H. Clinton has the worst criminally evil track record and political heinous nature that anyone 5% truthful enough about the worst of her could slaughter her as a candidate. Sanders the coward refused.
She is one of the most vulnerable to attacks of most candidates, I would say, in all of recent US history.
If the atrocious Trump doesn’t fuck up like the usual moron his is, and he goes on the attack, he should win in a landslide.

Posted by: tom | May 11 2016 19:22 utc | 3

hey b – you still feel that way?

Posted by: james | May 11 2016 19:43 utc | 5

nmb, i image that President Putin is making no assumptions wrt Trump. Of course Trump is at least theoretically a better outcome for Russia than Clinton, as we know her form, and we don’t know Trumps yet. In fact, though I am not a US citizen, if I were voting in Nov, I would prefer Trump over Clinton without question, despite the fact that I suspect that at best he is a clown, and on his public performances to date as a candidate, completely unsuited for high public office.
In some ways he reminds me of Boris Yeltsin, except he had the excuse of the demon drink!

Posted by: Razor Edge | May 11 2016 20:24 utc | 7

Hillary will have maximum institutional support. She’s gonna have over a billion dollars for her campaign. And even more if it looks tight. Wall St and all the other cartels from Healthcare, Defense, Trial lawyers, etc will pour as much money as necessary. She will have the complete backing of the media. She will launch the biggest campaign of fear that has been seen in America. Both the Democrat and Republican establishment will be her campaign echo chamber.
Trump is already stacking his team with establishment types. Goldman Sachs man has been appointed as his campaign’s fund raising chief. Can he continue to run his campaign as a maverick or will he succumb and get crushed in November?

Posted by: ab initio | May 11 2016 20:40 utc | 9

@ Banger 4
Not just Stone, there is also former Clinton insider Larry Nichols. If he remains healthy, he has pledged to help stop Hillary, says ..”if she’s not stopped, It’s over.” “[for the country]
@ nmb 8
Trump has the support of neocons —in the wings out of view are neocon supporters….think John Bolton and his types.
@Ab inito 9
it will Clinton’s billion dollars vs. Trump’s billion dollars. But it won’t buy this (s)election. O.t.h, it may just be Trump vs. Biden. DOJ’s reputation is at question.
Hillary, the most polarizing person in USSA politics, cannot disown Obamacare – she was part of that administration. Soon the double digit increases for Obamacare premiums will be in the mail and will become a campaign issue. So much for saving that $2,500!
It will be which side of the same coin get to count the vote. It has become a one-party system. Trump presents as a true outsider – the establishment should have kept silent if they wanted Trump to lose the nomination. They (the .01%) have underestimated the angst.

Posted by: likklemore | May 11 2016 21:29 utc | 11

@12 The more I see of these grinning overpaid progressives the more I think Trump will win.

Posted by: dh | May 11 2016 22:27 utc | 13

On the other hand, Trump is way too cozy with the Clintons and their social circles:

One of Trump’s closest friends and backers is a dual Israeli citizen Stewart Rahr, who goes by the nickmane “Stewie Rah Rah.” Rahr’s pharmaceutical company Kinray, Inc. cashed in on the spike in sales of the antibiotic Cipro in the wake of the anthrax attacks in October 2001. I believe this attack was yet another false flag. . . .
. . . . Stewie Rah Rah’s business card features himself posed with Donald Trump and Bill Clinton.
Rahr also likes to pal around with the Clinton crime family. The mogul’s business card is a fake $1 billion bill showing Rahr with golf buddies Bill Clinton and Trump over the motto “In Stewart We Trust” – his own name substituted for God’s.

http://winteractionables.com/?p=32811

Posted by: RudyM | May 11 2016 23:31 utc | 15

I am going to do a bit of projection of what my gut is telling me.
My gut is telling me that it will be Sanders against Trump and not Clinton II. I have no real data to back that up but smile when I think of the propaganda shit storm that would be.
End of projection.
Trump is a wannabee global plutocrat. I read comments here about how Trump is going to do something that might be good for the public and I just roll my eyes. Trump is the “Don’t throw me in the briar patch.” candidate for the global plutocrats and private finance……another dictator to be manipulated with ease and a great cover for doing real bad shit to the public.

Posted by: psychohistorian | May 12 2016 1:02 utc | 17

I thought I read somewhere that the Russians were thinking about releasing copies of Clinton’s emails that they somehow acquired. I thought it was on Sputnik, but maybe Reddit. Wouldn’t that be hilarious?

Posted by: Mischi | May 12 2016 1:44 utc | 19

Some defenses for Hilary:
Wikileaks had a field day with State Department e-mails, so a private server is not necessarily more secure. And it is not like Russians do not know what American diplomats are doing. The secrecy is for the public, and the vital secrets, those that would be dangerous for the foreigners to know, should not be given to DoS.
Clintonism (colonial version of Laborite “Third Way”) is first and formost about “triangulation”, and only secondarily about neo-con positions etc. Basically, Sanders can capture enough delegates so Hillary will have to get “superdelegate” votes, and the Democratic apparatus probably already noticed that Sanders has much better poll numbers. I expect that Hillary will make a fresh triangulation to present a credible platform. So far, she allegedly dropped her support for the newest batch of trade treaties.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | May 12 2016 3:09 utc | 21

Biden will be the next president, if he doesn’t get shot first.

Posted by: Denis | May 12 2016 4:33 utc | 23

no matter who wins,the rest of us lose…

Posted by: brian | May 12 2016 7:23 utc | 25

Here is what you need! Very much! Please read it carefully, twice.
Nothing else will help:
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2016/05/432181.shtml

Posted by: blues | May 12 2016 9:53 utc | 27

ofc Clinton will win, if Trump has the slightest chance, they’ll just do a Kennedy ^^

Posted by: xmasucks | May 12 2016 10:24 utc | 29

chipnick couldn’t resist for long ^^

Posted by: xmasucks | May 12 2016 11:06 utc | 31

People who say they won’t vote because they despise both major parties have a moral duty to vote third party (I intend to vote for Jill Stein). The way to refute the argument that votes for third parties are wasted votes is for enough people to vote third party.

Posted by: lysias | May 12 2016 11:51 utc | 33

collective stupidity is rarely as animated as during election season.
cultural placebo = sham therapy.
Democratic politics are stupid, not so much a reality TV show as a glorified version of the policeman’s identity parade, but in reverse time: the mass of voters identify the perp, and then he gets to go and commit his crimes
simultaneously parodying the utility of 20/20 hindsight.

Posted by: john | May 12 2016 12:10 utc | 35

lysias @35:

The way to refute the argument that votes for third parties are wasted votes is for enough people to vote third party.

I think the way to refute the argument is to explain that the major parties collude to exclude. This is a major part of the ‘rigged’ political system that even Trump and Sanders don’t speak of (because they are duopoly candidates).
Third-parties ARE viable. They always have been. The ‘illusion of choice’ is entirely constructed to ensure that power remains in the ‘right hands’.
The barriers to third-parties are entirely artificial:

Money-in-politics
Citizens United made corporations people and money speech. The result: large donors to SuperPACs (oligarchs) have undue influence on candidate selection and ‘viability’.
‘One person one vote’;
To most Americans this simple rule is the very essence of democracy. But it is deeply flawed as it ensures lesser-evil voting. A better system is ranked/scored choice where each voter gets multiple votes to allocate. In such a system, voters have EQUAL VOTES but can allocate some of their votes to a preferred choice instead of a lesser-evil.
Vote hurdles.
Presidential election financing and debates each require a minimum number of votes in the previous election or minimum interest from polling. This makes some sense BUT money-in-politics and lesser-evil voting mean that third-party candidates can’t qualify.

Together, these barriers kettle voters into a false choice between one of the duopoly’s establishment candidates.
What to do about it:

1) Help to overturn Citizens United;
2) Spread the word;
3) Vote third-party.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | May 12 2016 13:39 utc | 37

39;The only third party which would be reported on by the MSM would be a pro Zion as the 51st state(but number 1 overall)candidate.Will Stein promote such?

Posted by: dahoit | May 12 2016 14:27 utc | 39

I’ve always, since forever, said that Killary cannot win,.
She is simply too horrible, and too hated, rightly so. Remember, she lost to Obama, a one time loser already… I may have to eat my hat as I don’t wear ties. Still, I think NOT.
Recall, electronic vote switching / etc. took place in Obama vs. Romney, in favor of Romney, but the Obama (and in general Dem advantage) was too massive for it to work. One can only do so much! It provides a small boost -> 2-5%. Enough to elect G. W. Bush vs. Gore – not to mention the Supreme Court, etc. — No links, look it up.
The problem of the DEMS is that they have not invested in vote-flipping, and don’t control the apparatus, as they have the ‘natural’ advantage in the sense that the US population today is more DEM than REP.
Their investment was purely implemented to consolidate the power structure (top-down) of the Dem party, to blithely, confidently, ensure all the Dem voters would come in to:
Coronate their Queen
DEMS used, and use, fraud and shenanigans within the party (to keep Killary tops), but not outside, or not clearly so for the mo.
That strategy has now come apart thanks to both Sanders and Trump, both extemely popular opponents attacking her from different angles.
In any case, nothing much will change re. Foreign policy.
..if posted before i missed it …
Counterpunch, How H.C. bought the loyalty of 33 DEM state parties

Posted by: Noirette | May 12 2016 15:51 utc | 41

It doesn’t matter who is going to win. ‘They’ can put a sock-puppet in the White House, it will be the same ; more war, strife ,oppression both abroad and at home. In fact, as a Muslim; I can tell you that the road has, is and will continue to be paved where-in the nefarious folks who brought us 9-11 (Zionists and fascists)will orchestrate another , if not bigger calamity that will usher in a very dark chapter for the World, America and especially Muslims(here and around abroad).Following this ‘event’,Muslims living in America(citizens or otherwise) will be rounded-up and put on trains or whatever and sent to internment(FEMA)camps; while more war will intensify in the Middle East. Say I didn’t say so. You watch and see.I’ve been a ‘ watcher’ since I was ten years old..I know how these Satanists think. Coming to roads and highways near you will be billboards asking if you know any Muslims to call, and it will be all over T.V too. I’m also certain that there will be many good hearted Christian(not evangelists or Zionist types) etc who will help; perhaps even an underground rail-road or something to help Muslims at a risk to themselves. And no, I don’t wear, or have a tin foil hat nor do I see unicorns in my back yard. God watch over us all.

Posted by: bored muslim | May 12 2016 16:18 utc | 43

blues,
In less than 3 weeks we Californians will decide either Killary or Bernie the Democratic party presidential’s nominees. A critical must win State. Fortunately or unfortunately, Bernie won the West Virginia primary and may win California.
I sincerely believe Bernie is a Neoliberal (warmonger beside others) and have said Israel have the right to defense itself and US will pay Egypt and Israel billions to continue endless wars and murders in the West banks Gaza and elsewhere
I was prepared for upset, changed my voting preference from Green Party to no preference voter. I can vote in California’s Democratic party primary and other local issues.
Killary or Bernie?

Posted by: Jack Smith | May 12 2016 17:27 utc | 45

Write Me In! Robert K. Joyce, 01060 (blues)
No fake “Green Party” compromises!
Strategic simple score (“simple score”) voting can be completely described in one short simple sentence: Strategically bid no vote at all (ignore them as if the did not exist), or strategically bid from five (5) to ten (10) votes to any number of candidates you wish (up to some reasonable limit, say 20 candidates (20 ballot entries, where each voter counts up their ballot entries by numbering them), and then simply add all the votes up.
Any reasonably intelligent person can see how strategic simple score voting would completely disrupt and remove the two-party spoiler effect.
For example:
Social justice voters could give 10 votes to Dennis Kucinich, 10 to Cynthia McKinney, 10 to Jesse Ventura, 10 votes to blues, and 5 to 9 to Bernie Sanders.
Conservative voters could give 10 votes to Jimmy Duncan and 9 to Donald Trump.
In each case their power of franchise would only be diminished by 10% or 20% or 50% if their first choice failed. Hardly at all.
The vote-for-one two-party system would grind to a halt.
STOP listening to the election methods punditariat camps! Especially Wikipedia.
They are all jerks.
Simply demand power. Nothing more nor less.

Posted by: blues | May 12 2016 17:45 utc | 47

IOW: Information Operations Warfare

Posted by: okie farmer | May 12 2016 18:38 utc | 49

brian @ 26: “no matter who wins,the rest of us lose…”
If you’re working class, yes.
If anyone believes the Empires course will change based on the outcome of this “election”, they’re delusional. Enjoy the Theater.

Posted by: ben | May 12 2016 19:01 utc | 51

No, Hillary can’t win. Only a few insane lesbians have voted for her this time around. The vote count in U.S. elections is entirely fictional. That is exactly why Hillary will be installed as president by the money power boys who want her in and she will quickly establish martial law for them and put the “homeland security” army in the field to take the guns. Then it hits the fan for survival or death. And she will love it all.

Posted by: Tony B. | May 12 2016 19:29 utc | 53

Biden as bad or worse than Hillary. Member of the Obysmal, Hillary, Kerry, Nuland/Kagan/Kissinger/Brzezinski camp of Warmongering Zionists.
Biden performs for AIPAC whenever he gets a chance.
“I am a Zionist”. – Biden
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uo-UXZ-1ups

Posted by: fast freddy | May 12 2016 20:54 utc | 55

My random event generator tells me frequently that:
‘Every excess becomes a vice’
Excess behavior = Clinton and her paymasters are overdoing it in a stellar fashion. Trump and his ill gained wealth are a serious anathema for the average John and Jane Does.
Both of these candidates are against the best interests of ‘ordinary’ Americans and their offspring.
A good friend told me just earlier that she finally thinks that Americans have to be the dumbest people on the planet.
I disagreed respectfully. The American people are not the dumbest people on Earth – they are the most manipulated people on Earth and that’s a big difference.
Each moment the Clinton and the Trump proceed, will generate a huge push back on behalf of the majority of Americans. Each moment, it becomes more apparent that the two Emperors are not wearing any clothes.
Absent large scale vote rigging – which is absolutely not beyond the establishment’s attempts to maintain exploitation business as usual – the American population will gather behind Sanders. That is not an endorsement of Sanders, but more so the logical consequence of an awakening citizenry.
You may call me a dreamer – but I am not the only one…

Posted by: Helena | May 12 2016 22:29 utc | 57

@lebretteurfredonnant #23
FDR wasn’t a war monger
1933-1940 was the only time in which the USA weren’t involved in wars

Posted by: claudio | May 13 2016 7:35 utc | 59

Donnie’s got religion …
Trump signals backing for cuts to Social Security, Medicare

His top policy adviser Sam Clovis addressed a Washington DC conference hosted by the Peter G. Peterson Foundation, a group established by the billionaire former Nixon cabinet member to push for the dismantling of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security in the name of cutting the federal budget deficit.
Even attending the conference was something of a signal, given the Peterson group’s identification with entitlement spending cuts. Clovis underscored the message, telling the conference, “I think after the administration’s been in place, then we will start to take a look at all of the programs, including entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare.”
As late as a Republican debate in March, Trump claimed that his economic policies, based on protectionism and trade warfare, would make the United States so rich that no changes would be needed in Social Security or Medicare. He also claimed, in keeping with the nostrums of supply-side economics, that his proposed trillions in tax cuts for the wealthy would cause economic growth to skyrocket, leading to a huge increase in federal tax revenue that would eliminate the federal budget deficit.
Clovis gave a more cautious undertaking to the Peterson group, which has forecast that Trump-sized tax cuts for the wealthy would produce $10 trillion in deficits, not a surplus. The Trump promise not to cut entitlements was conditional on tax cuts producing record economic growth, he said.
“Right now, we’re not going to touch anything because we can’t predict the growth,” Clovis said. “We have to start taking a look not just at Medicare and Social Security but every program we have out there, because the budgetary discipline that we’ve shown over the last 84 years has been horrible.”
Clovis also told the Wall Street Journal in an interview that Trump would support privatization of the Veterans Administration or its transformation into an insurance plan rather than a direct provider of health care services to veterans. “The VA’s a broken system now,” he said. “We can’t continue down that road.”

Of course he’ll just continue say what ever come off the top of his head. There are a lotta people who wanna believe. Will enough people ask enough questions, and will they get answers? Didn’t in 2008, did they? But I can’t see a majority for Trump. Who knows. Hard to see a majority for Clinton either, isn’t it? The difference between them is marginal. I forecast we’ll all lose no matter which of these … or the Burn miester … first passes the potus post.
This is the proverbial ‘perfect storm’ for ‘non of the above write-ins. We could surely keep either one from garnering 50% of the vote … maybe come in second our collective selves … or first, even. If we managed to keep both of them below 50% we’ll have accomplished something tangible …

The change happens first in the minds of the people, and can only be measured later, when they are fully in motion. Such transformations occur when masses of people see themselves as part of a large, newly emergent group. Trump’s followers coalesced around his candidacy to become something more than just a bunch of angry white folks. During the primary process, they got to measure themselves for size, as a group, and were impressed. They started to see their group as a social force – and became one. It’s what humans do at critical junctures in history – including racists.

… ‘It’s what humans do at critical junctures in history’ – not just racists.
As for the viability of third parties, see Maurice Duverger. I find him convincing, although blues spits on the floor everytime he hears the name mentioned. We have two parties because people en masse feel they cannot take a chance voting for the candidate who appeals to them, because a plurality, not a majority, can elect the winner. Iterated polls till one candidate does achieve a majority solves the problem. Then we can have all the parties we’d like.

Posted by: jfl | May 13 2016 10:25 utc | 61

44;James,don’t believe MSM descriptions.I have no idea of this guy,but one news outlet? said he would be an economic president,and not a military expansion one,which might mean China bashing(very prevalent lately)is over for the Philippines.
And if true,he will be portrayed badly by the MSM imperialists.

Posted by: dahoit | May 13 2016 13:13 utc | 63

Nixon?What ever Nixon was,he weren’t no stinking Zionist traitor,as the Queen of Hell is.

Posted by: dahoit | May 13 2016 13:31 utc | 65

Voting in the United States isn’t about “democracy”—it’s about perpetuating the illusion of democracy.
Who makes the decisions in our society?
Who writes public policy?
Years of social engineering has caused people to be deluded on this matter.
The White House and Congress don’t really make the decisions, Wall Street and the Pentagon do.
Who wins the election makes no difference because all politicians must do what the elite want. Elections are a scam whose function is to neutralize resistance movements and dupe ordinary citizens into thinking they have a say in matters of the state.
Elections in the capitalist system do not secure popular control over the state, they do help secure state control over the populace. Voting is a ritual that reinforces obedience to state authority. It creates the illusion that “the people” control the state, thereby masking elite rule. That illusion makes rebellion against the state less likely because it is seen as a legitimate institution and as an instrument of popular rule rather than the oligarchy it really is.
The illusion of “choice” and “free elections” is very important to the ruling class. They recognize that this pretty illusion makes their job much easier, so they want to preserve it. The rituals of campaigns & elections function to con most of the population into believing that “they’re free.” Being forced to choose between 2 parties which are united against them, rigged to serve the interests of their oppressors is not “an election” it is a manipulation. People are waking up to that which is why voter turnout is low. People are not apathetic or stupid they very much get that these “representatives” do not represent anyone but the corporate elites.
In today’s US, especially at the national level, elections are worse than worthless — they simply perpetuate illusions & waste time. They are degrading & repulsive exercises in Madison Avenue PR techniques, where “the truth” is off limits from the get-go. Effort should be directed not at participating in this system, but at bringing it down, exposing its corrupt essence, & building genuinely constructive alternatives.
In America, the ovens will not be disguised as showers; they will be marked “Voting Booth.”

Posted by: Allen | May 13 2016 13:52 utc | 67

@ Kiwicris 36
Maybe. The interviews cited lean GOP camp. However, Fox and CNBC will not go out on a limb to attract libel suits.
I guard against posting to certain sources, not b/c they are deemed not credible – it’s too explosive and requires suspension of all things imaginable – as in the 28 pages 9/11 report. There is an article that was written 2 weeks after September 11, 2001 exposing the dirty secrets (Bush-Clinton alliance) cited briefly by Fitts in my post at 1. In fact, she confirms the contents of that article and now, so does IBD below.
Hillary is in deep brown stuff and it ain’t in the piggy’s barn. It’s the money, Stupid!
Oh my Oh My, there is so much more on the Clinton Cash.
An IBD’s (Investors Business Daily) Editorial titled –
Hillary’s Latest Scandal: She And Bill Siphoned $100 Mil From Mideast Leaders
(Note: Investors Business Daily (IBD). IBD is the credible source for Stock News & Stock Market Analysis, – a daily must go to source for smart money market people.}
http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/hillarys-latest-scandal-she-and-bill-siphoned-100-mil-from-persian-gulf-leaders/
[.]Remember, a Hillary Clinton presidency once looked like a sure thing. Now, given the growing possibility that she could be charged for criminal negligence for putting secret material on a private server, or perhaps even be charged with corruption, Clinton has far more serious problems than just getting elected. Her biggest problem may be staying out of prison.
~ ~ ~
Wall Street whistle-blower drops BOMBSHELL about Clinton Foundation
http://www.allenbwest.com/matt-palumbo/wall-street-whistle-blower-drops-bombshell-about-clinton-foundation
[.]”Wall Street analyst Charles Ortel was making news for uncovering years of accounting fraud at General Electric.
Now he’s turned his attention to the Clinton Foundation, and he’s convinced something similar is going on.[.]
Ortel said he has spent the past 15 months digging into the Clinton Foundation’s public records, federal and state-level tax filings, and donor disclosures. That includes records from the foundation’s many offshoots—including the Clinton Health Access Initiative and the Clinton Global Initiative—as well as its foreign subsidiaries.
According to Ortel’s reports, the contribution disclosures from the Clinton Foundation don’t match up with individual donors’ records. He also argued that the foundation is not in compliance with some state laws regarding fundraising registration, disclosure requirements, and auditing rules.”
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
I echo b. Not Clinton. Do you suppose the FBI and IRS can continue to ignore?
Hillary will need devine intercession to make it to 1600. Unless she is given the David Petraeus slap on the wrist, there is a P in her future and it is not president.
(See link: How David Petraeus, former CIA Director, avoided jail http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-how-david-petraeus-got-off-with-only-a-misdemeanor-2016-1).
Ya think, the former CIA Director got only probation? Will Hillary be given only probation and still be sworn in as president?

Posted by: likklemore | May 13 2016 19:50 utc | 69

Helena @ 59
Allen @ 70
Both thoughtful, and relevant posts..Kudos! Everyone should read them again.

Posted by: ben | May 13 2016 20:24 utc | 71

What Napolitano said about the email affair: A Perfect Storm of Legal Misery – LewRockwell

The bad legal news for Hillary Clinton continued to cascade upon her presidential hopes during the past week in what has amounted to a perfect storm of legal misery. Here is what happened.
Last week, Mrs. Clinton’s five closest advisors when she was Secretary of State, four of whom remain close to her and have significant positions in her presidential campaign, were interrogated by the FBI. These interrogations were voluntary, not under oath, and done in the presence of the same legal team which represented all five aides.
The atmosphere was confrontational, as the purpose of the interrogations is to enable federal prosecutors and investigators to determine whether these five are targets or witnesses. Stated differently, the feds need to decide if they should charge any of these folks as part of a plan to commit espionage, or if they will be witnesses on behalf of the government should there be such a prosecution; or witnesses for Mrs. Clinton.
In the same week, a federal judge ordered the same five persons to give videotaped testimony in a civil lawsuit against the State Department which once employed them in order to determine if there was a “conspiracy” — that’s the word used by the judge — in Mrs. Clinton’s office to evade federal transparency laws. Stated differently, the purpose of these interrogations is to seek evidence of an agreement to avoid the Freedom of Information Act requirements of storage and transparency of records, and whether such an agreement, if it existed, was also an agreement to commit espionage — the removal of state secrets from a secure place to a non-secure place.
Also earlier this week, the State Department revealed that it cannot find the emails of Bryan Pagliano for the four years that he was employed there. Who is Bryan Pagliano? He is the former information technology expert, employed by the State Department to problem shoot Mrs. Clinton’s entail issues.
Pagliano was also personally employed by Mrs. Clinton. She paid him $5,000 to migrate her regular State Department email account and her secret State Department email account from their secure State Department servers to her personal, secret, non-secure server in her home in Chappaqua, New York. That was undoubtedly a criminal act. Pagliano either received a promise of non-prosecution or an actual order of immunity from a federal judge. He is now the government’s chief witness against Mrs. Clinton.
It is almost inconceivable that all of his emails have been lost. Surely this will intrigue the FBI, which has reportedly been able to retrieve the emails Mrs. Clinton attempted to wipe from her server.
While all of this has been going on, intelligence community sources have reported about a below the radar screen, yet largely known debate in the Kremlin between the Russian Foreign Ministry and the Russian Intelligence Services. They are trying to come to a meeting of the minds to determine whether the Russian government should release some 20,000 of Mrs. Clinton’s emails that it obtained either by hacking her directly or by hacking into the email of her confidante, Sid Blumenthal.
As if all this wasn’t enough bad news for Mrs. Clinton in one week, the FBI learned last week from the convicted international hacker, who calls himself Guccifer, that he knows how the Russians came to possess Mrs. Clinton’s emails; and it is because she stored, received and sent them from her personal, secret, non-secure server.
Mrs. Clinton has not been confronted publicly and asked for an explanation of her thoughts about the confluence of these events, but she has been asked if the FBI has reached out to her. It may seem counter-intuitive, but in white collar criminal cases, the FBI gives the targets of its investigations an opportunity to come in and explain why the target should not be indicted.
This is treacherous ground for any target, even a smart lawyer like Mrs. Clinton. She does not know what the feds know about her. She faces a damned-if-she-does and damned-if-she-doesn’t choice here.
Any lie and any materially misleading statement — and she is prone to both — made to the FBI can form the basis for an independent criminal charge against her. This is the environment that trapped Martha Stewart. Hence, the standard practice among experienced counsel is to decline interviews by the folks investigating their clients.
But Mrs. Clinton is no ordinary client. She is running for president. She lies frequently. We know this because, when asked if the FBI has reached out to her for an interview, she told reporters that neither she nor her campaign had heard from the FBI; but she couldn’t wait to talk to the agents.
That is a mouthful, and the FBI knows it. First, the FBI does not come calling upon her campaign or even upon her. The Department of Justice prosecutors will call upon her lawyers — and that has already been done, and Mrs. Clinton knows it. So her statements about the FBI not calling her or the campaign were profoundly misleading, and the FBI knows that.
Mrs. Clinton’s folks are preparing for the worst. They have leaked nonsense from “U.S. officials” that the feds have found no intent to commit espionage on the part of Mrs. Clinton. Too bad these officials — political appointees, no doubt — skipped or failed Criminal Law 101. The government need not prove intent for either espionage or for lying to federal agents.
And it prosecutes both crimes very vigorously.
Reprinted with the author’s permission.

Posted by: ProPeace | May 13 2016 20:51 utc | 73

US backed coup in Brazil now
New brazil president elect all-men cabinet
http://fortune.com/2016/05/13/brazil-new-president-temer-cabinet/
New brazil president attacks women
http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Brazils-Temer-Attacks-Women-Human-Rights-and-Racial-Equality-20160513-0032.html
WikiLeaks Reveal Brazil’s New Coup President Is ‘US Informant’
http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/WikiLeaks-Reveal-Brazils-New-Coup-President-Is-US-Informant-20160513-0016.html

Posted by: Som | May 14 2016 8:22 utc | 75

Today the Eurovision competetion will go on, and as usual the booing against Russia just like 2014 and 2015.

Posted by: Mandel | May 14 2016 11:17 utc | 77

@ JFL 81
Not at all surprised. Adelson’s millions thrown in the pot because Trump has embraced Israel. Trump’s “America First “ is a slogan for the sheeple. He did not add —first “ after our masters.”
Here is how Trump sees it…Netanyahoo is “a very good guy.” Yes, Israel can keep doing all that’s illegal.
Trump: Israel should keep building West Bank settlements
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/278534-trump-israel-should-keep-building-west-bank-settlements
Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump says he’s in favor of Israel’s controversial construction of new settlements in the West Bank.
“I think Israel, they really have to keep going, they have to keep moving forward,” Trump told the Daily Mail in a story published Tuesday. “I don’t think there should be a pause.
“You have hundreds and even, I guess, thousands, of missiles being launched into Israel — who would put up with that? Who would stand for it?”
The Obama administration has argued that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s settlement policies damage the potential for a two-state solution.
Trump said he considers Netanyahu “a very good guy,” saying he made a campaign ad for the Israeli leader in 2013 and predicting he’d have a good relationship with him as president.

Posted by: likklemore | May 14 2016 21:39 utc | 79

@81 jfl
Trump will be the first publicly-acknowledged Israeli owned-and-operated POTUS?
Trump or Clinton – same difference, only Clinton has been in bed with the Israeli’s since the days of Slick Willie.
As for an Israeli owned-and-operated POTUS, one needs to look no further than the Clintonite presidency. Slick Willie owed his election success to the Jewish lobby who were intent on derailing Bush’s re-election bid. Bush, after all, had the audacity to threaten to withhold U.S. guarantees of some $10 billion of Israeli debt as leverage in a proposed Arab-Israeli peace conference.
The Bush Decision Point
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-bush-decision-point/
In May 1991, both Bush and Baker publicly called the settlements an obstacle to peace. In response, under AIPAC’s prodding, Congress began pushing Bush to release the loan guarantees on Israel’s terms, meaning Israel could use the money to build wherever it wished. On September 6th, Bush asked Congress for a 120-day delay before considering the Israeli loan request. AIPAC pushed back, flooding Capitol Hill with lobbyists. On September 12th, Bush called a press conference and denounced both Israeli West Bank settlements and the Israel lobby. He told reporters he was “up against some powerful political forces” designed to thwart him., adding that “a thousand lobbyists” were working the Hill, while he was “one lonely guy” on the opposite side. This pushback was initially very effective: rapid polls showed a large national majority in favor of the President and against the Israeli request, and Congress agreed to a delay.
This was the kiss of death for Bush 41. He blamed the Israel lobby at least partially for his defeat. The largely Jewish controlled media played a major role in “the transformation of Bush’s public image from the masterful diplomat …to the out of touch preppy of a year later.”
Bush’s failure to stand up to Jewish power marked the end of any semblance of rationality with regard to U.S. policy vis-à-vis the Mid-East. This lesson, a lesson of power politics, is reverberating in the corridors of Washington to this day. Just ask Hillary.
-Slick Willie opened the doors wide open to dual citizen infiltration of key positions in government. (ex: D. Ross appointment as Middle East envoy >> Israel‘s lawyer)
-He was also the first sitting president to openly prostrate himself at the annual Aipac convention, an event that has now become ritualized.
-The Clinton controlled Democratic party went so far as nominate that blatantly zionist lunatic Joe Lieberman for Vice President on the ticket with Al Gore in the 2000 election.
-Clinton’s notorious last act – the pardon of Marc Rich,(rumoured to have been an Israeli agent) then on the FBI’s most wanted list – “the then Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak, and former prime minister Shimon Peres made personal pleas to Clinton on his behalf to secure the controversial pardon.”- Guardian (the money angle was a red herring)
– only scraping the surface

Posted by: pantaraxia | May 15 2016 7:35 utc | 81

77;Commie speak.My wife is only half German-American,the other half I-talian.
My two daughters partners are a Jewish man and a black man.My grandchildren are half black,with a half Jewish child on the way.
How about your nuclear family?sheesh.
And I am an American,not an Aryan,as I’m only about?an eighth?Kraut.
The HB says she’ll release the UFO files on reaching POTUS.Talk about vapid idiocy.Wait till Trump tears her a new one on that!
And Trump is trying to hide something by not releasing his tax returns.Wait,doesn’t the IRS have his records?If he was hiding soething I have a strong feeling Obomba would have them release it.
And as she is the one hiding everything,it reeks of bubbleheaded hypocrisy.

Posted by: dahoit | May 15 2016 14:19 utc | 83

The new Philipinno President;He hates US for CIA bombings in the Philippines back in the 90s?Some American blew his leg off in a hotel,the FBI(CIA)showed up at the hospital and whisked him out of the country.(Of course with the corrupt Phil.government assistance)
Expect demonization.
And yes,I’m sure China likes the change also.

Posted by: dahoit | May 15 2016 14:28 utc | 85

in re 86 —
Glad you spotted the class-conscious rhetoric.
Not to worry. First, if I recall our volkisch theorists, they counted all the the Indo-Europeans as Aryans. Some, like the stereotypically blonde Teutonic types, of course, were thought of better than others. The Reich’s “New Order” was putatively pan-European, with any number of the conquered providing volunteers for Waffen-SS divisions like “Wiking” and “Nordland.”
But to keep it strictly German, you’re still good. Nazis said one-eighth made you a Jew, so I presume an eighth makes you German.
And we’ll go barefoot and fascist, then, the Italians having invented the twentieth century’s most pernicious ideology. Your Mondoweiss profile says you’re a patriot, so perhaps “barefoot and effusively nationalist” is fairer.

Posted by: rufus magister | May 15 2016 23:38 utc | 87

Bernie helped give Stephanie Kelton a voice in Senate budget debates, but Trump is the one who has (at least in some cases) been frank about the nature of money and federal debt, while I don’t think I’ve heard Bernie say anything along these lines:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/05/16/print-the-money-trumps-reckless-proposal-echoes-franklin-and-lincoln/
(Albeit, Trump also says he will balance the budget.)

Posted by: RudyM | May 16 2016 16:44 utc | 89

Democratic Party continues its unabashed support for Hillary.
See the comments(!) for a very interesting and important discussion. While some starry-eyed Sanders supporters continue to support him blindly, others are debating:

1) is it possible to change the Democratic Party?
2) who to vote for, given that Bernie is unlikely to win.

IMO, the Democratic Primary was ‘rigged’ and Bernie was too accepting of this from the beginning. Some rationalize this as his NEEDING the exposure that running as a Democratic would give him. But he has always said that he would support the Democratic nominee (i.e. Hillary) and has been reluctant to attack her like an independent candidate would (compare Trump and Lincoln Chafee).
This is important because IMO Sanders supporters should NOT be swayed by Sanders into supporting Hillary. They should stay true to their beliefs not any particular Democratic Party politician.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | May 17 2016 4:51 utc | 91