Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
January 29, 2015

Libya - Why Hillary Clinton Should Never Again Hold A Public Office

Today's must read: Exclusive: Secret tapes undermine Hillary Clinton on Libyan war

Top Pentagon officials and a senior Democrat in Congress so distrusted Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton's 2011 march to war in Libya that they opened their own diplomatic channels with the Gadhafi regime in an effort to halt the escalating crisis, according to secret audio recordings recovered from Tripoli.

The tapes, reviewed by The Washington Times and authenticated by the participants, chronicle U.S. officials' unfiltered conversations with Col. Moammar Gadhafi's son and a top Libyan leader, including criticisms that Mrs. Clinton had developed tunnel vision and led the U.S. into an unnecessary war without adequately weighing the intelligence community's concerns.
...
Instead of relying on the Defense Department or the intelligence community for analysis, officials told The Times, the White House trusted Mrs. Clinton's charge, which was then supported by Ambassador to the United Nations Susan E. Rice and National Security Council member Samantha Power, as reason enough for war.

Clinton is still laughing at that (vid): "We came, we saw, he died. Hahahahahaha ..."

I doubt that this was the last laugh on this issue.

Posted by b on January 29, 2015 at 01:26 PM | Permalink

Comments

Agreed b, but, good luck with the wish she never hold a public office again. We, in the USA, will NEVER get an independent, autonomous POTUS, ever. Our govt. has been captured by Oligarchs, and they will decide who holds public office, through our bought and paid for politicians, and our hackable e-voting systems. Sounds dire eh? It is. Caretakers of the Empire, thats who'll we "elect".

Posted by: ben | Jan 29, 2015 1:53:00 PM | 1

Nero fiddled while Rome burned.

That's how low we have sunk. Way back when, Hillary was just another soccer mom caring for her daughter's wellbeing. Then they had that million dollar wedding, and something slipped. The human brain can only stand so much ambition before it tries to escape its confinement and starts shorting out.

Hers has done that. Personhood is now alien to her.

Posted by: juliania | Jan 29, 2015 1:58:09 PM | 2

I'm convinced that Hillary has no chance winning a general election. That's why there is such a ruckus among potential GOP nominees. Everyone wants a chance at the low-hanging fruit. The Kochs, if I had to wager, are going to support Scott Walker. This means that it will likely be Jeb Bush vs. Scott Walker to see who can take on the Democrat nominee.

In order for the Democrat to win it has been broadly accepted that you have to have robust turnout among blacks and Latinos, something which is not going to happen for Hillary. Democrats are whistling past the graveyard when they say they can turnout the "Obama coalition" for Hillary.

Posted by: Mike Maloney | Jan 29, 2015 2:48:17 PM | 3

So when a financial crisis hits, Hillary is going to call her husband at 3 AM, and he's going to give her the same advice that he got that created the Financial Crisis of 2008 (only delayed by the dotcom and housing bubbles).

Posted by: MRW | Jan 29, 2015 3:01:24 PM | 4

I could never figure out what was funny re: Libya to this pant-suited greasy stain. Did she find setting back progress in a country in Africa of all places, funny? Civil war, anarchy, chaos - must be a real knee slapper, eh Hillary? Orphaned kids must really make you bust a gut! Libyan terror makes Hillary happy!
No humanity or shame in her game. Not only should she not ever hold public office again, she should be closely monitored while watching any prospective grandchildren to make sure she doesn't decide to eat them.

Posted by: farflungstar | Jan 29, 2015 3:04:15 PM | 5

@5 All personal would be my guess. The girls were out to get Ghadafi.

Posted by: dh | Jan 29, 2015 3:19:47 PM | 6

What a horrible venomous harridan, I hope those lawyers in the Epstein case, have pictures of "big dog" "Bubba" Abusing those underage slave girls.

Posted by: harry law | Jan 29, 2015 3:25:03 PM | 7

nice BUT 'with the Gadhafi regime '

do people speak of the Bush or Obama 'regime'?

Posted by: brian | Jan 29, 2015 3:35:15 PM | 8

All those Libyan lives lost, and their standard-of-living ruined.

Posted by: MRW | Jan 29, 2015 3:37:01 PM | 9

@3 Hillary will win if she is nominated, but she would usher a crazy GOP congress. The electoral map is too far gone for any Republican to win. Even in 2004, Dubya was relatively popular and still had to cheat to beat a thoroughly unlikable corpse. Team Blue has every Kerry state plus Ohio, Iowa, Colorado, and maybe Virginia locked. Down ballot races will get creamed.

The Obama national coalition wasnt very different from Kerry's and Dean's 2006 editions. The subsequent elections have proven Hispanics (young people across the board really) are not going to be wowed by old people acting silly on YouTube.

The GOP is fractured more than people realize between their voters and the traditional elite. Dubya's personal issues resonated with their voters, and it was clear Dubya belonged to the Romney class. The Romney/41 class won't risk a Dubya like candidate. They will fight to prevent that.

Posted by: NotTimothyGeithner | Jan 29, 2015 3:42:27 PM | 10

NTG @ 10: "Team Blue has every Kerry state plus Ohio, Iowa, Colorado, and maybe Virginia locked. Down ballot races will get creamed."

I don't think so. You're saying Hillary could defeat a candidate like Scott Walker in Colorado and Iowa based on Kerry's showing in 2004.

But you're significantly underestimating the erosion in the Democrats' popularity since 2012. Democrat results in the 2014 midterms should be our guide here. I've mentioned it before here, but let me do so again. People who are interested in assessing of the kind of realignment presently underway in the U.S. political system should read Thomas Ferguson's article from December: "Americans Are Sick to Death of Both Parties: Why Our Politics Is in Worse Shape Than We Thought: 2014 signaled a new stage of disintegration."

The Democrats are like Greece's Pasok or Spain's PSOE, ready for dung heap.

Posted by: Mike Maloney | Jan 29, 2015 4:04:35 PM | 11

What makes you think she will? Considering your litmus test, how on Earth was Merkel ever allowed to hold office after being a communist? In Germany, it should have been made explicitly clear through legislation as part of reunification that no former communist can ever hold public office. Why? Because there is no such thing as a former communist — once one always one.

Go Jeb!

Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Jan 29, 2015 4:26:58 PM | 12

a few things.. i don't like hilary, but my radar went up with mention of the washington times. the only time i ever hear about that publication is when someone is furthering an extreme right wing agenda.. of course the wt will not want to see hilary in power as she is a dem and dems apparently aren't warmongering enough. i know.. confusing for anyone to figure that one out, but i guess one is supposed to be more to the right then attila the hun..

i agree with ben @1. the usa has been bought and paid for.. the public can't touch it with voting... they have the racket sown up.. the only remedy would be revolution in the streets and as we saw in jefferson, or in the occupy wall st. movement, it is going to get shut down by the police state too..

i also agree with mike @3.. hilary doesn't have much of any chance is how i see it too.. i could be wrong, but it is just cheap shots from the washington times, not that i deny what a piece of work she is..

Posted by: james | Jan 29, 2015 4:55:24 PM | 13

@12

Yeah, it's a partisan attack on Hillary. She and Obama and all the rest, including the lifers, were responsible for US aggression against Libya and for its destruction. And all, but Hllary who continues to give moral support, are responsible for the aggression against Syria, Ukraine and Iraq, again, and for the destruction of those countries ... still attempted in Syria and Ukraine.

There is only one party in the USA and it's the War Party. And we can vote for it from the 'progressive' side or the 'regressive' side, depending upon our self-perception, or delusion.

You're also right @1 that we will never 'get' anything but more of the same ...


"This struggle may be a moral one, or it may be a physical one, and it may be both moral and physical, but it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. ... "

-- Frederick Douglas


... if we want change we'll have to do it ourselves. It's always been that way and always will be.

Posted by: jfl | Jan 29, 2015 7:25:21 PM | 14

Jesus, b. You're reading the Washington Times?

Posted by: slothrop | Jan 29, 2015 7:30:26 PM | 15

Madeleine Jana Korbel Albright AND Dianne Goldman Berman Feinstein!


Albright/Feinstein! 2016!!!! let’s get this Kali Yuga phase 4, started, proper!

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Jan 29, 2015 9:34:37 PM | 16

b:

While the Wasingington Times is rightly regarded as a right-wing Moonie rag and it is reasonable to be suspicious of an article with so many anonymous (Pentagon!!!) sources, there are some aspects of the article that appear based in fact. First off, I consider Dennis Kucinich a reliable source. In addition, Hillary's role in the formation of Obama's Libyan policy appears to be a consistent subtext of what I have read in her and Gates' biographies. What is not being stated (yet, this is the first of a 3-part series), is the role of the neocons, PNAC and the Israel Lobby in having set Libya up as one of seven countries to be taken out and the entire alignment of Hillary with the goals of the Israel Lobby and its donors in her long-term quest for the presidency. Since the WT is a Republican rag, this may never come up -- if the purpose of the piece is to single out Hillary and ignore the role of Bushco in setting off the neocon roadmap for the New American Century.

Posted by: Rusty Pipes | Jan 29, 2015 10:01:21 PM | 17

The electoral map is too far gone for any Republican to win.

Correct, NTG. We've already seen Romney talking about saving the middle class, Jeb the same. It will take billions for a repub to win plus a huge effort to suppress minority votes. Of course that's all in the pipeline as we type.

Posted by: okie farmer | Jan 29, 2015 10:03:46 PM | 18

Dank meme bruh. Quality post....

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Jan 29, 2015 10:04:05 PM | 19

Rusty Pipes @16
EXACTLY!

Posted by: okie farmer | Jan 29, 2015 10:07:21 PM | 20

OT, but relevant nonetheless. More govt as ongoing criminal enterprise.

The War You Don't See

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDutkYQF9d8

Posted by: okie farmer | Jan 29, 2015 10:11:18 PM | 21

While we're talking about The War You Don't see...

Is The Establishment Riddled With Paedophiles?

Is The Establishment Riddled With Paedophiles? Russell Brand The Trews (E244).
Reaction to the delay in Parliament's child abuse inquiry, the allegations of child abuse against former politicians and the recent allegations against Prince Andrew.
Subscribe Here Now: http://tinyurl.com/opragcg and send links to video news items of topical stories that you'd like me to analyse.

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Jan 29, 2015 10:18:18 PM | 22

Posted by: Rusty Pipes | Jan 29, 2015 10:01:21 PM | 16

Thanks Rusty. Partisan bickering is the only way we get a little truth out of the mainstream media. And the point is, these conversations are on tape, so the evidence is very solid -- whatever you think of the Wash Times and you should think bad things about it -- that the Pentagon thought the State department's assertions of Qaddafi war crimes were total b.s. Not that both the Republican or Democratic parties weren't completely gung ho on this war crime and evidence be damned.

And Obama: I left all that murder and pillage stuff to Hillary.

Wonder if cruise missile pseudo-marxist Lenin's Tomb will now apologize for supporting NATO's Libya war? Not holding breath.

Posted by: fairleft | Jan 29, 2015 11:04:18 PM | 23

This is classic misdirection. It happens whenever a US policy decision results in catastrophe (for the people at the receiving end of it, not necessarily for the US policy makers.) In this case Libya, to any rational observer, looks like a disaster. Invariably, there will step forward people who allegedly warned against it, tried to prevent it, hoped to obstruct it. Just as there were people after the fact who warned against to Iraq invasion and occupation. Inevitably, there will step forward people who warned against the Ukraine fiasco. And yet, regardless of who is president or what party is in power, these disastrous (for the victims, not the US government) choices are made again and again. And again.

The after-the-fact "we told 'em so" types serve a very important function. They lead the public, particularly that subset of it that is making some effort to pay attention, to believe that all is not lost. That there are rational people in the corridors of power and maybe with a little help they can take over and steer the country back on course.

Not gonna happen. While there probably are a few rational people who somehow slipped through the cracks and into the circles of power, they are there for window dressing. The bureaucracy of the US policy making invariably leads towards violence and military solutions, or at least financial blockade and sanctions, to impose US will on weaker countries.

Posted by: Lysander | Jan 29, 2015 11:08:36 PM | 24

With due respect, b, I couldn't be bothered reading all of this drivel. Libya is a fait accompli. They've had ~4 years to polish this turd and this is the best they can do? Power is about bullshit, fake sincerity, hysteria and intimidation, and Shrillary was just the Useful Idiot de jour. Lavrov called her out on the studious carelessness of the Reset/ Short Circuit fiasco and laughed AT her - as any joke in bad taste deserves.

But you're certainly correct that she should never again be considered for public office. And, if she is, then the American People should take it as Proof Positive that the PTB are laughing at them and holding them up to ridicule.
And act appropriately.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jan 29, 2015 11:08:44 PM | 25

"Never Again" seems appropriate - for a variety of reasons.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jan 29, 2015 11:11:32 PM | 26

Lysander and Hoarsewhisperer, well said. Nevertheless, it is useful that mainstream media publicize that, as it happened and not as hindsight" the Pentagon thought the State department's assertions of Qaddafi war crimes were total b.s. And that's why this story basically being suppressed or being positioned as a 'far out tea party crackpot' story.

Posted by: fairleft | Jan 30, 2015 1:32:19 AM | 27

i agree with rusty pipes @16, lysander @23 and hoarsewhisperer @24. i do think it is especially important the insights that are being shared here though, but wonder how much any of it matters. at some point the present system will cave in, but not before many more lives have been taken or ruined.. it is hard to have any respect for any politician in the west at this point and these insights don't help too much in that regard.

Posted by: james | Jan 30, 2015 2:38:55 AM | 28

b

Your willingness to push the ‘Clinton Did It’ meme reminds me now how I once believed Bilmon’s MoA was just an EU intel hangout operation. Twice too strategic in its analysis.

Hillary is nothing. She is 'not there'. One blood clot away from Totalitarianism. No power derives from her upper-class white suburban MidWest Methodist background. I grew up in that town and went to high school with her. Nothing happened there then, nothing happens now. She drifted off and married a Southerner, …and not a very bright one either. Her ‘mental prowess’ is pure WADC ad agency spin and focus groups divining.

We all watched Hillary panting on the 2008 Democratic Convention stage, shrilly waving her lily-white hands and bingo wings, ‘Aren’t you gonna do something about this guy?!” over Obama's vote count, murmuring to the press dark assassination memes ala Robert Kennedy. It was the most pathetic moment in US political history, ...why, since Dukakis and The Tank.

She’s a light-weight, our of her depth. She’s a pond-skimmer, playing with blue-water boys.
Her whole career, she’s been called Hectoring Hillary, …endlessly roaming and recalculating her political positions, always with an eye out for the Big Grift. Clintons are world-class grifters, right up there with English royalty, but they're not Presidential material.

Her pathos, glazed gleaming eyes, smugly chuckling, ‘We came, we saw, he died,” …Jesus, what kind of a sub-human Kissingerian psychopath says something like that?! There is no way she was responsible for Benghazi, and WE ALREADY KNOW THAT IT WAS DEEP STATE OPS.

That’s why they brought in Betrayus to cover for Morell, and to write talking points for Hillary, to find a Fat Lady Aria for the Benghazi Hearing Opera. That's why McCain was so furious that her Deputy’s death revealed the CIA Black Ops to arm and fund Al Nusra AQ against Assad, on behalf of Bibi, Likud, the PNAC and Triumphal Exceptionalism Zionists.
And now McCain is freely and openly meeting with Al Nusra and The Caliph to arm and fund them as I$I$ on behalf of Israel, to bring US arms and funds back in … and nobody cares~! Look at Ukraine~! MONSTROUS, MONSTROUS~! But nobody cares~! We're all being looted blind.

All the raw fear you saw on the Ubers' faces when 911 happened that there might be riots, their raw fear in 2008 when the housing bubble burst over national riots, the raw fear when they announced QEn, global riots. But nobody seemed to notice, and nobody seemed to care~!

It’s all out in the open now, and accelerating at light speed. The Social Security Trust Fund is looted with Fed Junk Bonds, the Banksters are bailed-in, scot-free and shorted to the hilt, waiting for the next flash crash. Congress wants -8% cuts across the board to health and human services, while Defense is clamoring for ANOTHER 13% budget increase, like it has every year since 2001, before they invoke UNLIMITED H-1B Hindu immigration.

So what’s the point now? What.is.the.point?! As Andrew Sullivan has retired, and Hunter S. Thompson expired, it’s bloody over. We’re just kibitzers in the line to the crematorium. Find a good book, pot a nice plant, and stake out your sunny 1/10th hectare to starve on.

Posted by: ChipNikh | Jan 30, 2015 3:25:53 AM | 29

Off topic but this looks excellent, and in a semi-mainstream New York publication: Ukraine on Her Knees. Detailed descriptions of the racist, fascist, and hopeless battalions battling the resistance in East Ukraine.

Posted by: fairleft | Jan 30, 2015 4:08:35 AM | 30

Have to concur w/ #28

We lost.


And I've suspected MOA was an intel hangout for a long, long time... and have solid reason to believe so. Though I know some here have been to see B, in Germany.*


*Waves at Joe, with my middle finger, How's Californication? treating ya, Joey?

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Jan 30, 2015 4:22:19 AM | 31

Link to ACLU">“Get out of here you low life scum.” (C-SPAN)

Code Pink protesters interrupt the start of the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing with former Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger, Madeleine Albright, and George Shultz. Senator John McCain, Chair of the Committee, has the protesters removed. Watch the complete hearing here: http://cs.pn/1uEQRKp

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Jan 30, 2015 4:47:30 AM | 32

“Get out of here you low life scum.” (C-SPAN)

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Jan 30, 2015 4:49:15 AM | 33

"As Disgraceful and Outrageous and Despicable as this"... Really?

This from War Criminal in Chief, John 'Maverick' McCain, responsible for arming and funding Al Nusra AQ and The Caliph I$I$ as US/IL's new proxy army, to drag US tax payers' blood & treasure back into the PNACs 14-Year War Crimes Against Humanity, with MILLIONS of Muslim innocents slaughtered, now more 1,000s BEHEADED, so McCain and his billionaire psychopath war criminal cronies can 'reluctantly' (can you hear them weeping) give MIC $10Bs MORE to increase Pentagon fraud, waste and abuse squandering, AGAIN, by another 13% a year, AGAIN, as it has for 14 years, while they cut all US health and human services funding by -8%?!

No my friends, there is nothing more disgraceful and outrageous and despicable as a traitor in national office, arming Middle Eastern terrorists with US 50-caliber sniper rifles to kill US kids being sent back into the meat grinder that John McCain just armed and funded.

Now he's doing it openly, brazenly, in plain view, on recorded video ... and nobody cares!
They're going to lynch Hillary to send a signal to all the JOs to keep their mouths shut, and put wiretaps on everyone who visits the MoA hangout with their breaking news flashes.

All animals are equal, ...but most of them will die in the coming con-flagration anyway.

Posted by: ChipNikh | Jan 30, 2015 5:18:59 AM | 34

S.O.T. but this Greek missive was written to Germans, so it belongs here on MoA.de.

Say Good Night, Dick ... Good Night, Dick!

Posted by: ChipNikh | Jan 30, 2015 5:49:24 AM | 35

Maybe calypso will make a true resurgence, after all the health and human services are gone? There's plenty of places still in the world where it's, "Learn or Die", and "Work or Starve."
You know, like Greek calpyso, and German calypso, and the New England calypso should be wild~!
Go On, Shut Your Mouth, Mama Look at Boo-Boo Day

Posted by: ChipNikh | Jan 30, 2015 6:21:34 AM | 36

As a US citizen, I try to vote for the best candidate, and the one likely to win so I do not squander my vote on someone who has no realistic chance of winning. I am loath to vote for Hillary for president, but I cannot imagine that the Republican party in its current state could possibly nominate anyone less undesirable.

Posted by: ralphieboy | Jan 30, 2015 7:05:47 AM | 37

problem is, the GOP has no problem with our belligerence. Obama was covering up that he was still running black prisons, and was as much of a hawk as Romney. That's the Benghazi cover up in a nutshell. Really not much to see here. Bush and Cheney clearly didn't listen to their intelligence communities either. Our politicians are too busy "making realities"

Posted by: scottindallas | Jan 30, 2015 8:32:38 AM | 38

Careful Ralphieboy, Hillary will be far worse than a GOP president. Hillary can sell out all the Dems, which no GOP can do. And, Hill will sell us out to war and wall st

Posted by: scottindallas | Jan 30, 2015 8:33:49 AM | 39

@scottindallas #38:

Yes, any Republican would be preferable to Hillary as president. With a Republican, Democrats in Congress would demonstrate some resistance to fascism, whereas with a Dem pres, they would just collaborate, as we have seen with Obomber.

Posted by: Demian | Jan 30, 2015 8:57:13 AM | 40

31@ "Get out of here you low life scum.” To which I would have replied to John McQeada, You have no need to talk, I can see that yellow streak right up your back, when you 'sang like a canary' in Vietnam,and received special treatment because your father was a Admiral. You Effin coward" May not have achieved anything, but by God, I would have felt better.

Posted by: harry law | Jan 30, 2015 9:07:03 AM | 41

@39 Democratic followers would be more vocal, but like the Dubya years, they would justify the behavior of Team Blue elites.

Posted by: NotTimothyGeithner | Jan 30, 2015 9:46:44 AM | 42

ChipNikh @ 28

Jesus, your description of Clinton is a masterpiece of vituperation. Maybe the best I've ever read. I'd recommend any politician who expects to go up against Clinton sign you on immediately.

If I keep reading it, it's going to be engraved in my mind along with the Gettysburg Address.

(Billmon's blog was Whiskey Bar.)

Posted by: Ken Nari | Jan 30, 2015 10:05:06 AM | 43

For what it’s worth ..

Refers to “On the day the U.N. resolution was passed, Mrs. Clinton ordered a general within the Pentagon to refuse to take a call with Gadhafi's son Seif and other high-level members within the regime..” from the posted article. (See Rusty Pipes and above.)

Published June 2014.

On March 20, 2011 General Abdulqader Yusef Dibri, head of personal security for Qaddafi, contacted Rear Admiral (Ret.) Chuck Kubic. Upon receiving this information, Rear Admiral Kubic telephoned Lieutenant Colonel Brian Linvill in Stuttgart, Germany, the U.S. AFRICOM officer point of contact for all military matters involving Libya.

Lieutenant Colonel Linvill immediately notified the head of AFRICOM, General Carter Ham, stating that the Libyan dictator was ready to establish communication with the Africa military command. General Ham was quite interested. However, the Obama administration did not give permission to General Ham to proceed with the negotiations.

The opportunity for a peaceful resolution of the conflict in Libya did not interest President Obama. http://tinyurl.com/mj9rg5k

Just before G. was murdered (20 oct. ’11, wiki) HRC was in Tripoli, news from 18 oct.

She said she hoped that Col Gaddafi would be captured or killed.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-15349335

Posted by: Noirette | Jan 30, 2015 10:11:21 AM | 44

I agree with ben @1, James @12 and jfl @13. Voting changes nothing. It matters not who is "elected". All we have is election theater.

Posted by: SingingSam | Jan 30, 2015 10:28:01 AM | 45

Posted by: ChipNikh | Jan 30, 2015 3:25:53 AM | 28

What.is.the.point?! As Andrew Sullivan has retired, and Hunter S. Thompson expired, it’s bloody over. We’re just kibitzers in the line to the crematorium.

The point is to keep fighting, because not even ChipNikh can predict the future. The present is very complex, with many forces, some of them positive (like the economic powerhouse growth of China), so keep ranting but don't despair and don't give up. There's no crematorium. Plan for at worst severe cuts in your Social Security and co-pays introduced on the good ol' Medicare, but you'll make it. Check the prices in the cat and dog food aisle. You'll be alright.

The point in this specific instance is that strong evidence for "Clinton lied us into war" is a great weapon for anti-imperialists and those opposed to the fake two party system as long as we also emphasize (simultaneously) the strong evidence for "Bush lied us into war." And throw in that 2012 Repub Prez candidate McCain is trying to lie us into war right now on the side of Al Qaeda and ISIS, but add that Obama just a few days ago kowtowed with the main 'secret' funder of Al Qaeda/ISIS, Saudi Arabia. Keep our fire balanced is the best we can do, and try our best to get our message out there in the nets.

Posted by: fairleft | Jan 30, 2015 10:28:24 AM | 46

i hate to disappoint you
but Hilary Clinton has been the odds-on favorite to
win US Presidential Election in 2016 for the past,lets say,perhaps 2+years

US might be getting the President they've always longed for-----not.

Posted by: chris m | Jan 30, 2015 10:29:41 AM | 47

@46 She was also the odds on favorite from Dec. 2004 to Feb. 1st 2008.

Hillary has ridden a wave of pre-Title IX support, but incompetence and cruelty were her undoing last time. Simple aging has removed 6 years worth of her supporters. As the nominee, she will win, but she has ample time to display the qualities that led voters to Obozo.

Posted by: NotTimothyGeithner | Jan 30, 2015 10:47:50 AM | 48

@ 44: "All we have is election theater."

For most general elections, very true, I fear. E-voting systems are a pox.

E. Warren or B. Sanders, could make a few waves IF they get their progressive message out through the main stream corporate media. I doubt that will happen, given the way corporate media throttles any message they don't approve of. The billions oligarchs will spend in the 2016 elections will buy a lot of fealty. Ownership of the megaphone, and the "lawmakers", is a tough nut to crack.

Posted by: ben | Jan 30, 2015 10:50:50 AM | 49

Recommended - London Review of Books - Review of two Clinton books - We came, we saw, he died - By Jackson Lears

The intellectual bankruptcy of the Democratic Party is nowhere more evident than in the looming presidential candidacy of Hillary Rodham Clinton. Assumptions of the inevitability of her candidacy tend to ignore policy matters, focusing instead on her gender and her twenty years as a Washington insider. Many usually thoughtful people can find nothing more substantial to say in her favour than ‘it’s her turn.’ This points to the problem with identity politics: it suggests that this woman deserves the presidency because she has paid her dues, first by enduring public humiliation at the hands of her philandering husband, then by losing the 2008 primaries to the messianic Obama. However empty his promises proved to be, Americans can congratulate themselves on having elected a black man; now, in the feel-good world of identity politics, it’s time to elect a woman. Who else but Hillary Clinton?
...

Posted by: b | Jan 30, 2015 11:51:19 AM | 50

Relevant story on the problem of unlimited money in the political process. Not just a USA problem.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/01/koch-brothers-mega-donation-proves-citizens-united-ruling-exacerbated-our-undemocratic-condition/

@ b 50: Can't count her out. Big money will get who they want.

Posted by: ben | Jan 30, 2015 12:04:01 PM | 51

Clinton is still laughing at that (vid): "We came, we saw, he died. Hahahahahaha ..."

In Clinton's sick brain it is rather:

"I saw, He died, I come"

Posted by: Anonymous | Jan 30, 2015 12:12:24 PM | 52

b @ #50,

Thank you. Provocative and insightful. I have shared this around.

Posted by: JerseyJeffersonian | Jan 30, 2015 1:55:54 PM | 53

Could it be, that the needs of the new Saudi King to mop up the palace and it's lawns is a splendid opportunity to disarm the 9/11 - racket in Washington? Who could oppose a Saudi scapegoat, if the new king himself uses it to close ranks behind him?

Even as a thread this might be quite efficient.

Posted by: TomGard | Jan 30, 2015 3:58:41 PM | 54

"As a US citizen, I try to vote for the best candidate, and the one likely to win so I do not squander my vote on someone who has no realistic chance of winning.

Hahhaaa. "As a US citizen, I try and choose the tastiest of the turds presented me. Mmmm mmm!" Really, this is what a pathetic show US politics have become. A bunch of children dizzy and puking on Rep-Dem merry-go-round - and no clue of how to get off the thing.

The US citizens simply aren't involved. They really do think democracy is trying to "the best" the hand picked candidates - of which "the best" won't be found within 100 miles of any campaign headquarters. They aren't involved in parties, don't give a fig about local politics. Its hopeless.

Of course US citizens pride themselves on "hard work" but unfortunately they don't seem to understand the political process. For every American who derides "the politicians" and is worried about "the country", they ought to know at least this: the difference between volunteering in local politics and voting for the US president is about on the same as someone who wants to retire someday deciding they're just going to play the lottery a couple times instead of getting a job. Foolish in the extreme.

Not that you can blame them. Its basically a lost cause to try and work inside the US oligarchy. But I don't think that's why most people don't fight. Its just that they just don't take politics personally enough. Which is a damn shame because that's what its all about.

Posted by: guest77 | Jan 30, 2015 9:25:46 PM | 55

Posted by: b | Jan 30, 2015 11:51:19 AM | 50

Thanks b.
The LRB review of Shrillary's book really IS a must-read.
Apart from the fact that every paragraph contains repulsive-but-valuable insights into her lack of both character and moral compass, there are some spiffy new words of which "teleology" is a one-word picture worth a thousand words, with "providentialist" coming a close second.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jan 30, 2015 9:38:46 PM | 56

ChipNikh @ 29, 34 --

You brought me down so bad, esp 29. But I still believe, like Winston Smith, "if there is any hope, it lies in the proles." Probably not so much in the center, as the periphery, at least to start, but hopefully I'm wrong.

But your video at 34 improved my mood and inspired me to look up an old favorite. This was a popular tune in the Caribbean at the time of the invasion of Grenada, Government Boots. Note the dissonance btw. word and image. Suitable for a thread on the Clintons, no?

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.... But seriously, keep settling for the lesser of evils, you only get offered evils.

Posted by: rufus magister | Jan 30, 2015 11:30:50 PM | 57

Her brand will have been tested by countless focus groups.
She must have decided the war cries work for her.

This video on the "sacrifice of Ukraine" has a analysis from a Vedic Shaman on the - instinctive - meaning of blood sacrifice and a fascinating cut of an Obama speech (talking about sacrifice) with an Aztec blood ritual.
From 13:00 onwards.

Posted by: somebody | Jan 31, 2015 2:42:57 AM | 58

@58

Yeah, it's a fascinating movie. But rather than dwell on the 'vedic sacrifice' angle I think we're better of following the money. Note the 'priestly' oligarchs are all billionaires.

Garden variety greed allowed to go to its 'logical' extreme. The US/EU have wasted so much money and treasure in pursuit of 'more' that its now conquer and divide Russia ... or collapse.

Yes, they have now devastated the Ukraine, just as they have devastated Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria.

But if they try to devastate Russia it will be the whole world that will be devastated.

I know they don't care. But I do. How about you?

Posted by: jfl | Jan 31, 2015 7:17:18 AM | 59

Posted by: jfl | Jan 31, 2015 7:17:18 AM | 59

You want to be a pawn? Last time I looked Russia was ruled by oligarchs/billionaires ...

Posted by: somebody | Jan 31, 2015 7:25:08 AM | 60

@somebody #60:

Russia is "ruled" by the government of the Russian Federation, with the president and members of parliament being selected by free elections. In other words, Russia is ruled by the Russian people.

Germany in contrast is not even a sovereign country, but a colony of the United States. So one can't even say that German oligarchs rule Germany: the US deep state does.

Posted by: Demian | Jan 31, 2015 7:42:58 AM | 61

somebody

Whats the name of these specific oligarchs? Just curious.

Posted by: Anonymous | Jan 31, 2015 7:52:03 AM | 62

Posted by: Anonymous | Jan 31, 2015 7:52:03 AM | 62

Like here:

Putin treats Russia's oligarchs to a free supper. Reportedly there were forty of them.

Of course, you can argue that Putin is the one who makes the rules here. I would argue, it is a military industrial complex cum security apparatus that disciplines the oligarchs but works for them. Putin came to power chosen by the Jelzin "family".

Secret Services have quite a business wing, and Putin was part of the network in East Germany, no, it was not business in the East, but with the West.

Above mentioned Schalck-Golodkowski by the way has a well cushioned quiet life in South Bavaria nowadays. He has friends here who protect him.

The German parliamentary enquiry commission on Schalck-Golodkowski got nowhere, those enquiry commissions don't even exist in Russia.

Posted by: somebody | Jan 31, 2015 8:52:29 AM | 63

Posted by: Demian | Jan 31, 2015 7:42:58 AM | 61

I have chosen a
Russian source
, so you cannot claim it is propaganda.

A third of respondents (33 percent) blamed regional and local officials for corrupt practices, and 31 percent said corruption was characteristic of deputies of regional and local councils and State Duma deputies. Twenty-nine percent suspect governors and judges of being unscrupulous, and 26 percent said this about employees of federal departments and ministries and rectors of higher education establishments. ... In the opinion of 45 percent of the respondents, bribery is the main form of corruption in Russia. Thirty-three percent pointed to behind-the-scenes influence and 31 percent to nepotism. Twenty-nine percent mentioned machinations with public assets amongst widely spread phenomena, and 27 percent said that misuse and embezzlement of public assets were rather common. Machinations in public procurement were mentioned by 23 percent, bribery of civil servants by 22 percent and tax evasion was named by 21 percent. Twenty percent said "a bloated staff or budget of administrative bodies" was a frequent form of corruption and the same number spoke about extortion by civil servants. More than a third (38 percent) thinks that the Russian authorities will continue their crackdown on corruption but will have little success because "corruption is indestructible". About a quarter (26 percent) believe the crackdown could be successful if there were "a purge of the senior bureaucratic ranks" and stricter punishment for corrupt practices. Nineteen percent argued it was hard for the leaders to fight corruption "because of their large dependence on the corrupt officials."

Who would you say governs the country in circumstances like this. The person that gets elected or the person that pays him?

Posted by: somebody | Jan 31, 2015 9:03:33 AM | 64

somebody

I cant access the page since its behind pay-wall.
FT is problematic in itself (being against anything Russian), and lunching with business people (as the headline implies?) are no proof that these people "rule Russia" as you claimed earlier. Are there oligarchs in Russia on the other hand? Of course.

Posted by: Anonymous | Jan 31, 2015 9:15:14 AM | 65

Well, in this case wsws.org agrees with the Financial Times, with a slightly different perspective of course.

Faced with a massive speculative attack on the ruble by the global financial system controlled by the imperialist powers, President Putin has appealed directly to Russia’s oligarchs. On December 19, he met with leading Russian finance tycoons and big industrialists to strengthen the Kremlin's alliance with the financial and business oligarchy. At the annual dinner between the Kremlin chief and the country's billionaires, Putin promised them that the sanctions imposed by the US and European Union would not come at their expense. ... According to the Vedomosti report, the meeting took place in a “very cordial atmosphere”. Another oligarch commented, “The main message of the meeting was the following: the government will protect business, and business should also help the government.” The meeting was attended by representatives of 41 leading Russian employers and banks, including the oligarchs Petr Aven, Roman Abramovitch, Viktor Wechselberg, Oleg Deripaska, Leonid Michelson, Michail Prochorov, Alischer Usmanow and Ruben Wardjanjan. The gathering included the top layer of the super-rich on the Forbes list. ... In order to secure the support of the oligarchs, the Putin regime is ready to place the entire burden of the economic crisis onto the backs of the working class. The Kremlin has intensified its austerity measures. At the same time, laws are being prepared to protect the fortunes of the oligarchs from the effects of the sanctions. According to the Rotenberg Law—named after Putin's friend and oligarch Arkadi Rotenberg—the Kremlin will repay the value of assets which Russian oligarchs have lost abroad as a result of the sanctions. The idea came from Rotenberg, after the Italian government took possession of his villa worth $40 million in October. The overwhelming majority of the Duma (parliament) voted for the law at its first reading in October. The law essentially means that the cost of the oligarchs’ “stolen property” is to be paid for by the Russian people. It is one of many measures by the Kremlin that show the reactionary character of the Putin government. Elvira Nabiullina, who heads the Russian Central Bank, responded to the massive devaluation of the ruble by raising the prime rate from 6.5 to 17 percent beginning January 1, 2015. In the international financial press, the move was hailed as long overdue and necessary. As in the 1998 financial crisis, a weak ruble would create a mechanism to curb wages and social benefits. This is why the policy of a weak ruble has been welcomed by sections of the oligarchy. Even before the start of the economic war against Russia, the central bank had significantly devalued the currency at the end of last year. ... In order to secure the support of the oligarchs, the Putin regime is ready to place the entire burden of the economic crisis onto the backs of the working class. The Kremlin has intensified its austerity measures. At the same time, laws are being prepared to protect the fortunes of the oligarchs from the effects of the sanctions. According to the Rotenberg Law—named after Putin's friend and oligarch Arkadi Rotenberg—the Kremlin will repay the value of assets which Russian oligarchs have lost abroad as a result of the sanctions. The idea came from Rotenberg, after the Italian government took possession of his villa worth $40 million in October. The overwhelming majority of the Duma (parliament) voted for the law at its first reading in October. The law essentially means that the cost of the oligarchs’ “stolen property” is to be paid for by the Russian people. It is one of many measures by the Kremlin that show the reactionary character of the Putin government. Elvira Nabiullina, who heads the Russian Central Bank, responded to the massive devaluation of the ruble by raising the prime rate from 6.5 to 17 percent beginning January 1, 2015. In the international financial press, the move was hailed as long overdue and necessary. As in the 1998 financial crisis, a weak ruble would create a mechanism to curb wages and social benefits. This is why the policy of a weak ruble has been welcomed by sections of the oligarchy. Even before the start of the economic war against Russia, the central bank had significantly devalued the currency at the end of last year.

Yes, I know. They are Trotzkists.

But yes, Russia is a very capitalist country, with a lot of monopoly, a small well connected elite that got rich by the fire sale/privatization of national industries, minus some checks and balances that exist in other capitalist countries. That is the reason Russian (and Ukrainian) oligarchs fight it out in London courts.


Posted by: somebody | Jan 31, 2015 9:42:28 AM | 66

Whats the name of these specific oligarchs? Just curious.
Posted by: Anonymous | Jan 31, 2015 7:52:03 AM | 62

Nifty question!
RT News did a piece recently which stated that "80 Billionaires worldwide control as much wealth as the poorest 50% (3,5 billion people)". Whoever compiled those stats could only have done so if they knew the nominal identity of each Billionaire. The same piece said there are circa 1,600 Billionaires. It would be a boost for public confidence if everyone on the planet had access to a comprehensive list of the names and addresses of every billionaire so that everyone would know who their nearest local Billionaire happens to be. It would help people decide who, and how best, to thank for his/her unselfish and/or selfish deeds.

I'd be very surprised if Vlad doesn't know precisely where every Western Billionaire, with plans to wreck Russia for personal gain is, 24/7.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jan 31, 2015 10:07:42 AM | 67

... minus some checks and balances that exist in other capitalist countries. That is the reason Russian (and Ukrainian) oligarchs fight it out in London courts.
Posted by: somebody | Jan 31, 2015 9:42:28 AM | 66

Ahem! It was the absence of anything resembling "checks and balances" in the clubbish US of A financial system which

-FACILITATED the sub-prime scam,
-enabled the culprits to escape punishment and keep the commissions and loot
-rewarded the looters (who cried poor) with truckloads of Fed cash
-encouraged the same people to start looting countries whose economies had been damaged by the sub-prime scam.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jan 31, 2015 10:29:30 AM | 68

somebody

Your source comes from:

<>Vedomosti

Vedemosti is an anti-Russian gov, site.

As you yourself said earlier this week, 'it always best to go to the first source'.

Posted by: Anonymous | Jan 31, 2015 12:09:17 PM | 69

@60

I am not 'rooting for' Russia .., although I am rooting for the Russian people ... the Ukrainian people, the Syrian people, the Libyan people, the Yemeni people, the Iraqi people, the Afghani people ... the American people. And for all the other people, animals, plants, and rocks, air, soil and water of our planet.

My point is that the greedy, ruthless, and increasingly desperate US/EU 'elite' will destroy more than 'just' themselves if they back Russia into the corner, as they are doing their very best to do.

It's time - it's always time - for all of us Russian, Ukrainian, Syrian, Libyan, Yemenis, Iraqis, Afghans, and Americans to get control of our governments and just call the whole thing off.

Posted by: jfl | Jan 31, 2015 1:10:12 PM | 70

Those who try and attack Russia because it is "run by oligarchs" should consider what to call a nation where the same 2 last names have been President for 20 out of the last 28 years, and where the same 2 last names appear to be fighting over the next 4.
The last gasp will be when a pet animal gets appointed to be Senator as Caligula did with his favorite horse.
Equally, the issue isn't who runs the nation. The issue is actually whether the person running the nation is making life better for its citizens. Can anyone say that of any American president in the last multiple decades?
Contrast that with what Putin has accomplished.

Posted by: ǝn⇂ɔ | Jan 31, 2015 1:30:19 PM | 71

as Caligula did with his favorite horse. and President "read my lips" did with his favorite chimp.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jan 31, 2015 2:43:32 PM | 72

@71 ǝn⇂ɔ - great comment that more could ponder..

consider fixing the problems at home rather then telling others how to fix theirs is another thought i entertain from time to time.

Posted by: james | Jan 31, 2015 3:20:46 PM | 73

en1c @ 71 --

Does Caribou Barbie count? She was only nominated as VP, failed to serve out her term in Alaska.

HW at 72 --

Let's be fair, RR only played opposite a chimp in Hollywood. Can we switch in Bush the elder making Dan "Can you spell Potato" Quayle his VP?

Posted by: rufus magister | Jan 31, 2015 3:53:45 PM | 74

Posted by: Anonymous | Jan 31, 2015 12:09:17 PM | 69

You can also read John Helmer's account if you prefer.

The dinner has been discussed by lots of people from various political sides - it was no secret.

I know the US are an oligarchy, however in Europe such a collective dinner would leave a bad taste - some people having special access to the state.

Posted by: jfl | Jan 31, 2015 1:10:12 PM | 70

I agree with that though identities are more complex than nations and people (as pawns) are made to kill each other for their loyalty and identity. We should learn not to do it and not to cheer it on.

Posted by: ǝn⇂ɔ | Jan 31, 2015 1:30:19 PM | 71

That benchmark is arguable. After the Jelzin years it could not get much worse. Russians are now back at the life expectancy they enjoyed at the height of the "communist" 1980's. Cubans have 10 more years. Don't tell me it is the climate and alcohol. Finnish life span is even longer.

Anyway, whatever happens in Russia, hardly is all Putin's work though the media enjoy making him dictator nowadays. Yes, he is demonized for all kinds of - bad - reasons, and yes, a new cold or even hot war is not in Europe's interest, nor is regime change in Russia as some people are clearly planning for.

Posted by: somebody | Jan 31, 2015 5:38:01 PM | 75

Hillary's book may have appeared with her name on it, but how much of it did she write, or read?

Posted by: lysias | Jan 31, 2015 6:09:23 PM | 76

@75

' We should learn not to do it and not to cheer it on. '

Right on. Although that's kounter kultural these days, even here at MoA.

Posted by: jfl | Jan 31, 2015 6:22:55 PM | 77

#70: It's time - it's always time - for all of us Russian, Ukrainian, Syrian, Libyan, Yemenis, Iraqis, Afghans, and Americans to get control of our governments and just call the whole thing off.

#75: people (as pawns) are made to kill each other for their loyalty and identity. We should learn not to do it and not to cheer it on.

A German saying that people trying to defeat fascism should not be cheered on. Nice. As Scott observed, Germany was defeated, but Nazism wasn't.

Posted by: Demian | Jan 31, 2015 7:52:02 PM | 78

Somebody

Having dinner with business men doesnt mean they rule Russia imo.

As Demian said:

Russia is "ruled" by the government of the Russian Federation, with the president and members of parliament being selected by free elections. In other words, Russia is ruled by the Russian people.

Posted by: Anonymous | Feb 1, 2015 3:50:41 AM | 79

Posted by: Anonymous | Feb 1, 2015 3:50:41 AM | 79

Sure. Same way the US are ruled by the American people.

Posted by: somebody | Feb 1, 2015 4:29:29 AM | 80

#75: people (as pawns) are made to kill each other for their loyalty and identity. We should learn not to do it and not to cheer it on.

A German saying that people trying to defeat fascism should not be cheered on. Nice.

Posted by: Demian | Jan 31, 2015 7:52:02 PM | 78

As someone said earlier Demian - You should learn not to do it and not to cheer it on

Russia is ruled by the Russian people.

Posted by: Anonymous | Feb 1, 2015 3:50:41 AM | 79

LOL

The things they say, eh?

Cute in an 8yr - kinda retarded though, in an adult

Posted by: Rogan Josh | Feb 1, 2015 10:00:23 AM | 81

b@50

Jackson Lears analysis reminds me of David Brooks.

Posted by: rjj | Feb 1, 2015 11:17:09 AM | 82

inanity is measured in Brooks units.

Posted by: rjj | Feb 1, 2015 11:25:48 AM | 83

What could recommend Mrs. Clinton would be the quantity and quality (two minutes hate quotient) of her negative press - and the sources.

Posted by: rjj | Feb 1, 2015 11:33:03 AM | 84

she came, we saw her, she lost.
now forever disappear and take pointless bill and pussi levy with you

Posted by: 5 dancing shlomos | Feb 6, 2015 2:00:25 PM | 85

The comments to this entry are closed.