have come across; however they're not all of them and since more has been coming out and few people have had time to sort out the best ones, more is inevitable. In most cases where there are JPG pictures they're followed by links to the E-Mail, however a few of them might be right before; if there isn't a leak typing up and excerpt and searching in either Google or Wikileaks search engine should turn it up; and clicking on the picture will lead you to the source of the JPG.
A House Republican already wants to impeach Hillary Clinton 09/09/2016
Goldman Sachs paid speeches 01/23/2016
Hacked Emails Show Hillary Clinton Repeatedly Praised Wal-Mart in Paid Speeches 10/12/2016
Hillary Clinton Campaign Avoided Helping Single-Payer Ballot Measure, Emails Show 10/10/2016
Clinton WikiLeaks Update: Leaked Emails Show Hillary Told Climate Change Activists To ‘Get A Life’ 10/16/2016
WikiLeaks emails show Clinton campaign collected data to discredit Bill Clinton accuser 10/15/2016
Clinton Speech For Deutsche Bank Was Designed To Give Cover For Wall Street Coziness 10/14/2016
New WikiLeaks emails show influence of Univision chairman in Clinton campaign 10/09/2016
Wikileaks: Gabbard Received Spiteful Email From Fundraisers Over Sanders Support 10/14/2016
Eleven revelations from Wikileaks' hacked Clinton emails 10/14/2016
Wikileaks Proves FBI Covered Up Hillary Clinton’s Private E-mail Server To Protect President Obama 10/14/2016
Obama Tells CIA To Prepare For Cyber War With Russia 10/14/2016
Read Hillary Clinton’s Speech Touting ‘American Exceptionalism’ 08/31/2016
WikiLeaks: Clinton Called Common Core a 'Political Failure' in Speech 10/12/2016
Hacked email shows Clinton’s team pushing a negative story about Bernie Sanders’s appearance at posh fundraiser 10/13/2016
LATEST WIKILEAKS REVELATIONS 10/0/2016
Warning to Hillary Clinton 03/21/2016 It was not uplifting to learn in recent hours that problems with foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation continue, Hillary Clinton was still making paid speeches for hire this week, and Tony Rodham is hustling gold mining deals in Haiti.
Re: Elizabeth Warren/HRC Meeting 02/17/2015 The NYT (Jonathan Martin and Maggie Haberman) reached out this morning to tell us that they are aware of a meeting HRC had with Senator Warren at her house back in December. They plan to write imminently, so wanted everyone to be aware that this could pop soon.
Re: DRAFT: Women senators TPs 11/29/2015 We were debating to include the women donors stat, but wondering whether we should leave out since this is open press and Bernie does in fact have more donors
Re: Priorities USA 05/06/2015 Collusion with Super PAC?
Revised debate memo 04/27/2015
Re: Fwd: 02/09/2014 Craig, do you have a few minutes to talk? I heard the NYT is preparing a big story about President Clinton's personal life. I'm trying to understand what's going on. Can you call me? I'm at 202-841-7584.
Re: Hillary Clinton 2016: Bernie Sanders attack from her proxies 09/06/2016 "Clinton campaign is telling surrogates to attack Bernie Sanders and is so ashamed and embarrassed by their own talking points that they refuse to put in writing what > they are telling surrogates to say about why she should become president. I cannot think of anything more stupid and self-destructive for a campaign to do, especially for a candidate who has desperately low levels of public trust." Brent Budowsky to Podesta
Re: Fwd: Here's my address so please use it whenever you want! 04/03/2016 "Dear Ken, I so enjoyed seeing you yesterday and appreciate greatly your support and friendship over the years. Stay tuned---I'll get back to you in a few weeks. All the best, H" (Discussions about candidacy in February 2015 one moth before her final paid speech; she lied at debate when saying she didn't know she would run while making paid speeches.)
Re: 06/29/2015 I explored with Marc what the limitations would be on HFA's use of Governor Granholm if she were paid by Correct the Record.
Obama Says He Didn’t Know Hillary Clinton Was Using Private Email Address - NYTimes.com 03/08/2015
Re: Ben Jealous 01/28/2016 "why would he do that? i'm happy to reach out to him. Not sure he will care, but happy to try." Neera Tanden agreeing to "do an intervention" to prevent Ben Jealous from endorsing Bernie Sanders
Warning to Hillary Clinton 03/21/2015 It was not uplifting to learn in recent hours that problems with foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation continue, Hillary Clinton was still making paid speeches for hire this week, and Tony Rodham is hustling gold mining deals in Haiti.
Re: Pipelines, Energy and the Building Trades 02/09/2016 I think a broader statement would address the issue as well if she could put a finer point on what type of pipeline projects she supports. She has privately told the building trades that she >> does not oppose pipelines.
Re: You know what average Americans need? 08/11/2015 "I fucking hate that guy. Like I'd like to kick the shit out of him on twitter...but I know that is dumb." Neera Tanden to Podesta who said "An everyday American pompous law professor. The smugness of Larry Lessig"
Fwd: Fwd: Congratulations on Paris 12/13/2015 "Thanks Neera. Can you believe that doofus Bernie attacked it? Ben happy?" Podesta
Rescuing the free-trade deals - The Washington Post 06/15/2015 "Our challenge is less to increase globalization than to make the > globalization we have work for our citizens." ... Larry offers a sober basis for proceeding. ... H
Re: Yale Law School 20th Reunion 03/05/2016 Dems are really split between Bernie and Hillary and it gets nasty. Zephyr would be insane to come out in favor of one or the other at this point in the race.
Re: F.E.C. Can¹t Curb 2016 Election Abuse, Commission Chief Says There is a stalemate among the agency¹s six commissioners, who are perpetually locked in 3-to-3 ties along party lines because of a fundamental disagreement over the commission¹s mandate. 05/03/2015 I have no magic solutions other than execution. Elias may have some legal ideas to slow them down. We have 3 things we have to do. Raise the primary $ by expanding the bundler network. Get Priorities functional.
WJC NBC interview 05/02/2015 Not sure it will help, but I called Chuck Todd (as head of political unit) to let him know how outrageous and ludicrous this was and that our side of the house is watching to see how NBC handles this.
Re: Taxes/health records rollout 07/31/2015 The print stories on Cuba will largely be pre-written in the morning based on excerpts that we are providing tonight (Dan has gotten HRC signoff on them already for this purpose). The reporters will do some tiddying up of the stories as the speech is delivered/completed, but they will largely be filed as she goes on.
Re: Deutsche Bank 11/23/2016 I think we could come up with a vanilla characterization that challenges the idea that she sucked up to these folks in her appearances, but then use AP's raising of this to our advantage to pitch someone to do an exclusive by providing at least the key excerpts from this Deutsche Bank speech. In doing so, we could have the reporting be sourced to a "transcript obtained by [news outlet]" so it is not confirmed as us selectively providing one transcript while refusing to share others.
Re: Foreign registered agents 04/17/2015 Take the money!! ....
Marc made a convincing case to me this am that these sorts of restrictions don't really get you anything...that Obama actually got judged MORE harshly as a result. He convinced me. So...in a complete U-turn, I'm ok just taking the money and dealing with any attacks. Are you guys ok with that? ....
We really need make a policy decision on this soon - whether we are allowing those lobbying on behalf of foreign governments to raise $ for the campaign. Or case by case.
Hillary almost 100% negative 01/21/2016 And bluntly, it is getting to the point where every word she utters, there are more young people and first time participants in politics who support Bernie who would not support her in a general election no matter how hard I and others try to persuade them.....and whoever persuaded her that running for Obama's third term is the way to win a general election is far removed from American politics in 2016, and if they think she can constantly shift her position they do not understand the depth of distrust of her and the damage it does....
Re: wanting to help 02/16/2016 My public narrative is that I’m anti-establishment, whether it’s from writing the organic law, leading the Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food effort at USDA, or from many other efforts. My guess is that I’m an appealing character for the kind of people energized by Bernie, but who could be steered, with the right approach, to the “progressive who gets things done.’
Re: AfAm donors 01/22/2016 Elite donors > are the ambassadors of the campaign. People are taking their cue from them.
Two follow up items 07/15/201 I wanted to get your blessing to move forward with the DNC joint account. We didn't get a chance to cover that on our call.
No comments:
Post a Comment