Showing posts with label Hillery Clinton. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hillery Clinton. Show all posts

Thursday, March 12, 2020

Southern Strategy To Rig Elections Continues!



The "Southern Strategy" was made it famous by the GOP and Lee Atwater made it clear in a leaked 1981 leaked interview that was based on racism. However, it's not limited to the GOP and the leadership of the Democratic Party has been using their own version of it for at least this election and the 2016 election with their front loading of Southern states, and possibly much earlier with variations helping both Bill Clinton and Biden's earlier campaigns.

Another major issue that the mainstream media has routinely ignored is what causes the South and many elsewhere, to be so racist; there is good research that shows this has it's roots in early education practices, often including abusive upbringing, including the use of corporal punishment and emotional intimidation of small children, that teaches blind obedience to authority, which makes children more susceptible to indoctrination and racism when they grow up, and less able to develop critical thinking skills that enable them to recognize why this isn't in their own best interests, let along the best interests of the minorities that are being targeted by racists people.

However, when it comes to political research by campaign workers they don't seem to discuss this at all, that I know of, and may not fully understand it instead studying how to manipulate the voters as if the way they became that way is an unsolvable mystery. Occasionally, like the following interview with Lee Atwater they show how they're trying to manipulate people without seeming racists:
Atwater: As to the whole Southern strategy that Harry Dent and others put together in 1968, opposition to the Voting Rights Act would have been a central part of keeping the South. Now [Reagan] doesn't have to do that. All you have to do to keep the South is for Reagan to run in place on the issues he's campaigned on since 1964 [...] and that's fiscal conservatism, balancing the budget, cut taxes, you know, the whole cluster...

Questioner: But the fact is, isn't it, that Reagan does get to the Wallace voter and to the racist side of the Wallace voter by doing away with legal services, by cutting down on food stamps?

Atwater: Y'all don't quote me on this. You start out in 1954 by saying, "Nigger, nigger, nigger." By 1968 you can't say "nigger"—that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me—because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this," is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "Nigger, nigger."

Democrats have been complaining about Republicans using racism for political gain, rightfully, but they often use more subtle versions of it at the same time while pretending to defend minority rights. Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton have been among the worst offenders, and they get a lot of support from the democrats in southern states. Hillary Clinton was famous for her claim that "We can talk about why they ended up that way, but first we have to bring them to heel," at a time when the academic world, or at least the academics the media and political establishment were willing to cover, was making paranoid predictions about super-predators. These predictions turned out to be false, and many people familiar with the academic research would know that despite the media coverage at that time the academic world wasn't in complete agreement about this conclusions, and the best researchers still don't get as much media coverage as they deserve.

Joe Biden was also a leading supporter of get tough on crime solutions that ignored the long term causes of violence, like poverty or lack of education or day care. There were some small improvements on these issues, at least in parts of the country where they had better informed people pushing for them, but not nearly as much as they needed. They both also catered to corporate interests, and benefited from front loading of Southern states during the primaries, especially Hillary Clinton. This was an issue brought up at the time, but most people didn't recognize the importance of it; with California on super Tuesday, with Bernie winning it, it wasn't quite as bad in 2020; however, there have been as many voter irregularities, if not more this year than 2016 when I posted Can Hillary Clinton win without cheating? listing extensive amount of voter suppression throughout the campaign, more that were reported later, which may not have been included in that article; I haven't posted quite as extensive a list of examples of voter suppression for the 2020 campaign yet, but I listed some below and will follow up with more. There's good reason to suspect that it's as bad, if not worse; and this is on top of the overwhelming amount of preferential treatment they give to establishment candidates with their media coverage.

Shortly before their primary Joe Biden said something like, "South Carolina is more representative of the rest of the country" than the three states that he had lost badly prior to that, which isn't even a good lie; however he routinely tells people what ever he seems to think will serve his best political interests even though it means contradicting himself over and over again, like many other traditional politicians, including Hillary Clinton. what he didn't remind the public of, nor has the mainstream media reminded the public in this election cycle is the fact that South Carolina has a long history of using dirty tricks there, which often turn out to be very effective, including,

the 2000 whisper campaign that alleged that John McCain’s adopted daughter, who is from Bangladesh, was in fact his own illegitimate African-American child; the 2008 Mormon-themed greeting cards that purported to be from Mitt Romney; the accusations that 2010 gubernatorial candidate Nikki Haley had an affair. “More-seasoned veterans might reach back to the 1978 phone calls pointedly ‘asking’ voters’ opinions about the faith of a Jewish candidate for Congress,” Crowley continued. “Or the curious case two years later of the reporter who asked a Democratic congressional candidate about his history of ‘psychotic treatment.'” This Is How South Carolina Got Its Reputation for Dirty Politics 01/21/2012

This isn't limited to South Carolina, of course, Jesse Helms's famous hands ad was in North Carolina, and the Willie Horton ad was a national campaign, although it appealed to people that were more likely to be racists or paranoid, which is more common in the South or among people brought up in strict authoritarian manners, often with abusive upbringing teaching blind obedience to authority. Many of these claims have little or no credibility, yet some people believe them anyrway in socme cases even when they're debunked. One of the most brazen claims was in 2012 when Rick Santorum claimed "elderly people in the Netherlands don't go to the hospital" or, if they do, wear bracelets saying "do not euthanize me," was was widely debunked at the time, (The Dutch Euthanize Their Elderly, and Other Scary GOP Lies About Europe 03/14/2012) yet many of his core supporters stuck with him and even if they didn't continue believing that obvious lie many of them trusted him on many other lies.

The lies that many of the most extreme right wing Republicans usually seem much more obvious and irrational than those believed by establishment Democrats that seem to trust candidates like Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, and are so obvious that many might wonder how anyone can possibly believe them; but when demagogues fight each other people raised in authoritarian ways are more likely to support the person with the toughest rhetoric, even if it doesn't match their record. This enabled Biden and Clinton to attract people by simply attacking the threat, that happens to be right wing extremists, without addressing many of the most important issues.

However, in 2016 Hillary Clinton had her own share of incredibly obvious lies even if they weren't quite as extreme and now Joe Biden is doing the same thing, including his lies about opposing the Iraq war shortly after it began, his lies about not repeatedly trying to cut social security, his lies about being in the civil rights movement, including a claim that he was arrested in South Africa while trying to meet with Nelson Mandela. By contrast, Bernie Sanders didn't have any "pants on fire fact checks by Politifact, while Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump all had at least five, with Trump taking the lions share with one hundred and eleven, personally, I think they were biased against Bernie Sanders, on one occasion making a issue because he said 42% of Walmart associates are African American, when it's technically 42% are "people of color." In all fairness one of Hillary Clinton's false claims that there were 270 mass shootings where "four or more people are killed" is also a understandable misunderstanding, since the media is constantly redefining this without adequately telling the public, they now refer to a mass shootings where four or more people are shot, not necessarily killed, but most people don't realize this; I might have made the same mistake before I figured out what they were doing.

But why are so many people believing such incredibly bad and obvious lies? One of the biggest reasons, if not the biggest reason is early childhood education methods when children develop critical thinking skills as I went into in several articles including Dobson’s Indoctrination Machine and more recently Must We Hate? Must We Beat Children? Using abusive and emotional child rearing tactics impairs the development of critical thinking skills that enable them to recognize incredibly obvious lies when they grow up and lead to a population that's more likely to go along with the crowd, even when they crowd is doing foolish things, voting against their own interests, or supporting demagogues or candidates pushed by mainstream media despite their incredibly bad records.

Joe Biden is repeating another pattern that Hillary Clinton started in 2016 as well by winning the primaries mainly in states that he can't win in the General election, which is part of the reason Hillary was defeated; not to mention the outrage about efforts to rig the nomination in her favor, which is also happening again this year. The southern strategy is a major part of efforts to rig the nomination again, which may inevitably enable another term for Trump, if it succeeds, although voter suppression isn't limited to the South, but there's probably more of it there, and they can also more effectively manipulate voters that were indoctrinated in an authoritarian manner, than in other states, especially older voters since child rearing tactics have been improving over the decades; which is a major part of the reason why Bernie Sanders does so well with younger voters, when they're allowed to vote.

Corporal punishment also teaches violence later in life, as I pointed out in Research On Preventing Violence Absent From National Media the nineteen states that still allow corporal punishment in schools and presumably use it more at home as well, mostly in the South, for religious reasons, have much higher murder rates, on average than the thirty-one that don't. In 2018 those nineteen states had just over 32% higher murder rates and for the past ten years before 2018 it's been between 22% and 31%, indicating that the difference is expanding. These nineteen states, on average also have higher rates of poverty, income inequality, pollution, and other social problems with lower rates for literacy and access to higher education.

The states that are most likely to support corporal punishment in schools and have higher murder rates, are mostly Republican states and they're the ones that both Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton do best in, while the states that Bernie Sanders won are the ones with lower rates of violence and other social problems, presumably because they do better at recognizing the causes of them and preventing them. I pointed this out previously in 2016 in Bernie Sanders Wins Least Violent States At a glance it's clear that the states voting for Bernie Sanders this time as well are on average far less violence than those voting for Joe Biden.

Children that are raised in a non-violent manner by parents that are much less likely to get emotional and scare them develop much better critical thinking skills enabling them to recognize fraudulent marketing scams or political propaganda; often voting against their own best interests, for people of all races; although, minorities get the worst of it. This is why there's more pollution and income inequality in the south among other problems; poor while people routinely are taught to blame minorities for taking their jobs or other problems. And poor minorities are often more concerned with opposing racist white people of their own class, when it's usually the wealthier people responsible for most of their problems; part of this is because if there is physical confrontation, wealthy people are more likely to isolate themselves in gated communities and have security while leaving the lower classes to fight among themselves while they rig the economy against people of both races.

Regrettably, the ruling class has taught the working class to hold each other accountable through violence, even though it's not in the best interests of either race; and both blacks and whites have come to think of this as their own idea even though this isn't true, especially for African Americans. In "All God's Children" By Fox Butterfield 2008 he traces the background of Willie Bosket, his father, and several generations before them going back to when slavery was still legal, and the use of extreme corporal punishment was taught to everyone, including teaching African Americans to use it against each other.

In fairness all races used this in the past but before African American's were kidnapped and sold into slavery they weren't taught to use nearly as severe use of abusive corporal punishment and as it was passed down from generation to generation minorities came to believe it was their idea without realizing it was taught to their ancestors by white slave owners recently when a Catholic school, Saint Augustine, decided to ban corporal punishment, it was the parents of African Americans that objected, nine years ago, while the Church, at least at the local level working with social workers, were encouraging a ban on it, according to St. Augustine High School corporal punishment debate is about more than the paddle. Presumably this is because they weren't aware of the history behind it and that going back hundreds of years, it was reversed, it was the Church and White Slave owners that recommended that children be disciplined using violence, as described in the Bible.

At that time the Vatican still wasn't opposed to all use of Corporal punishment; it wasn't until about two years ago where they quietly eliminated all corporal punishment in organizations affiliated with the Church. Presumably in 2011, when this was banned it was under pressure from local social workers that led them to ban it. An it's also likely that the reason they did this so quietly is because they wanted to avoid discussion about their past behavior, and how it led to the sex scandals and other social problems.

Stacey Patton also went into the history of how African American's were taught to use corporal punishment going back to slave days in That Mean Old Yesterday: An Abused Girl's Fight for Survival 2012, although I haven't read this book entirely, but what I have read of her indicates that she's quite credible including the following excerpt from a more recent book discussing the "Baltimore Mom" that became famous for several months after beating her son to get him away from protests against the police:

Spare the Kids: Why Whupping Children Won't Save Black America By Stacey Patton 2017

A Baltimore teacher told Gawker, Those kids were set up, they were treated like criminals before the first brick was thrown.”

“These kids are just angry. These are the same kids [the cops] pull up on the corner for no reason,” Sandra Almond-Cooper, the president of the Mondawmin Neighborhood Improvement Association, told the Baltimore Sun.

By the time Graham appeared on the scene, cameras were roiling but she didn’t care. Her goal was to get her son out of the chaos and back home safely. When she made eye contact with him, she went ballistic.

“Get the fuck over here!” Graham screamed as she repeatedly hit Singleton upside the head.

Once unmasked, young Michael backed away from his mother, subdued, with a look of humiliation in his eyes. The fifty-second video of the incident was viewed millions of times. The mother and son suddenly became media darlings, appearing on CNN, The View, and the The Today show. As Graham paraded her son on the media circuit, it was akin to giving a child a whupping and making him come out to say hello to company. And America ate it up. Oprah Winfrey gave Graham a thumbs-up seal of approval to drive home the narrative that good mothering requires physical force. The New York Post encouraged more black mothers to beat the protest out of their kids with the headline: “Forget the National Guard … Send in the Moms.” p.25 additional excerpts

At the height of the “Baltimore Mom” controversy, I appeared on a CNN segment with Illinois congressman Bobby Rush, a former Black Panther who took to the House floor with a large photo of Graham hitting her son and made a “special appeal to African American mothers.” He described the picture as an “image of strong black mother” giving her son “a love whupping – to snatch him back from the senseless violence that’s currently plaguing the city of Baltimore.” Rush added, “As this picture demonstrates, mothers can and mothers must be the mobilizing force to take back our street.” He then asked mothers across the country to show solidarity with Graham by wearing yellow.

........ The public’s view is that she saved her son’s life that day. I, however, was adamant that her tough-love approach and literal preemptive strikes against Michael do nothing to break the cycles of violence in our homes and communities. The widespread celebration, in fact, had little to do with what was good for Graham, her son, and the black community as a whole. The reason she was being worshiped by the news media was not because of genuine understanding of her fear and motivation for hitting her son, but because she symbolized the tradition of keeping black male bodies in check. Never mind that her violence against her son may only incite his anger and frustration because it prevented him from resisting the systems of oppression in his community.

Six months after she made the headlines, CBS News caught up with Graham and found her not living the life of a hero. She and her children were in danger of losing their home. They were struggling to put food on the table and the mother and son still lived in fear of the violence ravaging the neighborhood. p.27 additional excerpts


I'm glad they gave her a little bit of time on CNN when that happened, but I didn't see her, nor did I see any other good academic researchers that know as much as her and much more than traditional media and celebrities like Bobby Rush and Charles Barkley, and I did see the obsession coverage glorifying the "Baltimore Mom" for beating her kids. they glorified her repeating uninformed opinions over and over again without reporting on good research. this is just one of dozens of articles I've written citing good academics like James Garbarino, Barbara Coloroso, Alice Miller, Philip Greven, Murray Straus and many more that have written many good books on the subject, yet coverage of their views is only briefly brought on mainstream media and quickly forgotten enabling politicians and pundits to recommend the least credible research.

One of the few articles I came across that did cite some opposition was Mom of the year? Baltimore woman isn't a hero to all 04/29/2020 where they reported "'Tired of hearing about this Baltimore "Mom of the Year,"' said a tweet under the handle @DaAnGrYASiAN. 'If she raised her son better, she wouldn't have needed to do that.'" This person seems well informed, although she didn't provide additional details, or at least the media didn't repeat it, making it look like a difference of opinion where they're in the minority. However, there's plenty of good academic work some of which I've cited here, including Stacy Patton's two books, and many more that I've pointed out in the past, showing that this child rearing tactic teaches more violence, not less, and the high rates of murder and poverty in Baltimore confirms this. Five years after the media gave all that obsession coverage recommending that parents beat their kids to keep them in line the murder rates in Baltimore have broken an all time record instead of going back down. They had one year in 1993 with slightly more murders, but a much lower population so the murder rate in 1993 was probably only about 45 compared to 55.9 in 2019.

These same child rearing tactics are often used by the police and their parents before them teaching them to blindly obey orders and respond to all threats with violence, often when not necessary. This doesn't protect the public or the police, the same cities with the highest murder rates also have the more police violence and shootings killing civilians, innocent or not. And this isn't the only major contributing cause of violence, I wnet into many more contributing causes of it in a series of my own studies, including other peer reviewed one in each subject in Politicians increase crime; Grass roots efforts reduce crime; Politicians steal the credit including poverty, income inequality, gambling, gun control, insurance, and several other factors, and found significant evidence that when local communities are more informed about good academic work and address the issues despite lack of media coverage they can reduce the crime rates in their own communities.

I hesitate to make a big issue out of the clothes that the "Baltimore Mom" was wearing since it shouldn't much of an issue but Bobby Rush seemed to make in issue out of it citing it positively, recommending that people wear yellow to honor her; however, poverty is one of the other leading causes of violence, and epidemic levels of fraudulent marketing contributes to that including those torn jeans which are considered stylish. falling for incredibly bad marketing scams is also more common for children raised in authoritarian manners as I pointed out in How Much Impact Does Deceptive Marketing to Kids Have On Violence? which focuses on sneaker killings and black Friday riots, but also explains how marketing, starting with little children is a form of indoctrination and leads to increased poverty, fraud and other social problems, also reducing development of critical thinking skills, although I don't expect it's as important as stopping child abuse.

In order to teach better critical thinking skills so that voters won't fall for incredibly bad political propaganda we have to teach better child rearing tactics so that outrageous corruption is easily recognized and not accepted by voters, even with appeals to emotion. Voters have fallen for incredibly obvious demagogues like Trump who treats anyone that disagrees with him by insulting them; and Biden isn't much if any better as indicated when he took a tantrum a few days ago as described in Joe Biden Physically Threatens Voter, Curses and Jabs Finger in His Face 03/10/2020; another incident a few months ago ‘You’re a damn liar, man!’ – Joe Biden blasts Iowa voter, calls him ‘fat’ after man repeats Ukraine smear 12/05/2019; and many more examples where he's yelled at voters disagreeing with them often telling them to "vote for someone else" routinely treating voters with disrespect, yet he's still supposedly the front runner.



Why would anyone consider someone so obnoxious?

Because when they're raised in abusive manners they learn to tolerate this kind of behavior and often adopt it themselves, thinking it's the appropriate way of addressing issues.

We need far more discussion about how early child rearing practices impacts kids ability to participate in the Democratic process. Fortunately, even though few people have pointed this out, modern child rearing tactics are much better than past tactics, which I have no doubt is why many young people do a much better job recognizing political scams than older people who support Joe Biden, Donald Trump, and in 2016 Hillary Clinton.



For some additional articles on this subject see the following; and after that, as I said, I compiled a lot of articles reporting on voter suppression for a future post of my own, but for now I'll just list the links below, showing that there's an extensive amount of voter fraud going on:

Baltimore nears record homicide rate as violence surges 12/26/2019

Baltimore murder rates

Baltimore sees second deadliest year on record in 2019, homicide clearance rate under 40 percent (deadliest year on record, based on the murder rate, since the population was lower in 1993, only year with slightly more murders.) 01/01/2020

Exclusive: Lee Atwater’s Infamous 1981 Interview on the Southern Strategy 11/13/2012

Sanders’s Not-So-Southern Strategy 04/15/2016

1992 Democratic Party presidential primaries

Results of the 2016 Democratic Party presidential primaries

Maddow Piously Labels Jesse Helms' 'Hands' Ad as 'Almost Evil' 06/03/2014

The dirty truth about dirty tricks in South Carolina politics 03/11/2016 So what pray tell was so shocking that would-be McCainiacs walked away from the celebrated POW and Arizona senator? Only the worst possible thing you would ever say about a politician in South Carolina: John McCain fathered a black child.

This Is How South Carolina Got Its Reputation for Dirty Politics 01/21/2012

The Dutch Euthanize Their Elderly, and Other Scary GOP Lies About Europe 03/14/2012 Most recently, leading GOP candidate Rick Santorum claimed that 10 per cent of the Netherlands' deaths were from euthanasia, 5 percent forced, and that "elderly people in the Netherlands don't go to the hospital" or, if they do, wear bracelets saying "do not euthanize me," all of which is false.

How the southern strategy brought the rebel yell to the White House 10/15/2013

Bernie Sanders Wins Least Violent States

Can Hillary Clinton win without cheating?

PolitiFact: Joe Biden

PolitiFact: Bernie Sanders

PolitiFact: Donald Trump

PolitiFact: Hillary Clinton

Bernie Sanders: Joe Biden claims in a new ad that he has always protected Social Security. That’s patently false. He can’t hide 40 years of working with Republicans to cut Social Security. Here are the facts. 1/8 03/07/2020

Corporal punishment in black communities: Not an intrinsic cultural tradition but racial trauma CYF News | April 2017 By Stacey Patton, PhD

Understanding black America and the spanking debate 09/21/2014

That Mean Old Yesterday: An Abused Girl's Fight for Survival By Stacey Patton 2012

Spare the Kids: Why Whupping Children Won't Save Black America By Stacey Patton 2017

Spanking Is Part of Black Culture 08/14/2011 by LaShaun Williams

Blacks Don’t Have a Corporal Punishment Problem 09/19/2014 Americans do. But when blacks exhibit the same behaviors as others, it becomes part of a greater black pathology.

All God's Children: The Bosket Family and the American Tradition of Violence By Fox Butterfield 2008

2016 United States elections

Why does Joe Biden keep losing his cool with voters? 01/29/2020

Says Joe Biden “attacked voters this primary,” saying “damn liar,” “full of s---” and “dog-faced pony soldier.” 03/12/2020

‘Biden Is Gonna Kick Ass Here Because This Is a Normal Place’ 02/28/2020 He laughed. “By the way, I wonder what the incest rate is in Iowa. I bet it’s high! Really high. Like any part of Appalachia where nobody can get in.”

Joe Biden Has Built a Career on Betraying Black Voters 03/05/2020



The following are a long list of articles about voter suppression or fraud; I'll be following this up with more in another Blog Post that will include any additional reports; but there's already enough to show it's an epidemic problem:







THREAD Downwards arrow We know that the Establishment is doing everything they can to stop Bernie Sanders. But this apparently includes actual election fraud. That is a bold allegation, but it is based in facts as reported on election night by TDMS Research. 1/8 03/05/2020 In the 2020 Massachusetts primary election results differed significantly from the results projected by the exit poll. As in the 2016 Massachusetts primary between candidates Sanders and Clinton, disparities greatly exceed the exit poll’s margin of error.

South Carolina 2020 Democratic Party Primary Exit Poll Versus Reported Vote Count 03/02/2020

New Hampshire 2020 Democratic Party Primary Exit Poll Versus Reported Vote Count 02/17/2020

The computerized vote counts from the South Carolina Democratic primary also differed significantly from the exit poll, yet again greatly exceeding its margin of error 03/05/2020

Was Maine’s Democratic Party Behind a Statewide Effort to Prevent Sanders Voters from Getting Ballots? 03/05/2020

U.N. is needed to oversee Democratic primaries due to election fraud 03/10/2020

Lee Camp Redacted: [11] Exit Poll Expert Proves Election Fraud w/ Richard Charnin 03/05/2020

Super Tuesday Biden Victories Questioned by Election Watchers 03/10/2020

In a Dark Time, the Eye Begins to See’: The Bernie 2020 Campaign Represents a Fight That Must Continue 03/11/2020

The Coming Freak-out Over the California Primary 02/27/2020

Bernie Sanders Calls Long Lines at Michigan Polling Places an “Outrage” 03/11/2020

Greg Palast tag/vote-suppression

Brian Ross Honors Palast for Reports on Georgia Purge 02/21/2020

Super Tuesday Results Demonstrate That Caucuses Suppress the Vote 03/05/2020

Analysis: Messing with elections messes with democracy 03/07/2020 Rick Hasen has written a book — “Election Meltdown: Dirty Tricks, Distrust and the Threat to American Democracy” — that went public Tuesday.

Civil rights group demands Texas Secretary of State address Super Tuesday voting issues 03/05/2020 AUSTIN — A Texas civil rights group called the secretary of state, Texas’ top election official, to work with local officials to resolve the voting issues Texans faced on Super Tuesday before the November general election. Attorneys from the Texas Civil Rights Project sent a letter to Texas Secretary of State Ruth R. Hughs on Thursday demanding the state to work to eliminate long lines caused by shortages of elections workers and problems with machines. Issues were reported in Bexar, Dallas, Harris, Hays, Tarrant and Travis counties. “We demand that you and other relevant stakeholders take immediate action to invest in voting infrastructure and prevent a similar disaster from unfolding in November,” Mimi Marziani, president of the Texas Civil Rights Project, wrote in letter. The letter states the issues disproportionately affected many first-time voters and voters from marginalized communities. “What should have been a fast and straightforward process turned into a nightmare for hundreds of thousands of people across Texas,” Marziani wrote. “Instead — and as Texas has seen over and over — the brunt of the burden was borne by communities of color, young people and people with disabilities.” The letter specifically asks Hughs to host a series of town halls with voters in those counties by the end of April to hear the issues they encountered voting this week and share preparation for the November general election, the letter says. Hughs should also create a commission with community leaders, political party members and voting rights experts to further investigate the issues, the letter says. The secretary of state’s office did not immediately respond to the letter.

'Tidal wave of voter suppression' washes over states, lawyer says 03/03/2020

The risk of continued voter suppression in the 2020 Elections 03/10/2020

Voter suppression alive and well on Super Tuesday 2020 03/08/2020 In Georgia, they purged tens of thousands of voters, disproportionately people of color, from the rolls for offenses as trivial as a misplaced hyphen in a name. In North Carolina, they enacted a photo ID law designed with what a federal court called “almost surgical precision” to suppress the black vote. And in Texas, according to a report from the Leadership Conference Education Fund, they’ve closed 750 polling places since 2013 — more than any other state — so that now voters like Rogers must pass an endurance test simply to exercise a constitutional right.

Long voting lines put voter suppression front and center 03/04/2020

👇🏼Voter purging in Missouri. Do we have any legal groups that people can get help from to be able to vote? Pls post possible links or phone numbers on this thread: #VoterSuppression #NotMeUs 03/10/2020

If you had wait in line for more than an hour to vote yesterday, let me know what happened in the comments-include where you were, how long it took and other issues you saw. #VoterSuppression 03/04/2020

My county in Michigan has a population of 158K and we have 38 polling locations. Fargo has a population of 122K with only 1 location? I'd like to speak to a manager. 😤 #VoterSuppression #NDPrimary 03/10/2020

The Mayor of Kansas City went to vote at the site that he has been going to for the last 11 years and he wasn't on the rolls. This is Exhibit A when it comes to #VoterSuppression in America today. It's outrageous and should never be tolerated. 03/10/2020

The New Poll Tax? Long Lines, Closed Polling Stations Hurt Black, Latinx & Student Voters in TX, CA 03/05/2020

One of the six polling places I visited on Tuesday in solid Bernie districts. They were all like this. Lines wrapping around buildings and coiling around the voting area inside. Each site had over half its machines broken. Countless voters turned away. #VoterSuppression 03/05/2020

Voting should not require heroism, great sacrifice or strife. It should be made as easy and accessible to anyone who wishes to cast a ballot. Anybody who tells you otherwise is... well, a Republican and advocating for #VoterSuppression. 03/04/2020 https://twitter.com/DHStokyo/status/1235088391827419137 “It is an outrage that it is this hard to cast a vote. … It is because the state government wants it to be hard to vote. It’s wrong. It should not take that much heroism and that much sacrifice to do your civic duty.” @maddow re: #VoterSuppression in TX

Black and Latino voters were hit hardest by long lines in the Texas Democratic primary 03/04/2020

Bernie Sanders Calls Long Lines at Michigan Polling Stations an 'Outrage,' Suggests Dems Are Engaging In Voter Suppression 03/10/2020

Lee Camp [Redacted]: The exit polls were off from the unaccountable voting machine results in Texas, South Carolina, California & Massachusetts. The difference always benefits Biden & hurts Bernie Sanders. More details here - 03/11/2020

Bernie lost 553,000 Votes to California Dem Party Rules 03/09/2020

Super Tuesday Biden Victories Questioned by Election Watchers 03/10/2020

A Michigan State University student after waiting over an hour in line to vote, called it quits and walked out. He said “this is bullshit, I can’t wait this long, I have to get to work.” @MichSoS, this is unacceptable. #MichiganPrimary #YouthVote2020 03/10/2020

Polls are officially closed in Michigan, but the East Lansing city clerks office is still packed with students who have been waiting on average 3 hours to vote. This is what the line currently looks like. Btw most of these people are voting for @BernieSanders . #MichiganPrimary 03/10/2020

My reasons for not wanting to vote for @BernieSanders were based on his failures on gun issues. You can now add to that he is a liar and engaging in alternative facts. I will gladly and proudly support @JoeBiden to be the next President of the United States. 03/06/2020 https://twitter.com/WilesWj/status/1236001153860550656 You are lying. Look at the facts. https://theintercept.com/2020/01/13/biden-cuts-social-security/ Joe Biden Has Advocated Cutting Social Security for 40 Years

How Biden Helped Strip Bankruptcy Protection From Millions Just Before a Recession 10/23/2019

Jen Rice original reporting: Carla Reed and Hervis Rogers, the last two voters at Texas Southern University. Finally got their "I voted" stickers. They waited six hours, until just after 1am. #TXDecides 03/04/2020

It took 7 hours for Hervis Rogers to vote at his polling place on the HBCU campus of Texas Southern University in Houston. Texas has closed 750 polling places since 2012, many in black and brown communities, causing long lines and waits. 03/04/2020

Dr. Manhattan: a lot of organizers in North Carolina are telling me that most people planning to vote for Biden thought he supported Medicare-For-All, oof. 03/04/2020

The 20-year argument between Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren over bankruptcy, explained 09/12/2019

Black and Latino voters were hit hardest by long lines in the Texas Democratic primary 03/03/2020

Black and Latino Texas Voters Get Stuck in Long Super Tuesday Lines 03/04/2020





Wednesday, May 22, 2019

Symone Sanders: Pundits Views Are A Commodity In Pseudo-Democracy



The truth is a commodity for campaign spokespeople and media pundits, as demonstrated by Symone Sanders and her recent decision to join the Biden campaign.





Edit 03/30/2020: Within the past week Joe Biden has been accused of sexual assault; and someone reviewed Symones old posts defending Christine Blasey Ford and found that she deleted them all, presumably so that they couldn't be used against her for political reasons; however some screen shots have been saved, including one that I had all along below with a link to the tweet which was up when I wrote this. This was reported on Reddit Joe Biden Campaign Advisor deletes all her tweets supporting Christine Blasey Ford. Morally Bankrupt. 03/30/2020 I'm not usually a fan of Breitbart, but they did save texts of these Twets and more along with links to the source which have all been deleted in WOKE: CNN's Symone Sanders Warns "the Patriarchy's Day is Coming" 09/28/2018 If you're not familiar with the accusations which have been mostly ignored by mainstream media, I saved a bunch of links which were included in my latest article, Fake Corona-virus Apocalypse?



This isn't unique to Symone, nor is this the first sign that she's sold her political views. This is standard operating procedures for the majority of pundits who agree to support what ever "team" they join and go along with the talking points. Sam Clovis was one of the other most obvious people that sold their views and didn't even try to do a good job pretending otherwise, although the mainstream media barely mentioned this, so most people might not have noticed. He was hired by Rick Perry's campaign in 2015 talking about how Rick was in it for the long run one day then no more than a few days later quitting and on the next day announcing that he's working for Donald Trump, as the Perry campaign began collapsing because he couldn't pay his staffers.

The biggest problem isn't Symone Sanders or Sam Clovis, but the system that provides a financial incentive to cater to the interests of the wealthiest political operatives, usually serving Wall Street interests, although they routinely have to to pretend to serve the interests of the majority of the public. What we need to end this is better education about how the system works teaching the public to recognize conflicts of interests and how they study how to manipulate the public and enabling them to control the debate themselves.

I explained how part of this problem can be solved by setting up an interview process where all applicants for political office can have a chance to be heard in Modern "Poll Taxes": Voter ID & Campaign Contributions Instead of raising thousands if not millions of dollars to campaign for office, the public should control the interview process, requiring all candidates to fill out an application and show up for interviews, and national media should be required to provide fairly equal coverage for all candidates, not giving preferential treatment to those collecting the most money or hiring professional spin artists.

By now most people have forgotten about how obvious Sam Clovis's selling out to Donald Trump; but Twitter is having a field day with Symone Sanders, and how obvious it is that she's selling out too (I included a sample of some of the Tweets exposing her below). It's not hard to check the record to find out how different Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders are, although it can be time consuming since they both have long records, but Biden is almost always taking the side of Wall Street, while Bernie Sanders takes the side of working class people and minorities.

Many of the people on Twitter have seen right through this incredibly obvious sell out; however, the vast majority of the public isn't nearly as inclined to check the record so closely, and might rely on mainstream media for a lot of their information, or if they are on Twitter and Facebook but follow mostly establishment pundits many of them might buy into their excuses justifying her working for Biden. So this can show how corrupt the system is to a modest percentage of the people, for now, but these tactics could enable them to rig the nomination again.

However, since Biden's record is so extreme, my best guess is that it'll backfire on them and he'll collapse in the polls long before the primaries.

I went into many of the problems with Joe Biden in Joe Biden Really Was Taken Off The Trash Heap and I've updated it with numerous new articles since I first posted it, most of his record is hardly being mentioned on the mainstream media, including articles that show he supported segregation, overturning Roe v. Wade, supported outsourcing of jobs, gave preferential treatment to his own family while arguing for get tough on crime policies that only targeted the poor and much more.

But selling out isn't something Symone just started doing when she was hired by Biden; she also began campaigning for Hillary Clinton while she was pretending to support Bernie Sanders for the 2016 primary, as if it was already over, and Bernie had lost fairly. When Bernie won several of the primaries and showed that he had a chance of winning, and there were major signs that some the primaries he lost were being rigged as I pointed out in Can Hillary Clinton win without cheating? there were several of his supporters including Ben Jealous, Van Jones and Symone Sanders spending a lot of time on CNN or other cable news networks coming to Hillary's defense when Donald trump was attacking her, often spedning far more time at this than they were defending Sanders; and both Van Jones and Symone Sanders were given jobs as pundits that continued to this day, or in symone's case until she went to work for Joe Biden.

However, in addition to providing additional evidence to how bad the mainstream media is, which is hardly even covering many of the contradictions or Biden's incredibly long record contradicting his propaganda, it may also raise some questions about both the Bernie Sanders campaign and hiring or campaign staff, including unionized staff, now that Bernie Sanders has become the first candidate to have a unionized staff.

I supported Bernie Sanders in 2016 and still do, but there have been some problems which I can't forget, including the fact that he remained silent about the cheating during the primaries then campaigned for Hillary Clinton and Tom Perez after he was elected chairman of the DNC, trying to restore the credibility of the Democratic Party, when it clearly had no credibility. He agreed to support the Democratic Party and nominee when he first began his campaign and George Stephanopoulos asked him if he would support the nominee or run as an independent and again this year when he became the first to sign the Indivisible Loyalty Pledge Which Is A Duopoly Protection Pledge without even discussing Ranked Choice Voting that can enable more parties to compete so that the two dominant parties will have a much harder time rigging nominations for candidates supporting the Wall Street agenda.

The real solutions, if we're going to have major reform clearly have to come from the grassroots not a political candidate, even Bernie Sanders! I'm tempted to join in the call of many supporters of the Green Party or Democratic Socialists of America to oppose all establishment candidates, even Bernie Sanders, sometimes, but there's little or no chance that they're going to elect a president from their parties or many if any to Congress or Governors offices.

I also support unions as a means to protect workers; however, when union leaders like Richard Trumka support the Democratic party, or remain silent when there's a candidate that's far better for workers than the ones pushed by the Democratic party like Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden, there's major doubts about whether these leaders really are doing their best to defend workers right. The same might go for unionized campaign workers.

Many progressives were thrilled when Bernie Sanders campaign workers unionized, and to some degree I'm happy to see this to; however, there's no guarantee that the campaign workers have the same interests as the grassroots or many of the volunteers supporting Bernie Sanders on weekends and nights when they can without getting paid. Symone Sanders is a clear example of this problem; she's not the exception to paid pundits or campaign workers selling out, this is the rule, although most of us have come to expect better of Bernie Sanders campaign workers, some of which have been far better.

The vast majority of campaign workers that jump from one campaign to another and often work for media companies or serve as staff for winning politicians aren't looking out for the best interests of the public, they're looking out for the best interests of their campaign donors who're paying their salaries! If these campaign workers unionize do you think they're going to be better advocates for good public policies anymore than the politicians they work for?

There's also a possibility that there might be conflicts of interests between paid campaign workers and unpaid volunteers. Unpaid volunteers presumably join campaigns because they support the candidate, or in the case of a charity, the cause, while paid campaign workers are doing this for a living and they might be as interested, if not more interested in job security, that often pays much better than working class people get paid.

There have been some concerns about full time volunteers, because only the wealthy can afford to do this, and they might have other undisclosed motives. The most obvious example of this is Paul Manafort who volunteered to work for the Trump campaign and famously wrote “How do we use to get whole,” to Konstantin Kilimnik as part of an alleged conspiracy to use his position as a campaign manager to pay off his debts, clearly indicating he had a major conflict of interests, which has led to his trial and imprisonment, although some of the details about this have been distorted for one reason or another.

These professional campaign workers, or unpaid volunteers with connections to wealthy clients should not be confused with the vast majority of volunteer campaign workers doing low level campaign work for sincere reasons. And these professional campaign workers also come from upper classes, that often go to the same colleges joining fraternities dominated by wealthy families, that working class people can't get access to. A handful of these college educated people, like Thomas Frank, Bernie Sanders, David Sirota do stand up for the working class, but they usually don't come from quite as wealthy families, and sometimes even they support the duopoly, supposedly to get some modest reform, which they consider better than nothing. In many cases this is true; especially if there aren't large numbers of working class people speaking out and acting to defend their own rights, which is the only way we'll get major reform that we need.

Another major potential conflict of interests that has also been exposed by extreme actions of the Trump campaign are non-disclosure agreements. There have been several lawsuits filed exposing that he not only required his paid campaign workers to sign non-disclosure agreements or non-disparagement agreements but also attempted to require unpaid volunteers to sign them as well. When the media exposed this they reported it in a manner that stated or implied that this was unique to the Trump campaign, although they didn't make a major effort to find out for certain if it was, that I know of.

Could this be common practice for most political campaigns?

It almost certainly is! I don't have any hard evidence of non-disclosure agreements for other campaigns; however, the entire scandal about stolen E-mails from the DNC and John Podesta clearly indicates that they're shrouding a large portion of their campaign activities in secrecy; and instead of admitting that they were caught rigging the elections so that Hillary Clinton would have an unfair advantage over Bernie Sanders, they dug in their heels and declared that they have a right to shroud their activities in secrecy and that by exposing their activities the alleged hackers, assuming it wasn't actually inside leakers, were victimizing them, not that they were victimizing the American people!



If they expected their activities to be shrouded in secrecy do you think there's a chance they might have protected their secrecy by using non-disclosure agreements as well?

It's almost guaranteed.

If unionizing campaigns becomes routine and establishment candidates do it as well will campaign union members like Neera Tanden or Brian Fallon demand that this secrecy continues as part of their union negotiations? Not publicly, of course, but will they have their think tanks come up with a way to make is seem justifiable and then come up with a way to screen campaign workers to find out if they would object? Probably not all of them, since there are to many, however there's a good chance that top campaign workers will be required to sign a non-disclosure agreement.

We don't have the right to know how our elections are being run under the current circumstances; and whether or not they require campaign workers to sign non-disclosure agreements the campaign workers at the highest levels all come from a relatively small class of people that have connections to the political establishment. As much as I like Bernie Sanders he's already demonstrated that he's not going to do much if anything to change this, unless he's under pressure from the grassroots. Yet I still support him because on most issues, including Single payer health care, free college tuition, taxing the rich, opposing outsourcing of jobs, and many other issues he's been consistently on the right side of the issues for decades, and even though Obama Hillary and many other establishment Democrats have demonstrated, with their actions that they routinely say one thing during the campaign, and do another once elected, I doubt if Bernie Sanders will cave like they do, although he'll face an enormous amount of opposition from the rest of the political establishment.

However, contrary to what the mainstream media claims I doubt very much if Joe Biden will win the nomination, and it's even less likely that he'll win the general election if he does win the nomination, presumably with epidemic levels of help rigging media coverage from the mainstream media. The reason I came to this conclusion is mainly that I just looked at his record, despite the fact that the mainstream media isn't reporting on the vast majority of it, and noticed that even though they ignore most of it, they're routinely forced to cover some of it as people draw attention to it, and it's being spread on alternative media, which a growing number of people are relying on.

Most of the other corporate candidates are going to have a hard time winning as well because a close look at there record is just as bad, or at least the closest ones in the polls that I can tell including Kamala Harris, Beto O'rourke, Pete Buttigieg, Cory Booker etc. with the possible exception of Elizabeth Warren, who at least does a better job pretending to be progressive than the other corporate candidates, although I doubt if she'll be able to attract much of the progressive votes from Bernie Sanders.

At this point I'm cautiously optimistic that Bernie Sanders just might get the nomination; and if he does that he'll easily be able to beat Trump, although it'll be a nasty campaign from both the Democrats before he wins the nomination or epidemic levels of cheating even worse than with Hillary Clinton to rig it for one of the corporate candidates, who will inevitably lose to Trump, as a result of that cheating.

Whether this happens or not there's overwhelming amount of evidence to indicate that the entire political establishment is behaving in an insane manner when there are far more important things to address than the silly Russia conspiracy theory, when it's clear that the mainstream media did far more to rig the election by only covering the candidates they support, refusing to cover honest candidates, with the exception of Bernie Sanders, presumably because he gained so much popularity by being sincere for decades, or so it seems.

There's also evidence to indicate that the political establishment knows far more about rigging elections and manipulating voters than they seem to be letting onto, especially with all their incredibly bad blunders. I explained some of this in an article about Frank Luntz, and other political advisers, one of the most effective ways they have of rigging elections so that candidates they don't want to win can't win, is simply refusing to cover them at all.

This adds to many other major unsolved mysteries, including some that don't seem to be related, although I suspect they might be, as I explained in a long series of articles including Is The Pseudo-Revolution Already In Progress? where I speculated about the possibility that it might somehow be related to incredibly rapid development of technology over the last seventy years, megaliths that were moved thousands of years ago, despite experiments that show that it should have been impossible, and claims by Philip Corso that he shared alien technology retrieved from the alleged Roswell crash in 1947 and other alleged extraterrestrial crashes.

If Corso's claim is true then it can explain how technology was developed so rapidly over the past seventy years. if it's false then there has to be another explanation why he was able to make it up and get so much institutional support from the publishing companies, along with why many other high ranking, and credible officials, were claiming that there's much more to UFOs than the government is admitting to. Either there's a massive cover up, or there's a massive effort to make it seem like we've been visited by UFOs when we haven't.

This theory probably seems far-fetched to most people, especially if they're not familiar with many of the details, or even if they are; however, there is something incredibly foolish going on and the political establishment is acting in an obviously dysfunctional manner despite the fact that not only should they know better, but they almost certainly do. However, it does explain how the ancient megaliths were moved and perhaps, if many of the details are worked out, it can explain many other major unsolved mysteries, although it clearly needs work, since there's simply not enough information to figure out many of these things or confirm the theory.

If there's something to this theory then they might actually be rigging the nomination for Bernie Sanders, as far-fetched as that sounds, so that he can implement partial solutions to the problems that they want to solve while using us for their own purposes for other reasons. This could explain why Bernie Sanders caved and campaigned for the Democrats after they rigged the primaries against him. It could also explain why they let him have enough media coverage to get so far ahead in the polls of everyone except Joe Biden, or so it seems. He's not necessarily actually behind in the polls, since it's been exposed that they under polled people under forty, and some polls that are being spread on the internet from mainstream media show him ahead, but mainstream media is only giving these polls a token amount of coverage buried where few people notice them.

Whether or not this theory is true, or somewhat close, there's little doubt that a small fraction of the public has near total control of the political debate as it's being presented in the mass media and they can use that control to rig elections, as they've been doing for decades. there's also little or no doubt that Bernie Sanders is far better than Joe Biden, Donald Trump or any of the other corporate Democrats. The only candidates that might be better than him are Mike Gravel or some of the candidates that get absolutely no media coverage from mainstream media like Sanderson Beck.

But even if Bernie Sanders does win, with or without this theory about Corso sharing alien technology, and this being part of a controlled disclosure effort is true, he's far better on most issues than other mainstream politicians; but, there are some major problems with him on a few, including the fact that he campaigned for the corrupt Democrats, and that he's remaining silent about epidemic levels of cheating. there's also little or no chance that he's going to try to break up the media so they can't continue rigging elections by rigging coverage so only candidates they support can win.

As much as I like Bernie Sanders on most issues, it's clear that even he isn't going to fix many important problems unless he's under an enormous amount of grassroots pressure. the most effective solutions are going to have to come from the grassroots no matter who is elected, but with most of these other Wall Street candidates they're not even going to take steps in the right direction on any issues, including climate change which may be irreversible, single payer, affordable education, or ending one war after another based on lies and many other issues.

Perhaps the best thing that Bernie Sanders is doing is drawing much more attention to many of his issues than other politicians and rallying people behind him, and these issues. I can't completely rule out the possibility that he'll cave on some issues as he has in the past when campaigning for Democratic politicians working against his issues; but, real reform has to come from the grassroots, and if they keep pushing beyond what he calls for then there's a chance that we'll get major reform!

Even though the best reforms have to come from the grassroots, we still need help from our representatives, at least until we can increase reliance on ballot issues and direct democracy on those issues, and reform the interview process; until we can elects real grassroots candidates like Sanderson Beck or many others that most people have never heard of because the corporate media never mentions them, Bernie Sanders is by far the best candidate with a reasonable chance of winning.

This may not sound like the loyal support that is expected for many politicians but we're not cult followers, and as the saying goes "not me, us," meaning that we want a leader that's willing to listen to the people. When Bernie does that it's what makes him so much better than other establishment candidates.



Symone Sanders recently tweeted, I learned something from @brianefallon everyday we worked together at Priorities. So when he told me he was going to start an organization to ignite grassroots activist interest in the courts, I wondered if he knew something I didn't. Per usual, he did. 05/17/2019 Apparently shorty after leaving the Sanders campaign, not only did she get a job as a CNN pundit, but she also worked with the democratic establishment she was previously working against supporting the corporate agenda, while pretending to be part of the "resistance."

Like many other politicians or advisers she comes up with statements like the following tweet defending Sanders, only to have to explain it away a few months later after joining the Biden campaign, although as far as I can tell, instead of explaining it, she ignored it and the mainstream media is helping her by ignoring it as well, so only those that pay attention to social media at the right time will recognize how hypocritical she's being.

Major Democratic super PAC hires Clinton, Sanders vets, Brian Fallon and Symone Sanders, for relaunch 01/18/2017



Anita Hill because she is a Black woman did not have the luxury of vulnerability before the all white male Senate Judiciary Committee in 1991. 09/17/2018



The following are some related articles including my past one about Joe Biden which has been updated with more articles about him and there will probably be many more added to it periodically; tweets exposing some of her hypocrisy are included as well:

Joe Biden Really Was Taken Off The Trash Heap

Is Oligarchy Creating Second Wave Of Fake Progressives? If So Why?

Symone Sanders Slams Shaun King After He Attacks Her For Supporting Joe Biden 05/19/2019

Symone Sanders, Bernie’s Former Press Secretary, Goes to Work on Biden’s Campaign 04/25/2019

CNN Humiliates Symone Sanders By Using OUR Talking Points 05/19/2019

Sam Clovis switching from Perry to Trump one day later on Rachel Maddow.

Symone Sanders Said Dems Don't Need White People To Lead. She Went To Work For Joe Biden 04/25/2019

Symone Sanders defends past donation to Buttigieg after joining Biden campaign 04/25/2019

Facts are facts @SymoneDSanders. U have a job 2 do-& that’s spin. My job is 2 point out facts—which is that the crime bill ushered in unprecedented mass incarceration. The fact that u & @JoeBiden can’t ackowledge it/propose reforms is telling 05/19/2019

Yesterday something truly painful happened. A dozen activists wrote me saying they were sick to their stomachs seeing it. The Biden campaign asked @SymoneDSanders to say that the crime bill only impacted states. At 1:37 the anchor called their bluff. 05/19/2019

Symone Sanders earns her money in this clip trying to convince us water isn’t wet, birds don’t fly and paying states billions to lock up more black people didn’t contribute to mass incarceration. Honesty is your friend @SymoneDSanders 05/18/2019

Damn, @SymoneDSanders, you ignore that Bernie voted for Crime Bill because the Violence Against Women Act was included. How can you look in the mirror? You chose to be on the payroll of a man who's done severe harm to most Americans? You are a paid liar just like Sarah Sanders. 05/19/2019

.@SymoneDSanders wants voters to "give us a minute, you will see.” See what, @JoeBiden unaologetically defend his racist crime bill that has devastated Black families for 25 yrs? Nah, it wasn’t "over correction,” it was white supremacy. 05/19/2019

I mean, you did bust a mean jig defending Biden @SymoneDSanders At what point do your convictions, morals, and integrity supersede your desire to have an illustrious but empty career? 05/19/2019

Please keep going on TV trying to defend Joe Biden and his racist crime bill. It's helping Bernie tremendously. People see through your nonsense. 05/19/2019 I don’t think Symone was this useful to the sanders campaign even when she worked for it // She literally wasn't. She was a mole.

The 1994 CB disproportionately incarcerated Black men, destroyed Black families & left Black children fatherless. @JoeBiden’s denial of it is disgusting. @SymoneDSanders sycophantic caping, simplifying it as “some people went too far” is foot shuffling to excuse white supremacy. 05/18/2019

A Lawsuit by a Campaign Worker Is the Latest Challenge to Trump’s Nondisclosure Agreements 02/25/2019 The most legally significant aspect of Johnson’s suit may ultimately be something the complaint does not explicitly address: the pervasive use of nondisclosure agreements by Trump during his campaign and in his Administration. Johnson’s suit is at least the sixth legal case in which Trump campaign or Administration employees have defied their nondisclosure agreements. Three of those actions, including Johnson’s, were filed this month. Johnson, who was the campaign’s administrative field-operations director in Florida, signed a nondisclosure agreement that bars her from revealing any information “in any way detrimental to the Company, Mr. Trump, any Family Member, any Trump Company or any Family Member company.” Johnson’s attorney, Hassan Zavareei, said, “We expect that Trump will try to use the unconscionable N.D.A. and forced arbitration agreement to silence Ms. Johnson. We will fight this strong-arm tactic.”

A Former Trump Staffer Filed A Class Action To Invalidate All Of The Campaign’s Nondisclosure Agreements 02/20/2019 Jessica Denson, who worked for the Trump campaign in 2016, is arguing the language of the nondisclosure and nondisparagement agreements that all staffers had to sign is unlawful.

Non-disclosure agreements aren't limited to political campaigns or business transactions they're used for just about everything, including collecting money for charities, apparently. These are literally agreements to conspire against the best interests of the majority of the public, in many cases. There may be some minor exceptions but many charities have turned into public relations arms of corporations as pointed out by Christine C. MacDonald in "Green, Inc: An Environmental Insider Reveals how a Good Cause Has Gone Bad," and there's good reason to believe that this practice isn't limited to environmental providing propaganda cover for energy companies as MacDonald reports, but it's done on virtually every major charitable organization including Planned Parenthood, the AARP and many other organizations.

This secrecy is used to deprive people of the information they need to know how much of the money they donate actually goes to the charity and of information about potential conflicts of interests from many major corporations donating to charities and using them as propaganda public relations. The following is a sample Non-disclosure agreement that seems to include charitable organizations:

Sample Volunteer Privacy and Nondisclosure Agreement

As a volunteer, you may be provided with information regarding donors and prospects to assist you in your volunteer role. Information may include names, addresses and phone numbers of individuals, their giving interests, gift society memberships, potential capacity, a suggested ask amount, or other information relevant to your role as a fundraiser on behalf of __Charity__.

Because of the sensitive and confidential nature of these types of information, each campaign volunteer must agree to abide by a strict policy of privacy and non-disclosure:

As a volunteer, I understand that I am provided with this information in strict confidence to enable me to perform my functions as a volunteer. I will not share this information outside of the development office of __Charity__ including development staff and volunteers acting in a development role on behalf of the __Charity__.

I have read and understand this Privacy and Nondisclosure Agreement:

Signature: ________________________________________________________________
Print Name :_______________________________________________________________
Date: ____________________________________________________________________ Original article


This agreement may ban volunteers from disclosing information about the people donating but it's not guaranteed to ban charity collectors from selling their lists. there good reason to believe that lists are routinely sold by many businesses and we have now way of knowing how often it happens, possibly because those involved in it are bound by non-disclosure agreements!

Wealth Engine





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:

The Rachel Maddow Show, Transcript 3/17/2017

CAPLIN: The coverage tended – was more about what was in the e-mails as opposed to why these e-mails existed, who is responsible for putting the e- mails into the public discourse and why and that was – that was frustrating. .....

CAPLIN: In the end, none of the e-mails themselves were particularly damaging but for the last 35 days of the election, it was a headwind that was constantly in the news. .... Complete article


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:

Donna Brazile admits stealing debate questions for Hillary, but blames the Russians 03/18/2017

In October, a subsequent release of emails revealed that among the many things I did in my role as a Democratic operative and D.N.C. Vice Chair prior to assuming the interim D.N.C. Chair position was to share potential town hall topics with the Clinton campaign. I had been working behind the scenes to add more town hall events and debates to the primary calendar, and I helped ensure those events included diverse moderators and addressed topics vital to minority communities. My job was to make all our Democratic candidates look good, and I worked closely with both campaigns to make that happen. But sending those emails was a mistake I will forever regret.

By stealing all the DNC’s emails and then selectively releasing those few, the Russians made it look like I was in the tank for Secretary Clinton. Despite the strong, public support I received from top Sanders campaign aides in the wake of those leaks, the media narrative played out just as the Russians had hoped, leaving Sanders supporters understandably angry and sowing division in our ranks. In reality, not only was I not playing favorites, the more competitive and heated the primary got, the harder D.N.C. staff worked to be scrupulously fair and beyond reproach. In all the months the Russians monitored the D.N.C.’s email, they found just a handful of inappropriate emails, with no sign of anyone taking action to disadvantage the Sanders campaign.

But the damage was done. Politics has never been considered a clean sport, but 2016 marked a new low. The D.N.C., a political party committee dedicated in part to defending free and fair elections, was attacked by the Russians while the Republican nominee for president openly encouraged it. This was not a Hollywood movie about rogue spies and super agents. This was real life. Complete article

Donna Brazile: Passing potential town hall topics to Clinton camp 'a mistake I will forever regret' 03/18/2017


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:

Tom Perez Apologizes for Telling the Truth, Showing Why Democrats’ Flaws Urgently Need Attention 02/09/2017

The more alarmed one is by the Trump administration, the more one should focus on how to fix the systemic, fundamental sickness of the Democratic Party. That Hillary Clinton won the meaningless popular vote on her way to losing to Donald Trump, and that the singular charisma of Barack Obama kept him popular, have enabled many to ignore just how broken and failed the Democrats are as a national political force.

An endless array of stunning statistics can be marshaled to demonstrate the extent of that collapse. But perhaps the most compelling piece of evidence is that even one of the U.S. media’s most stalwart Democratic loyalists, writing in an outlet that is as much of a reliable party organ as the DNC itself, has acknowledged the severity of the destruction. “The Obama years have created a Democratic Party that’s essentially a smoking pile of rubble,” wrote Vox’s Matthew Yglesias after the 2016 debacle, adding that “the story of the 21st-century Democratic Party looks to be overwhelmingly the story of failure.”

A failed, collapsed party cannot form an effective resistance. Trump did not become president and the Republicans do not dominate virtually all levels of government because there is some sort of massive surge in enthusiasm for right-wing extremism. Quite the contrary: This all happened because the Democrats are perceived — with good reason — to be out of touch, artificial, talking points-spouting automatons who serve Wall Street, Silicon Valley, and the agenda of endless war, led by millionaires and funded by oligarchs to do the least amount possible for ordinary, powerless citizens while still keeping their votes.

What drove Bernie Sanders’s remarkably potent challenge to Hillary Clinton was the extreme animosity of huge numbers of Democrats — led by its youngest voters — to the values, practices, and corporatist loyalties of the party’s establishment. Unlike the 2008 Democratic primary war — which was far more vicious and nasty but devoid of any real ideological conflict — the 2016 primary was grounded in important and substantive disputes about what the Democratic Party should be, what principles should guide it, and, most important of all, whose interests it should serve. ....

An even more illustrative episode occurred late Wednesday. Perez was in Kansas campaigning for votes from county leaders and was asked about the need for the party to retain the support of the Sanders contingent. Perez unexpectedly blurted out a truth that party functionaries to this day steadfastly bury and deny even in the face of the mountain of evidence proving it. This is what Perez said:

"We heard loudly and clearly yesterday from Bernie supporters that the process was rigged and it was. And you’ve got to be honest about it. That’s why we need a chair who is transparent."

That’s quite an admission from the party establishment’s own candidate: “The process was rigged.” And he commendably acknowledged how important it is to admit this — “to be honest about it” — because “we need a chair who is transparent.”

But Perez’s commitment to “transparency” and “being honest” had a very short life-span. After his admission predictably caused controversy — with furious Clinton supporters protesting the truth — Perez demonstrated the same leadership qualities that were so evident when Zaid Jilani asked him about Israeli human rights abuses.

He quickly slinked onto Twitter with a series of tweets to retract what he said, claim that he “misspoke” (does anyone know what that word means?), apologize for it, and proclaim Hillary Clinton the fair and rightful winner: Complete article


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!