Wednesday, March 29, 2017
Democrats In Total Denial About Blatant Election Rigging
The behavior of numerous Democrats in the leadership, acting as if there was not problem with the content of the E-mails that were leaked, is so absurd it boggles the mind. I can't help but wonder what they could possibly expect to accomplish with this, or if they're collectively insane or delusional enough to believe their own spin.
Or if they're so delusional that they could expect more than a small fraction of the public not to see right through it.
Efforts to blame the Russians are absurd and logically flawed especially when you consider a few fundamental basics that were available to the public before they even leaked, and these fundamentals aren't even secret, although there is an enormous amount of propaganda that has been distracting a shocking percentage of the public that hardly even thinks things through.
In order to have a viable chance to get elected president the first thing any candidate has to do is get name recognition; and since the media was consolidated into six oligarchies under the Clinton administration that means that only candidates covered by those oligarchies have a chance. This consolidation began under the Reagan administration and both the Bush and Obama administration attempted to increase consolidation but faced enormous grassroots opposition which was only covered widely through alternative media outlets or brief reports in the traditional media, that were quickly forgotten.
On top of that in the late eighties the debate process was taken away from grassroots organization including the League of Women Voters and handed to the Commission of Presidential Debates, which works with the DNC and RNC to exclude all other candidates when possible by requiring fifteen percent in polls controlled by the media that refuses to cover grassroots candidates.
This enables the six oligarchies controlling the media to work with the DNC, RNC and Commission of Presidential Debates to restrict the viable candidates to those they approve of. These efforts to limit choices enabled them to ensure that many other candidates including Jill Stein, Gary Johnson and almost certainly many that no one ever even heard of will have a chance.
If they really did want to rig the election against Donald Trump or for Hillary Clinton they've demonstrated that they could and would do just that. They ensure that only a small percentage of the public can ever be considered; and even if the Russians did do some manipulating they couldn't have come close to doing nearly as much damage as the establishments controlling the election process no matter what they do.
They certainly couldn't have arranged for Trump to win without help from the Mainstream media giving him obsessive coverage throughout the campaign while refusing to cover grassroots candidates.
The Russians certainly couldn't have forced the mainstream media to only cover candidates that were under criminal investigation and down play efforts to report epidemic levels of voter irregularities all over the country, which were reported at grassroots level throughout the primary.
The mainstream media began presenting Hillary Clinton as the inevitable front runner in 2013, if not in 2009; and never provided adequate coverage for many if any candidates to challenge her since. The entire political establishment endorsed her before any voters had their say even though she had enormous negative poll ratings due to her epidemic levels of scandals that go back decades. This enabled Trump to beat her; however there is no way that he could have done that if the media hadn't given him obsession coverage or abstained from giving other candidates fair coverage.
Bernie Sanders had much more support but clearly the entire system was rigged against him.
However that doesn't mean that the E-mails aren't relevant since they do confirm what well informed people already knew, and fills in some of the blanks about the discussions behind the scenes that helped rig elections, and prevent Bernie Sanders or any other candidate from getting a reasonable chance. Yet that doesn't stop them from lining up one pundit after another to come out and claim there is noting to the claims of election rigging, including Glen Caplin who said the following on the Rachel Maddow show:
This is amazing, both sides claim that the existence of leaks about their own wrong doing are the problem not their own crimes; yet both sides take the opposite position when it comes to the other side. The Podesta leak took place on the same day the Access Hollywood video was leaked and Trump claims that that leak along with more that have taken place since he took office is the problem and that no one should consider the content which he calls "locker room talk" even though it wasn't in a locker room and even if it was it would still be outrageous.
The leaks provided enormous amounts of information about psychological manipulation and collusion with the media and even attempts to incite violence for political reasons. I went into much more of this while the were happening and will provide links below for anyone that is starting to forget some of the details, which is understandable since there are so many things that were disclosed that I don't see how anyone can remember them all.
Donna Brazile has been even more audacious in her denials and outright lies sometimes mixed in with selective admissions accompanied by incredibly bad spin like the following statements:
She of course, didn't mention the obvious and public efforts by the mainstream media and political establishment that I mentioned above; like the rest of the political establishment they're hoping that if they never mention it and repeat their bad spin over and over again the complacent majority will fall for their scams. Her claim that she was trying to make all candidates look good was a blatant lie, as indicated by the leaks and insults that were public when there was a scandal about them letting their firewall down and blaming Bernie supporters when they informed them about it. Threre were some uses by one Bernie staffer at that time but he was quickly dismissed and the leaks showed that the efforts to rig the primaries against Bernie Sanders were far worse than what that one staffer did.
The DNC and Podesta leaks exposed the fact that the establishment candidates were far more concerned with collecting money to pay their own salaries and come up with effective propaganda to deceive the public than to address the concerns of the voters, making the Democratic Party part of the corporate kleptocracy that enabled trump to get elected. Many people have argued that Trump is even worse, and he often seems that way, but a shockingly large percentage of the public has been falling for the Democratic propaganda and more recognized that something is wrong and voted against them, for Trump. The clear advantage of Trump is that he's no longer even doing a good job pretending to represent the public, nor for that matter is the Democratic Party; however with Trump as the greater evil they've accepted democrats as the resistance even though they obviously aren't.
At least it should be clear that anyone paying attention with reasonable thinking skills must know that the entire process is a sham with both Parties controlled by incredibly corrupt corporations.
Amazingly Tom Perez admitted, perhaps by accident that the election was rigged, before "walking it back" and coming up with a blatant denial that has no credibility if you look closely. However the media is hoping that no one will remember and aren't reporting it, after an initial low profile disclosure.
Fortunately the alternative media has kept a record of it including the following excerpts from an Intercept article by Glen Greenwald:
The entire political establishment is coming up with excuses so pathetic that only the most complacent would believe it. And they seem to know it, which seems to be why they're relying on an extreme lesser of two evils argument and pretending to be the Resistance against Trump even though they've had plenty of chances to implement a progressive agenda supported by the grassroots. Nancy Pelosi even claims that she wants Single Payer now and has mentioned it at least a couple times before, briefly; however this is an obvious lie for political reasons, like her jumping up and kicking off her heals recently. She's been in power for decades, and the reason that they elect her to lead the Democrats is because she does the best job collecting money for corporations that want preferential treatment from them. If she wanted Single Payer as she now claims she could have been speaking out in favor of it for well over a decade educating the public about the deceptive propaganda given by the political establishment.
However instead of doing that she's been joining in on the propaganda and even famously told us that we had to pass the supposedly Affordable care Act, which was written with help from insurance companies donating to the Democratic Party, before we could know what was in it.
She now claims that it is outrageous for the Republicans to pass their bill in secrecy and rush it through; but she obviously had no such qualms when she did the same thing for her campaign donors.
How many people are going to give her the credit for standing up to the Republican's without remembering she did the same thing?
We would have to be complete idiots to believe that she wanted Single Payer after that.
Sadly there are a shocking percentage of the public that are jumping on the pseudo-resistance movement being led by rhetoric from the Democrats pretending to stand up to the corporations financing them; however the Indivisible protests have turned against them as well in at least a couple cases including protests against both Dianne Feinstein (This article opens up making Feinstein look happy with the protests; however it is clear shortly after that they aren't so happy with her. People that glance at headlines might miss this and believe they support her.) and Debbie Stabenow.
If enough people wake up and educate each other then there's a chance they can get real grassroots reform but if the political establishment has their way then they'll make things even worse than they are and continue destroying the economic and political system until it even starts destroying them selves before they act.
How much damage can they do before there are riots in the streets? Actually occasionally there already are, although they're usually only local; but it can get much worse if the political establishment doesn't stop behaving so extreme.
Edit 03/29/2017: While I was finishing this article Hillary Clinton was already speaking out again demonstrating even more blatant denial of the problems within the Democratic Party and within hours of that Debbie Wasserman Schultz made it even worse when she said, “Respectfully, to Senator Sanders, we are already a grassroots party. I mean, if we were not, we would not have been able to help bring down the absolutely abhorrent health care repeal bill… It’s actually more like semantics. We all agree that we should be and we are a grassroots party that focuses on making sure that we can help people reach the middle class.”
This was in response to Sanders statement, “The Democratic Party today, programmatically, in terms of how it does business, has failed. I mean, the evidence is obvious. It’s not just that we’ve lost the White House and the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House. We’ve lost 900 legislative seats in the last 8 or 9 years.” Debbie Wasserman Schultz on Sanders’s Criticisms of Democrats: We’re Already a Grassroots Party 03/2/2017 However she doesn't even address his comments about losing so many elections nor does she address many of the other problems including her support of Pay Day lenders and many other issues over opposition to Grassroots. Nor does she mention that there was an enormous grassroots opposition to the Republicans that aren't necessarily supportive of her or Hillary.
Hillary Clinton's statements, Hillary Clinton Says She's Back: 'I Will Never Stop Speaking Out' 03/28/2017 were also just as phony and staged; she appeared before a friendly audience which were routinely staged during the campaign and they cheered her on; however it is virtually guaranteed that this was as phony as her campaign events; and if this applause was remotely sincere either at this speech or during the campaign there would have been no way she could have ever lost to Donald Trump.
I did not scream at the TV when I first saw this, since I've become so accustomed to it after watching for way to damn long but I can guarantee that there were almost certainly people all over the country doing just that.
I did not follow one of Elvis's old habits and pull out a shot gun and shoot the TV because it was so full of shit; but I can't rule out the possibility that someone might have done so or at least felt like it they were so outraged.
The outrage was instant on Twitter and other social media outlets which was so predictable.
How could they possibly not know this latest speech and total denial would only inspire even more denial?
If they wanted to know it would happen they could have and would have.
For some tweets to links about Podesta and DNC E-Mails or other election articles see, Blatant election rigging was public long before #PodestaLeaks or #DNCLeaks Blaming Russia for that is insane!