Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
June 08, 2016

U.S. Election Thread 2016-04 - Premature Presumptive

The Associated Press yesterday declared Hillary Clinton to be the "presumptive" Democratic nominee for the presidential election based on alleged pledges of anonymous super-delegates.

This was a quite unprecedented interference in still ongoing and upcoming primaries on a day when no new public vote count was available.

Bernie Sanders said he will continue to campaign up to the convention. His hope is that either the FBI will indict Hillary Clinton for using an unsecured private email server for classified state business, or that some other Clinton scandal will make it most likely that she would lose a vote against Trump. In both cases some super-delegates may change their vote and the convention might vote for Sanders as nominee.

The FBI is under Obama's control and there no doubt that he wants Clinton as candidate to continue his right-leaning policies. But the FBI tends to be leaking quite a bit and someone with access to the case may want to speak to some enterprising reporters.

Sanders requested a meeting with Obama which will happen on Thursday. Obama will offer him a bad deal which would be akin to a total capitulation. Sanders will look for a way to sneak at least some of his preferred policies into the party agenda. He will demand some significant price for endorsing Clinton and will probably wait to do so up to the last minute.

People around the world will wonder what democracy is all about when a race for a presidency ends up as a contest between the two most disliked people in the field who are both proxies for the more or less same small social segment.

The "Not Hillary" voices will not die down. A seemingly racist Trump with otherwise unpredictable policies may be less damaging to the world than an unreconstructed neolibcon Clinton.

Posted by b on June 8, 2016 at 5:44 UTC | Permalink

next page »

Hopefully Bernie will win the nomination, if he doesn't he should run as VP of Jill Stein.
SEE VIDEO: Jill Stein Said Vote for #Bernie in California Primary if you're Independent or Democrat

Posted by: Tom Murphy | Jun 8 2016 5:53 utc | 1

This is gonna be battle royale.

The entire political establishment (left, right & center) along with the big money interests and corporate media are aligned to crown Hillary as the next president. They will use all their resources to scare the American people that Trump is dangerous. They will stoke fear and anger and even violence. They will use false flag attacks to pin the violence on Trump supporters to reinforce their relentless message that Trump is Hitler. The danger not only for America but for the rest of the world will be the Clintons back in the White House. Now, fully experienced, totally corrupt, with the tentacles of the ziocons deeply enmeshed, they will wreak vengeance on their perceived enemies and will be the most arrogant and haughty team to take reins of the destructive power of the US state. Their unmatched ego and greed and lust for power will try to steamroll their opposition and leave destruction in their wake.

The election as usual will come down to a handful of states in the midwest and south-east - Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Indiana, North Carolina. Whoever, wins these states will be the next US president. Let's hope the working class men and women in these states stay true to their conscience and keep the Clintons from achieving their ultimate ambition to come back with vengeance in their heart.

Posted by: ab initio | Jun 8 2016 6:11 utc | 2

Thanks for the posting b. I was also struck by the AP announcement just prior to the CA vote.

I think Bernie knows some dirt and is going to confront Obama about it on Thursday.

I want this coming election to be between Sanders and Trump so we can get a measure on what this country stands for better than the past annointments. It may be all talk on both sides but there are values expressed by the talk and i will take Sanders values over Trump's every day of the week.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Jun 8 2016 6:20 utc | 3

War criminal and class war media are trying to create a mindset of resignation - no point voting or ever supporting Sanders, they are selling.

Now that it's over and Hitlery has won, WW3 took 3 steps closer.

Posted by: tom | Jun 8 2016 6:24 utc | 4


Right on! How deep can the most dangerous nation with nuclear weapons sink! Of course the U.S. has long ago ceased to be a democracy conform its true definition. Lately by interference of the Supreme Court in 2000 "election" and by declaring corporations are people too. A disfunctional U.S. Comgress doesn't represent "We the People." Just state propaganda with media bought by corporate power. And US generals using NATO as its war party across the globe. The UN has become a lame organization abiding by world powers with right to veto with some nations under full protection to abuse human rights with impunity .... Israel and recently the House of Saud in Yemen. Welcome to the 21th century ...

Posted by: Oui | Jun 8 2016 6:25 utc | 5

'Fixing' Latin America for Hillary?

Posted by: nmb | Jun 8 2016 6:50 utc | 6

b, its over betcha Bernie wanna VP job? Goodbye President Bernie Sanders, welcome VP Bernie Sanders. Together invincible duds? Obomo could easily release Hillary's emails. It may happen in Oct?

Sad, give or takes 30% Bernie supporters will NOT vote for Hillary, what a joke!
Time to change my voting preference again for the next show.

Posted by: Jack Smith | Jun 8 2016 6:59 utc | 7

Many complain that Trump will herald a fascist US. Like, the US isn't already fascist?

If the choice is Killery or Trump, and if Trump would get the US out of the many damned foreign wars then a fascist US is a small price to pay. At least the US wouldn't be killing millions overseas.

But I somehow doubt that Trump will be any different than Killery.

Posted by: AriusArmenian | Jun 8 2016 7:03 utc | 8

one gets a clear sense of the frustration in the air.. the us election is more proof of it..

Posted by: james | Jun 8 2016 7:30 utc | 9

@Jack Smith

The Clinton clan won't offer the VP slot to Bernie Sanders ... no way! That's not how HRC operates and was one of Obama's many mistakes to offer HRC the State Dep't.

Posted by: Oui | Jun 8 2016 9:08 utc | 10

I know how bad Hillary Clinton is. I can only presume that the Donald is about the same. I can see no reason to believe he's any worse. I won't be voting for any of the three 'leading' choices but I think a lot of people will be voting for the Donald, for one reason or another. It would be very satisfying to see the Demoblican Party self-destruct, shoving a despised, losing candidate down the throats of the electorate for no known reason other than pure cronyism, only to be beaten at the polls.

Of course the fix in November might be on the Demoblican Party side this time, "it's their turn". That's the reason for pushing the female Clinton, right, it's "her turn"?

What a mess.

Posted by: jfl | Jun 8 2016 9:16 utc | 11

Clinton Claims Democratic Nomination, Sanders Vows to Fight On

Clinton has won South Dakota, New Mexico, New Jersey and should win in California where she leads by 14 percent with 82 percent of the vote counted.

Hillary takes a victory lap ...

Obama Set to Meet with Bernie Sanders This Week

The news of the meeting comes as Obama thanked Sanders for “energizing millions” through his campaign ...

... Obama throws the sheepdog a bone.

Together they rub the noses of the people who supported what they perceived as the best chance for change in 'their own dirt'.

Posted by: jfl | Jun 8 2016 9:47 utc | 12

So it happened again. This time with a blatant suppression of votes (that calls for criminal investigation into violation of election law) by a corporate behemoth such as AP doing its dreadful Orwellian deed of straight lie for oligarchic class.

Make no mistake, tonight, Dems party mafia and disgusting Wall Street oligarchs have spoken loudly while people have been largely gagged and defrauded, purged, and betrayed in this already year long farcical spectacle of rich, constipated and ought to be indicted lowlifes, called US elections. Oh yes she made a history of having more political balls than flaccid Trump.

Those few who genuinely support Hillary must understand that by supporting the very fascist establishment candidate in the end they support American fascism whether Hillarism or Trumpism, no difference, and that they will soon be sacrificed and consumed by its flames no matter what lies they are being told.

Dems primary elections farce already have been rigged and stolen months ago starting from Iowa and N.H., and a stooge of the establishment is about to be anointed according to the will of those few opulent who paid her off. Not you, even if you voted for her. Your vote don’t count at all.Oligarchs won. Are you happy?

On the other hand Sanders supporters must be confronted with harsh reality of undeniably and fatally flawed Sander candidacy, mostly not due to his personal failings but due to a deeply unfair and outrageously undemocratic electoral system he chose to accept and vowed to uphold. Why?

It is as clear as it gets that Sanders was a flawed candidate to hopelessly flawed, deeply undemocratic electoral system that is specifically designed to prevent ruling elite from heeding cry of suffering population, not to mention their willingness of doing something about.

But that’s not even democracy. In democracy people rule and do not ask power to heed their grievances, that’s feudalism.

Having said that, Sanders campaign was not off mainstream or radical in any way but of a conservative centrist type aimed to stop political madness. He was a solemn voice of sanity in this crazy campaign spectacle; he advocated a moderate, even modest call for return to simple rule of law destroyed by oligarchic class like Clintons, Trumps and their masters.

Sanders campaign was a failed attempt to save democrats’ party from oblivion so was successful so far Trump candidacy aiming to save GOP from complete irrelevancy. Sanders asked politely Dems’ establishment not to believe their own utter lies and they sadly but not unexpectedly refused clinching to Wall Street pockets begging for a change.

Make no mistake, Hillary and Trump are both excretions of the same abhorrent regime, equally hostile to humanity and both deserve utter condemnation from majority of Americans not as a political or ideological act but as an act of self-preservation and self-defense.

Besides Trumps tasteless reality show passed in MSM as campaign, it was Hillary campaign that was nothing but ridiculous, shameless influence peddling for oligarchs via lies and innuendoes for money she got paid for, an intellectual embarrassment for otherwise witty Clinton, who stooped into utter nonsense and retarded incoherence punctuated by her vicious ad hominem aggression, outbursts liken to lowlife blog troll against decent man epitomizing civility missing from a screen play of this electoral farce, complete opposite to her conniving husband she praises and wants him in W.H. position.

What does tell about her character and basic morality?

Still, in fact Sanders would be right if he calls for Hillary to resign if her criminal investigation is not dropped, and her bought speeches and taxes since 2008 not released before convention.

It is critical that Sanders understands that those millions of votes people cast for him already are not his votes; these are people’s votes that must be respected and democratically counted. His responsibility is to guard people’s votes and protect them by whatever means available, legal or political or revolutionary.

What's ironic that this time as well, millions of irrational, desperate and helpless Democrat electoral zombies, under a spell of exciting political masquerade and their serf's duties, instead of choosing reason and self preservation are aligning themselves with an anointed by establishment "winner" of a popularity/beauty contest who in fact will inevitably drive utter destruction of the Democratic party itself while a "socialist" Sanders wants really to transform it, to redirect Dems from worshiping of heartless greedy Wall Street oligarchy toward ordinary people to, in a word, save it while Clinton mafia is continuing to authorize Jonestown-like suicide mission of the democrat party into political oblivion.

Now it is the last moment to start protests of this fatally deeply undemocratic system that will never bring any change unless people force it, by taking it over. In this election, it is the system stupid.

Decision time is now whether Sanders continues as independent and respect millions of his voters or he ultimately reveals himself as a sheepherder for the establishment and endorses Clinton as I and many others suspected already 10 months ago.

Political stooges, those farcical clowns of this abhorrent regime will soon understand that there is no silent majority but only temporarily “silenced majority” and when they hear their roar it will be the last thing they ever hear.

"The individual loses his substance by voluntarily bowing to an
overpowering and distant oligarchy, while simultaneously
“participating” in sham democracy."

C. Wright Mills,"The Power Elite" (1956)

This is not about Bernie or bust. This is about Bernie or revolution
or precisely about:

A Revolution with Bernie or without him.

Posted by: Kalen | Jun 8 2016 10:32 utc | 13

AP did not help Clinton, they hurt her by discouraging her voters from turning up and may have put California back into play which would give Sanders enough of a moral boost to keep in the nomination battle. So scratch the oligarch secret collusion manifestos. The party was stronger than the insurgency, that's it. In the GOP the party was weaker than the insurgency, which means instability on the right will be the new norm. GWs Presidency can now be properly interpreted as a Party shattering presidency, in a way that Obamas has not been. I too am very concerned about Hillary's FP thinking. But here is what I don't get. Do people really not understand how Iraq2 destroyed GW and the GOP? Does Hillary not get that aggressive FP action risks sinking her Presidency and Party like a stone? She is a political animal right? How can she ignore the obvious danger? Maybe the money really is too good to ignore.

Posted by: Northern Observer | Jun 8 2016 11:59 utc | 14

Racist Trump?No more than the hell bitch,who uses minorities as a venue to power and then turns on them for the Zionists.
b has no idea of what is really happening here in America.Our society is being destroyed from within by dual citizen traitors who know their power rests on American's divisions.HRC is their babe.
Trump perfect?Nah,he says stupid stuff sometimes,but his pledge of America First is the most needed US dictate since the US Constitution,which of course the Zionists hate,as a level playing field is not to their advantage.

Posted by: dahoit | Jun 8 2016 12:01 utc | 15

dahoit, Trump is going to bow to AIPAC just like Hitlery.

Posted by: Mischi | Jun 8 2016 12:12 utc | 16

Posted by: Northern Observer | Jun 8, 2016 7:59:47 AM | 14

Doubt that, Sanders California win was thought feasable on huge spontaneous turnout - early vote was done by reliable Democrat voters - ie more in favour of Clinton.

You cannot expect a party that has been dominated by a certain type of politics - for how many years - plus formed by the self fulfilling expectation that elections can only be won by triangualtion to suddenly get a different perspective. Sanders got where he got by the Democrat party allowing independents to vote.

Sanders presumably stays in to send as many social democrat delegates to the Convention and get as as much leverage as he can. Plus - not to disappear from the news.

If the US are lucky he succeeded in changing the political business model.

Posted by: somebody | Jun 8 2016 12:24 utc | 17

"The FBI is under Obama's control and there no doubt that he wants Clinton as candidate to continue his right-leaning policies. But the FBI tends to be leaking quite a bit and someone with access to the case may want to speak to some enterprising reporters."

Obama has a terrific track record for relentless pursuit of leaders. The notion the FBI is infested with preop Chelsea Mannings seems to me to be a bit of a fantasy. Let me suggest that Obama is not a Hilary Clinton supporter and that the FBI is being allowed to pursue a fake investigation. When Clinton was Secretary, every person who paid attention to the server address knew that Clinton was keeping the dirty laundry under wraps. It was okay then because it was perfectly well understood the dirty laundry was first and foremost the government's (Obama's) dirty laundry. It's exactly like Hilary lying about the jihadis having a falling out with their co-conspirators in Benghazi.

Posted by: steven johnson | Jun 8 2016 12:46 utc | 18

If Hillary is elected, she won't last long at the job. The GOP will not rest until the email scandal really splashes on her and she will be investigated just like her husband has been.

Posted by: virgile | Jun 8 2016 13:09 utc | 19

Two relevant articles:

What Does it Mean to be an American Liberal Today?

Liberalism is “an ideology rooted in a nation founded upon imperial conquest and rabid capitalist exploitation.” Its main proponent in is the Democratic Party, which “has become the engine of US imperial rule.” Hillary Clinton is a twin of Barack Obama. “While Obama intensified imperial war, austerity, and domestic repression, liberal supporters sat on the sidelines and watched.” Liberals wage fake wars on Republicans and real wars on the world.


American liberalism has thus historically been able to fester and thrive in the US political landscape in periods of reforms in the capitalist order. The transition from chattel slavery to industrial capital, and subsequently from industrial capital to the so-called age of social welfare, gave American liberals political space to adjust their bourgeois principles to fit the needs of the time. In the current period of capitalist decline, this is no longer possible. The rule of capital has reached its highest stage and it must eliminate all that stands in its way of unfettered profit accumulation.


When one asks what an American liberal is today, it is important to be honest. An American liberal is the arbiter of a more effective politics of exploitation and oppression. The American liberal supports the Democratic Party by waging a fake war with the Republicans while the entire establishment moves ever more rightward. The American liberal is no less an enemy of social progress than the right-wing, Republican oriented populace. The American liberal must be combated or its ideological stranglehold over emergent movements now and in the future will continue to lead them astray.

What’ll It be Folks: Xenophobia or Genocide?

So-called “progressives” fear Donald Trump’s nationalism more than they loath Hillary Clinton’s imperialism, which murders millions. If Trump fragmented America, disrupting the West’s plans for World War III, that “would be an unequivocally good thing.” However, most U.S. “progressives” don’t really care about America’s victims, only about themselves. “Clinton’s imperialism will not disturb their slumber.”

Posted by: Allen | Jun 8 2016 13:23 utc | 20


That is some of the most inane tripe I've ever read.

Posted by: Bruno Marz | Jun 8 2016 13:41 utc | 21

abi @ 2: "The entire political establishment (left, right & center) along with the big money interests and corporate media are aligned to crown Hillary as the next president. They will use all their resources to scare the American people that Trump is dangerous."

Absolutely true, although Trump isn't dangerous, just another in a long line of puppets. Anyone that believes Trump can't be bought, is extremely naive. If elected, he'll do as he's told by the Empire's owners.

Barring an uprising by the people, or a change in the reserve dollar system, or petro dollar, the Empire rolls along uninterrupted.

Posted by: ben | Jun 8 2016 14:13 utc | 22

Allen @ 20: What the hell are you smoking?

Posted by: ben | Jun 8 2016 14:17 utc | 23

@21 and @23

Allen's links did not work. Here are the correct links so you can read the whole articles easily.

"What is a US liberal?"

< HREF="">"What will it be, folks? Xenophobia or genocide?"

Actually, the rhetoric in both articles sounds pretty standard for the message boards in this website.

Posted by: Inkan1969 | Jun 8 2016 14:26 utc | 24

< HREF="">"What will it be, folks? Xenophobia or genocide?"

Posted by: Inkan1969 | Jun 8 2016 14:27 utc | 25

Posted by: Bruno Marz | Jun 8, 2016 9:41:51 AM | 21

Inane? - yes. Tripe? - not so much.
It's an explanation of how and why things got so bad, so quickly and smoothly, due to AmeriKKKa's (unopposed) influence since the 1970s.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jun 8 2016 14:32 utc | 26

"What will it be, folks? Xenophobia or genocide?"

I'm really sorry. Please delete @25.

Posted by: Inkan1969 | Jun 8 2016 14:36 utc | 27

@Allen | Jun 8, 2016 9:23:12 AM | 20

.....However, most U.S. “progressives” don’t really care about America’s victims, only about themselves..

Excellent! Please ignore apologists and they still believe - Change, Hope and Bernie's "A Future to believe in". My foots!!

I voted against the Democratic party yesterday morning and will do it again, feel good about it.

Posted by: Jack Smith | Jun 8 2016 14:43 utc | 28

THE WORST EVIL ... select the MOST ABHORRENT CANDIDATE POSSIBLE ... and hope the whole system collapses. That opens the gates to a possibility of real revolution and perhaps attendant reform.

Posted by: Jack Smith | Jun 8 2016 15:03 utc | 29

Now can we stop pretending the Democrats can be reformed?

Again and again, progressives fall for the Democratic Party shell game. The Party runs a "progressive" that CAN'T WIN because the game is rigged.

Keen observers of the Democratic Party made this same point when Sanders entered the race:

Black Agenda Report: Bernie is a 'sheepdog'

Talking Points Memo: We know how this ends

What makes matters worse is that Bernie seems to be part of the scam. Everyone has become emotional about Bernie's seeming fight with the Democratic establishment and that emotion blinds them to the truth:
> Bernie has pulled many punches: the most stark being his failure to attack Hillary on the e-mail issue - especially after the State Dept IG Report;

> Bernie has not tried to create an independent Movement and has repeatedly said that the would endorse Hillary;

> Bernie became fiesty only as it became apparent that he lost;

> Bernie's hope to convince Super-delegates to switch is deluded at best and probably just a ploy to keep his young, idealistic followers engaged right up to the Convention.

Bernie is actually very establishment himself. He has caucused with the Democrats for years in Congress and the Democratic Party has 1) refused to finance candidates that would run against Bernie; 2) allowed Bernie to run in their primaries. Bernie counts Democratic leaders like Obama, Hillary, and Schumer as friends.

<> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>

Democratic Party hacks want you to know that the Green Party is not a viable option. They claim that the Greens suffer from disorganization, in-fighting, and are not registered in all 50 states. Some also note that Greens in Germany are establishment (implying that Greens in USA will not really change anything).

These "facts" are very misleading:

> the Greens suffer mostly from being a very small Party - a large influx of new members would change the Party;

> the Greens are registered in about 35 states and are seeking registration in all 50. They are registered in most, if not all, of the Blue states that are most likely to lead to a successful Presidential run for a progressive candidate.

> Green Parties of each nation are independently run. The USA Green Party is the most progressive and realistic alternative in the USA. In fact, the USA Green Party platform is very similar to Sanders policy positions.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jun 8 2016 15:10 utc | 30

MSM has more or less kept the lid on Bill Clinton's repeated trips to friend Jeffrey Epstein's "Orgy Island"-- girls as young as 14, etc. Even the secret plea deal and withholding some of the charges from the judge in Epstein's case didn't get the story headlined, despite island visitors like Clinton & Prince Andrew.

But what about last week's murder that is being linked to the effort to keep the Clinton connection quiet? Story goes that some of the girls live in Georgia, and were specifically excluded from the case due to prosecutorial-defense collusion, now backed up by FOIA e-mails. Georgia's Camila Wright, Assistant Atty General for sex trafficking -- a new position-- has been diligent in her job. It was her husband who was murdered, while working as an Uber-type driver.

It's not the first murder around the Clintons. However I would say there is exactly 0 chance that the bedrooms on the island aren't equipped with cameras. All of which makes Hillary even more attractive as an even more controlled potential President.

Just one thing though-- a certain blonde-pompadoured fella whose mouth runs away w him.

Trash, all around. Just trash.

Posted by: Penelope | Jun 8 2016 15:25 utc | 31

Posted by: Tom Murphy | Jun 8, 2016 1:53:44 AM | 1

You're #1 and you know what? I voted for Hillary Clinton yesterday morning, not for her but against Bernie Sanders and the democratic party. I feel good about it, how about you?

Bernie an't gonna to be pres anytime, at best Hillary running mate. Democrats should stick together and these two old hags should long put to pasture or retirement home.

Stop dragging Jill Stein along with the Dem. Now, whom should I vote in November Hillary or Thump ticket? Doesn't matter they're all the same, murder one, ten or even hundred of thousands still the same.

Trump look good?

Posted by: Jack Smith | Jun 8 2016 15:35 utc | 32

allen @20 is absolutely right. oh god, the desperate need to believe in that hopey changey BS.

and penelope @31, do you have some links on that, esp. the clinton thing? lots of epstein stuff swirling around, no doubt there's *something* to it. sounds like season 1 of 'true detectives', though a satanic child sex/torture ring is pretty low-hanging fruit on the "let's make a titillating scary story" tree. snoooooooooooze. murdered prostitutes a la godfather 2 also work for blackmail. still, ruining people's lives thru purely bureaucratic means, paper/button pushing, speechifying in interminable committee meetings, must get boring. they ain't ever gonna get the thrill of pulling the trigger or bayoneting someone themselves. is it a frisson of actual violence/power in "safely" abusing powerless victims and truly, not vicariously, being "above" law & morality, in a very visceral, physical way?

Posted by: jason | Jun 8 2016 16:00 utc | 33

The possibility that Hillary is indicted

This will not help Sanders. The Democratic Party establishment has no doubt already planned for such a possibility.

1) Obama's Dept of Justice will delay indictment and/or allow Hillary to plead to a lesser charge. which Hillary's team can spin: she is innocent but forced to 'put this behind her' to run for the Presidency.

2) After being nominated Hillary can (apparently) step-down and name her successor. There is (apparently) no delegates input for anything that might occur AFTER the nomination.

Bottom line: either Hillary or another establishment Democrat will run for the Presidency - NOT Sanders.

Sanders MUST know this. He will NOT get many Super-delegates to change their vote AND hhe will not benefit from a Hillary indictment (if there is one). People are still not cynical enough.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jun 8 2016 16:09 utc | 34

Reading these posts, it's clear that we deserve these two candidates. There is so much anger, and none it is unified toward a common understanding of what the problems are or how to address them. Public funds for campaigns. Draw down of foreign military bases and spending. Investment in education, infrastructure, and social services. Investment in training diplomats. But screw that, let's pretend to be taken seriously by proclaiming nothing is worth it, or by typing Obomo, Killery, etc. What's wrong with Kansas. A lot.

Posted by: IhaveLittleToAdd | Jun 8 2016 16:16 utc | 35

Globalisation, neo-lib economic policies, deregulation, trickle-down, hasn’t worked for US citizens to their satisfaction. (Impoverishment.)

OK for big Corps (their employees, not to forget), the Gvmt - state apparatus (control of almost eveything, and security), the 20%, the Financial institutions etc. (not super for the last but they can’t abandon their position, risky and breathtaking but so profitable…)

Wars abroad haven’t helped a whit, have only enriched some ‘sectors’ (arms trade, contractors, all the ‘defense’ scams, security, prison, and an endless amount of rogue pillagers all over the place, but some part of the population earns its money in these industries…)

Something has to give: to go back in time somehow to restore previous glory - *Make America great again* (Trump), or relieve US citizens of crippling, unpayable college and health costs, debt (Sanders) so that they can ‘get ahead’ or at least live on in ordinary lives… the American dream can be, gasp, prayer, a beacon on the hill, once more.

Neither of these approaches will furnish desired results.

The US is a corporate-fascist state with internal and external policies that are 100% predatory, from the top down at home (e.g for-profit health care), to outside in a muddled foreign policy swaying between bombing millions of ppl on any excuse, with any partner who has ‘hate and domination' as 'cool', and controlling vassals under threat of decimation.

Posted by: Noirette | Jun 8 2016 16:17 utc | 36

For those of you with a historical memory, it is like an uncanny repletion of 1964, with Hillary as LJB and The Donald as Goldwater. She's already being touted as the peace candidate, while her opponent demonized as likely to bring war, whereas exactly the opposite is true. Expect an ad soon with a little girl picking petals from a daisy, which turns into a nuclear explosion. With Hillary (whom most women will vote for no matter what), we'll have war by spring, if we're lucky not nuclear.
PS: If by some unlikely chance the Donald prevails, I've already seen an article of how the members of the Electoral college aren't legally bound to their pledges.

Posted by: Seward | Jun 8 2016 16:18 utc | 37

In fine Clinton tradition, Hillary can blow me.

Posted by: Shh | Jun 8 2016 16:19 utc | 38

I am not a fan of Green Party, and as long as there is hope in reforming at least one of the major parties, this should be pursued first. And Sanders did show that this exists in the Democratic party. Sadly, this shows least on the foreign policy issues, but this is just electoral reality, rather few people care about it.

That said, it is also dangerous if all folks are "reasonable". If there is no price for screwing up but there are rewards (like support from pressure groups that benefit), things will not improve. Moreover, today's polls (Real Clear Politics) suggest that GOP will loose more to libertarians than Dems to Greens.

Sanders should absolutely refuse to concede and "support the winner" without some meaningful concessions from Clinton. Again, sadly it is least possible about the foreign policy. One problem is that it is hard to describe what "liberal policy" is, too much hidden sh..t that folks who read too much of "responsible media" do not know about.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Jun 8 2016 16:23 utc | 39

Allen @20

Progressives and Liberals are different.

Most 'liberals' are just members of some historically disadvantaged group (women, minorities, LGBT, poor, etc.). They primarily want to keep the gains that have already been made. The Democratic Party plays on their fears with 'identity politics'.

Progressives want change. I think most progressives today are focused on income and wealth inequality, climate change, and imperialism not identity politics.

The "Third-Way" Centrists ("fake left") are not really interested in class issues because they identify with and serve the ruling class. And they have co-opted the term "progressive" as well as the history of progressive change.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jun 8 2016 16:23 utc | 40

Posted by: jason | Jun 8, 2016 12:00:13 PM | 33, penelope @31

It does sound like a very, very bi-partisan affair.

Hillary Clinton as a role model for feminism is a sad joke.

Posted by: somebody | Jun 8 2016 16:27 utc | 41

@36 Noirette
so grateful to find others who reccgnize that usa is fascist country, fascism being an outgrowth of economic distress, to put it mildly. after a half century of propaganda through their divertissements, when collapse comes the populace will wander around from ptsd, not knowing what to do. needing to write off debts and revive an economy a very large destruction of value is needed though russia has wisely avoided being suckered into war.
what i don't understand is europe. while they are also brainwashed they retain parliamentary democracies, ie, multiple parties with real programs. why are they allowing themselves to be led to slaughter?

Posted by: bolasete | Jun 8 2016 16:42 utc | 42

Seward #37,

If by some unlikely chance the Donald prevails, I've already seen an article of how the members of the Electoral college aren't legally bound to their pledges.

Yes, there is a historical precedent. In 1972 Roger McBride an elector for Nixon from Virginia changed his electoral vote and voted for the Libertarian John Hospers. Hospers became the first Libertarian and his running mate Tonie Nathan became the first female to receive an electoral vote.

Posted by: juannie | Jun 8 2016 17:05 utc | 43

The means to effect political change requires countervailing power as an organized movement or third party. This really does not exist in the American political landscape, partly due to rules which create often insurmountable obstacles to candidates outside of the duopoly, and partly due to a loss of historical memory of struggle and organization. Anecdotally, it appears that many Americans relate to politics as consumers selecting a brand, and react as disappointed children when their brand doesn't win.

This election cycle appears to represent a perfection of the two-party system - a choice of two Establishment figures who will be seen as a bad candidate versus an even worse candidate. No need even for a "hope and change" marketing strategy, as it will be a pure lesser-evil choice. There will be attempts to mount a third-party challenge, but there is no existing organized movement with a political base a third-party can coalesce around. The New Deal reforms of the 1930s did not happen because the establishment was beneficent, they happened because there was a strong organized left movement which could potentially threaten the established order.

Posted by: jayc | Jun 8 2016 17:17 utc | 44

@Noirette #36

They are in Dresden:

Year after year, a sizeable number of extremely rich and powerful workaholics seem to think it’s worth strapping on their Bilderberg lanyard. But why? What’s getting the head of Google, two prime ministers, a vice-president of the European commission and the chairman of HSBC together in the same hotel basement for the same three days in June?

Posted by: Yul | Jun 8 2016 17:51 utc | 45

There is not hope, Piotr. Where have you been?

It's Greens or nothing.

Posted by: juliania | Jun 8 2016 18:48 utc | 46


The FBI is under Obama's control and there no doubt that he wants Clinton as candidate to continue his right-leaning policies

He wants Biden.

Jackrabbit | Jun 8, 2016 12:09:02 PM | 34

1) Obama's Dept of Justice will delay indictment and/or allow Hillary to plead to a lesser charge. which Hillary's team can spin: she is innocent but forced to 'put this behind her' to run for the Presidency.

2) After being nominated Hillary can (apparently) step-down and name her successor. There is (apparently) no delegates input for anything that might occur AFTER the nomination.

I think you’ve got it. This thing is being carefully choreographed. Comey/Lynch are going to delay kicking the beehive until after HRC is nominated. That will at least give her the “honor” of being the first woman nominated for president. Then they will let her step out of the race of her own accord "for the good of the party" before they indict her.

All of the work the Clinton team has been doing for the last 4-6 weeks has been to benefit Biden who will step into HRC’s shoes and easily win the election, particularly if Warren is his VP.

Obama can then let HRC off the hook as he goes out the door. That protects Biden from having to suffer the wrath of the people that Gerald Ford suffered in 1976 for letting Nixon off the hook. As a reward Biden then nominates Obama to the USSCt. Check, check, checkmate. HRC goes back on the speaker's circuit and, hopefully, we never hear of her again.

Brought to you by CrystalBalls Inc. (tm)

Posted by: Denis | Jun 8 2016 18:55 utc | 47

Neither "major party" can honorably be said to represent the United States. Both have shown themselves to be criminal conspiracies of oligarchs, deserving international court indictments across the board. How anyone can consider voting for any candidate claiming to be a member of either one as presently constituted simply beggars my mind. I refuse.

This is not about practicality; this is about morality.

I would like to see someone like Gary Johnson join forces with Jill Stein. I love Cheri Honkala, but it would be good for the Greens to show they are about joining forces with others in an emergency, and this is that. (Have you noticed what has been happening to Australia's eastern coastline, never mind the Great Barrier Reef? It's coming, folks, and we are far from ready for it.)

War, and this country stands for war, will rapidly become an extravagance mankind cannot any longer afford. That is the only light on the horizon, as far as I can see.

Posted by: juliania | Jun 8 2016 19:04 utc | 48

California results are instructive. Hillary won all the major coastal population centers. I'm curious who the Hillary voters are? I did not see any Hillary signs or bumper stickers, nor know any Hillary voters.

Also, a state with some 40 million, only around 3 million voted in the Democrat primary.

Posted by: ab initio | Jun 8 2016 19:19 utc | 49

Again, why is there so much attention and resources being paid to the farce that is the U.S presidential elections? I don't get it. Have most of you people not realized that it is no more than a 'shell-game' at a carnival(what the U.S has essentially become). Destructive U.S policy will go on no matter what; even if the fifth column put a 'sock-puppet as the POTUS. Sigh. I hate to break it to ya, but the POTUS is 'vetted', not ' voted'. Simple as that. Sorry, we don't live in a Democracy, but a Fascist state with many side-shows. It's time to wake up people. Notice I used metaphors even a 4th grader can understand.

Posted by: bored muslim | Jun 8 2016 19:30 utc | 50

How could anyone even compare clinton to trump, of course TRUMP WOULD BE BETTER! What kind of nonsense stuff is this?
You guys dont realize what a corrupt warmonger Hillary is, not even on MoA?

Guys here speaking on Trump like the anti-trump crowd in the liberal media do.

Posted by: Rap | Jun 8 2016 20:19 utc | 51

No fair elections until a 'NONE OF THE ABOVE' option is added to the ballot.

I hear that one of the candidates running for President of the US is not a clown idiot? Which one is it? I can't tell?

Posted by: ALberto | Jun 8 2016 20:27 utc | 52

#49 Some Hillary voters I know or have met:

1) Elderly women voters who are excited to see a woman president before they die. Many of them believe that she is highly qualified and experienced. Some of them are voting for her mostly because she is a woman and she carries name recognition (the same reason that she polled so highly a year ago before she had any challengers).

2) Mainstream to Conservative Democrats nostalgic for the 90s, many of whom are big Bill Clinton fans. The horror of the Reagan-Bush years and the Bush II years contribute to these voters' rosy memories of the 90's as a time of general prosperity (rather than a time of irrational exuberance). Democrats in both of these categories look at Clinton's "stepping aside" after the 2008 primaries "for the good of the Party" when they proclaim that it is "her turn."

3) Older Black voters, some of whom appear to love the Clintons (others may feel a sense of obligation, may believe that it is "her turn," about her stepping aside for Obama during the 2008 primary).

4) Democratic politicians, up and down the ticket, who know how the system of patronage and fundraising works. Low information Democratic voters who see most of the Democrats, even progressive ones, endorsing Clinton can be swayed to vote a straight Hillary ticket.

5) Zionists. Aside from elderly women, some of the most enthusiastic support I have heard for Hillary has been from hard-line Zionists. Most other Hillary supporters just tout her time as Secretary of State as experience, but pay little attention to the details of her foreign policy. Zionists support her because of her "pro-Israel" record and for promising to take the relationship with Israel to the next level.

Posted by: Rusty Pipes | Jun 8 2016 20:30 utc | 53

The Greens did very well in Calif. This for those that say the Greens are wasting there time running for potus when should doing this. This was done with less than $700,000.

Posted by: jo6pac | Jun 8 2016 20:30 utc | 54

****Shooting in Tel Aviv****

b, OT?

Posted by: ALberto | Jun 8 2016 20:33 utc | 55


I have heard the Biden theory elsewhere in the past few days. I'm not sure exactly how Obama could just replace Clinton with Biden before or after the convention. (I'm also not clear on just how independent the FBI's investigation is; so that once it gets rolling, Obama would or could make an intervention). A Biden/Warren ticket might satisfy some mainstream Democrats: Biden is corporate-friendly and Zionist enough. Those who are thrilled about Hillary just because she is a woman might accept Warren as a vice-President as a compensation prize. Some progressive Democrats who have been backing Bernie would be enthusiastically endorse a ticket including Warren (especially those who were "Run, Warren, Run" voters before they switched to Bernie).

Clinton fans would be deeply disappointed (even outraged); but they'd probably vote for the ticket anyway. Such a ticket would probably get support from more Bernie-backers (like Progressive Democrats), but it still might not attract the independents and young people he has mobilized.

Posted by: Rusty Pipes | Jun 8 2016 20:56 utc | 56

Trump will be making the obligatory election season homage trip to Israel soon. This follows actions by Adelson to smooth the way. I guess the only question remaining is will he match Clinton in his pandering or go further?

Posted by: Yontatan | Jun 8 2016 21:03 utc | 57

Joe "I am a Zionist" Biden is Hillary lite in too many respects. For me anyway. Most registered Democrats would probably go for a Biden/Warrne ticket though (at this point). Biden is up to his eyeballs in the situation in the Ukraine too.

Posted by: RudyM | Jun 8 2016 21:09 utc | 58

' AIPAC ' for President !

(banging my head against the wall)

Posted by: bored muslim | Jun 8 2016 21:26 utc | 59

Oh, for cripes sake!

Jack Smith quoted me again above. Thanks.

BUT, and every single one of you needs to understand that: THE PARTIES, and their candidates, ARE WHAT AMERICANS WANT.

We want to be #1 ... we want to dominate and control ... we long for the 1950's when the so-called New Deal gave everyone who mattered (i.e., white folks) what they wanted ... a piece of the pie. The oligarchs went along with FDR because they had almost enough smarts to understand that a repeat of the French Revolution was entirely possible. Since then the propaganda has taken root and people really believe the tripe they were and are fed by the education system, the media, and in some sense sites like this. We want to believe we are good, we want to believe we are a positive force for the world.

All I can say to that is, with very few minor exceptions, we are deluded, rapacious and vicious when it comes to the all sacrosanct "I" of American political posturing! Yes, I am saying that YOU ARE THE PROBLEM! (Frankly, so am I) because we don't go buy some pitchforks and slam them into the nearest politician ... remove the pitchfork and use it on the next available politician ... they all pander to what is wrong ... and they'll be replaced by those just like them (maybe and probably you too.)

In closing: Viva la revolucion!

Posted by: rg the lg | Jun 8 2016 21:46 utc | 60

Posted by: Rusty Pipes | Jun 8, 2016 4:30:15 PM | 53

I suspect the Black and Latino vote runs deeper.

This here is the Sanders vote Clinton alluded to as being anti-immigration

The program would have allowed businesses to apply for visas for workers for up to two years at a time.

Today, he likes to talk about his opposition to it in humanitarian terms, calling guest-worker programs semi-slavery. But at the time, Sanders's public comments reflected on the economics of the program — specifically, his concern that bringing in guest workers would drive down wages for low-income Americans.

Trade Unions have a tendency to restrict competition to protect workers whilst the only chance minorities on the outside have is open "liberal" competition.

Posted by: somebody | Jun 8 2016 22:34 utc | 61

@rg the lg | Jun 8, 2016 5:46:46 PM | 60

Bro, yes I'm the problem thank you. No offence intended:-)
Never a follower but uniquely different, passive and pacifist. In this primary cycle voting for Hillary and in November for Trump may starts self destruction within the Democratic and Republican parties.

Posted by: Jack Smith | Jun 8 2016 22:40 utc | 62

IhaveLittleToAdd @35:

... we deserve these two candidates.
No, we don't. The establishment works to divide us.

And the changes you wish for sound like the Green Party platform. Instead of despairing about the 2 major Party candidates, why not just support the Greens?

<> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>

Piotr Berman | Jun 8, 2016 12:23:28 PM | 39:

I am not a fan of Green Party, and as long as there is hope in reforming at least one of the major parties...
So you're willing to give the Democratic Party a 'pass' this election season? Even after Obama's betrayal and Sanders treatment (which may include his 'sheepdogging')? Will you vote for Hillary?

<> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>

jayc @44:

... but there is no existing organized movement with a political base a third-party can coalesce around.
There are third-parties that already exist like Libertarian Party, Conservative Party, and Green Party. Each has staked out a constituency.

<> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>

bored muslim @50:

Again, why is there so much attention and resources being paid to the farce that is the U.S presidential elections?
Because many people recognize the problems you cite and want to address it. Nothing will get better otherwise.

<> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>

ALberto @52:

I hear that one of the candidates running for President of the US is not a clown idiot? Which one is it? I can't tell?
Jill Stein of the Green Party (Party Convention to be held in August).

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jun 9 2016 0:10 utc | 63

@39 piotr, 'as long as there is hope in reforming at least one of the major parties, this should be pursued first. And Sanders did show that this exists in the Democratic party'

You've gotta be kidding. What'll you say after Bernie walks out of the White House with Obama's around him and endorses Hillary?

Sanders' Moment of Truth

If the Sandernistas’ morale remains high right up to the convention – that is, if they are enabled to maintain a sense of group mission – then the path to a new party to the left of the corporate Democrats will begin to emerge among a significant minority of his activists.

If that happens, if Bernie hangs in until the convention, Bernie will have escaped remembrance as the complete betrayer, but he still will have pulled yet another bait and switch on the American people. He will support Hillary. There is no hope of reforming 'either' [wing] of the major party. We need structural changes to the election process in order to regain control of our representative government and we need to assert the supremacy of direct democratic government in order to govern ourselves. I suggest one way of setting off on that quest, atomized and unorganized as we are. May the 'hard-core' sandernistas rise to the challenge, on way or another, after Bernie parts ways with them ... whether on Thursday afternoon or in July.

Posted by: jfl | Jun 9 2016 0:50 utc | 64

It looks like the choice will be between a politically unknown buffoon and a politically proven vampire.

Posted by: Hal Duell | Jun 9 2016 0:55 utc | 65

Rusty Pipes | Jun 8, 2016 4:56:44 PM | 56

I have heard the Biden theory elsewhere in the past few days. I'm not sure exactly how Obama could just replace Clinton with Biden before or after the convention.

History is the best teacher here. HRC getting indicted would be the equivalent, politically, of Bobby K getting a bullet in the head in 1968. Either way, the leading Democrat is eliminated from the race right after the CA primary. In ‘68 the ideologues were the anti-war candidates McGovern and McCarthy, the equivalents of Sanders today.

Hubert Humphrey was Johnson’s VP, equivalent to Biden. Like Biden, Humphrey did not run in a single primary, but at the convention a back-room deal was done so that Kennedy’s delegates didn’t go to McCarthy and McGoven – they got shafted. Humphrey waded in and took the lot. That’s why Chicago blew up in everybody’s face. Philadelphia will, too, if Sanders gets shafted, but – hey – that’s politics.

If Obama is playing a role in this process, it is almost certainly orchestrating the FBI/DOJ announcement on what they are going to do with HRC so that a) Biden gets the nomination, b) HRC gets off the hook, and c) Sanders gets some sort of consolation prize in the hopes of avoiding repeat shaft-job-induced violence.

Taking down Trump is too important. If Comey/Lynch don’t indict HRC or if Obama exonerates her, Trump will use her to pound the Democrats into the ground and the next thing you know the US will be at war with Mexico, Russia, China, Syria, and Megyn Kelly. Nor can the Democrats afford to hang their hopes on independent voters of middle America supporting a septugenarian Jew. Never happen. It’s down to Biden or Trump.

RudyM | Jun 8, 2016 5:09:42 PM | 58

Joe "I am a Zionist" Biden is Hillary lite in too many respects. For me anyway.

Yeah, I don’t like the guy particularly and dread the thought of 4 years of him going on and on about his dead family members. And judging by his loose mouth in times past, he’s thick as a brick, diplomatically speaking.

But he is the paragon of a pol – in both the worst sense and the best sense of the term. If you get a chance, find his speech to the California Democratic Convention in late Feb. It is a freakin’ masterpiece. “Go Joe” signs all over the place, and a campaign speech to match JFK – well, JFK on an off day.

I’m luke-warm on Warren. She’s such an Yisrael-firster and almost as ambition-blinded as HRC. I don't trust overly ambitious women, I've been married too many times not to be jittery. If I had my choice of a presidential or vice-presidential candidate -- and if she had 10 more years of experience -- I’d be all over Tulsi Gabbard. Brilliant woman.

But Biden and Warren would (will?) be unstoppable against Trump. It would be a 25 point spread.

Posted by: Denis | Jun 9 2016 1:21 utc | 66

The thing would be if the Sanders supporters were able to organize a fraction of voters into a third force. Merging with time tested minority parties would be the kiss of death, I think. But people would have to sacrifice their careers to accomplish this, might be too much to ask. Keeping the large scale small donation model is key, of course. That would help organize the support of talented politicians.
Money is the mothers milk of politics

Posted by: Jay M | Jun 9 2016 1:44 utc | 67

@Jay M | Jun 8, 2016 9:44:24 PM | 67

Talk is cheap, would you sacrifice your career if you're working or donate big monies if retired? Maybe you’re ill-informed. Most of these insane Sanders’ worshippers are unemployed, loaded with students’ debts and other debts?

If you really care and that includes Sanders worshippers, first get rid of both Democrats and Republicans parties by whatever mean within "the law" and put all the politicians' pests in jail starting from the top.

Am not insulting you, but remember more or less 500 motherfucks are smarter and richer than everyone on earth? Further, they owned the laws, had bigger clubs and will crush anyone who dare to challenge them.

Posted by: Jack Smith | Jun 9 2016 2:26 utc | 68

Jack, yes you are part of the problem so long as we advocate acting 'within' the law. That is precisely why I say that I too am part of the problem. I'm just too comfortable with the way things are. The sad reality is that almost all Americans feel the same way. Perhaps worse, they also dream of the happy days of the 1950's ... when some of the safety net of the New Deal kept the oligarchs safe from the revolution they so definitely deserved. Unless, and until, the average member of the Empire ( real name: EXCEPTIONALISTAN ) understands that the New Deal wasn't about keeping them happy but about preserving the status quo, there will be no real change.

California proves just how venal so-called progressives really are. Voting for Clinton? If the vote had been between peace and a nuclear holocaust, they still would have voted en masse for the holocaust!

I've said before, humanity is a cancer. Cancers always kill their host. The only salvation is that with enough, but not too much, radiation maybe the holocaust of a nuclear Armageddon will put an end to us ... ?

Hey! One can hope for a positive outcome ... ?

Posted by: rg the lg | Jun 9 2016 3:22 utc | 69

"If that happens, if Bernie hangs in until the convention, Bernie will have escaped remembrance as the complete betrayer, but he still will have pulled yet another bait and switch on the American people. He will support Hillary. There is no hope of reforming 'either' [wing] of the major party. We need structural changes to the election process ..."

This is precisely how a party should operate. Dispute, fight, but then work together. If Sanders won, Clinton would be obliged to support. It is true that sometimes the candidate is despised by the political machine of the party and left out there to die (politically). I think that this is what happened to George McGovern, as his colleagues and the media waited until after the elections to start pursuing Watergate in earnest. A criminal was (clearly!) better than an anti-war wacko. An alternative is a plethora of party and "independent candidates" and all too often they are nut cases who are popular for this and that reason with some segment of the electorate.

A dictatorship cannot be better than the dictator, and democracy cannot be better than the people. And you can tinker with the rules all day long, but one cannot have to high hopes on that. Decreasing the role of big money and more universal franchise is important, as well as the freedom of media. Gerrymandering is also an issue. But the wide population can still fall to cheap tricks (sometimes even without large financial backing).

The opinions do not change quickly, and the process has some resemblance to tug-of-war game. Sanders pulled the rope quite a distance in the correct direction, and the "lamentable two-party system" actually amplified the visibility of that change. What is needed is a progressive version of "Tea Party" and/or "Christian Right" that would replace some party apparatchiks and instill the fear of God in the rest. The leveraged takeover is how politics works, and like most of tricks, it can be used for good and for bad.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Jun 9 2016 4:05 utc | 70

' Hillary ' for Prison 2016

there's where my vote goes...

Posted by: bored muslim | Jun 9 2016 4:16 utc | 71

Jason @ 33,
None of the coverage on the Epstein/Clinto/orgy island business infers any violence whatever. Just underage & paid for sex. I didn't supply a link cuz it's all over the net; just search any relevant phrase: orgy island, Clinton Epstein sex scanadal-- whatever. I think Blacklisted News was one of the ones that carried it. Epstein was convicted, spent 13 months in the pen, cuz he's managed to keep it a state matter instead of federal. Clinton made multiple trips to the island w/o his SS minders, in Epstein's plane. Epstein's a billionaire financier I think

There's no proof that the execution of the husband of the asst DA had any connex w the Epstein/Clinton matter. For that matter, I only saw in 2 places that Asst DA Camila was working on the case, due to the residency of some of the girls in Georgia.

It's a story that's out there; I certainly don't know if this particular murder is connected to the Clintons. When Bill was Gov, Arkansas was a hotbed of drugs being flown into Mena Airport and people died. He's seriously mobbed up. I think his maternal uncle owned a car dealership & was mob, if I remember right

Unbelievable no. of murders around Clinton. About 3 attys investigating land swindles in Arkansas or trying to represent the victims were killed. You may remember Ron Brown who was being investigated, would've testified, answered interrogatories, etc: Plane crash. Next day his atty was killed. Even the ATC during the plane crash was suicided.

There's an unbelievable number of killings. Remember Vice Foster? A few deaths are more closely associated w Hillary than Bill. Here, I found a link to some of them.

Incidentally, it lists William Colby, who'd been Director of Central Intelligence in an earlier, somewhat less vicious time. No reason to think his death was connected to Clinton.

But Jason, it reminded me of William Colby's webpage. I haven't thought of it in years. I was following him daily on it when he was killed. Frightened me. He'd known John Kennedy, wrote on his webpage about Kennedy. He wrote about how the organic origin of oil was a fraud, cooked up on the plane on the way back from getting the first important mideast oil concession. How it's really a natural product of the earth. He wrote that the US had compelled the formation of OPEC by kidnapping a relative of each of the people who had to agree! How a kidnapped woman had fallen in love w one of the CIA guys and married him. Lots of stuff. Shook me when they killed him. I think when he testified in Congressional closed sessions that he told more than TPTB liked.

Sorry I ran on.

PS The Ron Brown connection & why the ATC died are covered here

Posted by: Penelope | Jun 9 2016 5:45 utc | 72

@70 piotr, ' A criminal was (clearly!) better than an anti-war wacko. '

Another of your outbursts from the gut posing as satire? You identify far too readily with those I view as directly responsible for the sorry shape we're in. Not that it matters what you think, or what I think, but its good to read things written clearly rather than this constant, murky subterfuge.

Posted by: jfl | Jun 9 2016 6:09 utc | 73

The dust starts to settle on the California fix ... Where are the Missing California Primary Votes?

After I finished filling out my ballots, a woman takes my ballot with the prop measures and slides it in the machine, then LOOKS at my presidential ballot vote and stuffs it in a box that is filled to the brim with other provisional ballots. I asked her when it would be counted and she said in a few weeks.

Before I even get home the opposing candidate has been proclaimed winner.

Posted by: jfl | Jun 9 2016 12:54 utc | 74

"A criminal was (clearly!) better than an anti-war wacko." Sorry, I should write "(clearly!?????)". At that time I was observing from the other side of the ocean so I can be wrong, but it seems that George McGovern was outrageously betrayed.

But it is still my opinion that the more plausible route for positive change in USA is through positive changes in the Democratic party, and using internet to educate more active voters. That does not mean that voting Green is "dangerously naive". Everyone has a different ordering of priorities even if we agree on goals.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Jun 9 2016 13:02 utc | 75

16;I don't know,he might,their MSM demonizes him daily,its possible he wants better coverage,and of course Israeli genuflection works,but his support is nationalists,like me,and if he does that,he'll lose the bedrock of his support.
Adelson aint dumb,and maybe he knows Trump will win and he's just hedging his bets,that's all.

Posted by: dahoit | Jun 9 2016 13:43 utc | 76

Posted by: dahoit | Jun 9, 2016 9:43:08 AM | 76

Trump has died-in-the-wool smarts. He'll be able to tell the "Israelis" something sufficiently promising and ambiguous to trigger their Hopey Changey genes. Tricksters can be suckered too - even when they're vampires.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jun 9 2016 14:51 utc | 77

Penelope | Jun 8, 2016 11:25:05 AM | 31: “It's not the first murder around the Clintons.”

That’s a cheap shot, alleging that Zlofaghari’s murder has anything to do with the Clintons, certainly at this early stage in the investigation – he’s only been dead a week. Your conspiracy BS doesn’t even make any sense. Even if it did connect a couple of dots (which it doesn’t), without a shred of evidence backing it up it’s just a crude attempt at character assassination.

But maybe I’m just not getting the gist of your theory. Even if we agree that Zipper Bill was a frequent flyer on Epstein’s Lolita Express, how does that implicate him or Hil in the murder of a Lyft driver in Atlanta who is married to an asst state AG who is going after human traffiking? The connection you provide is that some of Epstein’s Lolitas live in Georgia. WTF??? Is this hit supposed to be a message from Hillary to stay away from a Florida case that has nothing to do with Georgia other than some victim allegedly lives there? And so we’re just going to bundle all this crap together and use it to conclude that the Zlogaghri murder is “not the first one around the Clintons”?

Here’s a valid theory for you: Camila Wright got her new job as Georgia’s prosecutor for human trafficking in 2014 because she was so successful in busting traffickers in Fulton County, where she put almost 2 dozen of them behind bars, including 2 for life. If the killing of her husband was somehow connected to her job, then the obvious suspects are the ones related to the creeps she has already put away. Ya' got 20 pervs locked up times, say, 10 associates/family members each = 200 valid suspects right there.

If the Clintons were going to be involved in killing someone close to the Epstein case, it would certainly be someone who is a whole lot closer than a Lyft driver who has no vague connection to Epstein or Epstein's victims or Epstein's sicko friends. I like a good conspiracy theory as much as anyone, and I detest the Clintons more than most, but this sort of wild character assassination by conspiriados is what makes the internet the vicious place it is.

And the reason I say it is that if, as you allege, this murder hypothetically implicates the Clintons because they are buds with Epstein, then it also hypothetically implicates Dirty Dersh for the same “reason.” I’ve got it on good authority that he trolls this blog daily. Got $200k to defend yourself in the defamation case he’ll surely file?

Posted by: Denis | Jun 9 2016 15:39 utc | 78

Listen and weep: Exit polls, normally accurate to about 2%, cancelled in CA, other highly suspicious events....

Posted by: metamars | Jun 9 2016 16:56 utc | 79

Dersh can bring no case for an accusation that was not made (even if it logically follows from an accusation against somebody else that was made).

Posted by: lysias | Jun 9 2016 18:39 utc | 80

Killary’s e-mails to be released after the election, on Nov. 31. (sic). What a lovely typo or sly joke: as Nov. 31 doesn’t exist!

Posted by: Noirette | Jun 9 2016 19:44 utc | 81

what i don't understand is europe? bolasete @ 42.

A bit OT? anyway… Cameron, Merkel, Hollande, and others have not said much about the US elections except to vilify Trump, — they are just following what they glom as the US PTB line, knee-jerk reactions along the Dem. apparatus stance, as Killary is supposed to win.

In the Dems. abroad primary, 70% voted for Sanders, which threw up some positive comments about him from EU bigwigs but these were not ‘public positions’ and didn’t make the MSM. (Sanders is the mirror image of what Europe ‘likes’.)

It is said that EU countries (particularly Germany, occupied since after WW2; France as an ‘exception’ has been cracked down on hard; Sweden as ‘innately’ pro US; GB as the long standing ally, and others) are completely under the thumb of the US.

Either by direct, if long standing, manipulation (Young leaders, infiltration, corruption, blackmail, power games, the economy, banking, etc.) or more seriously imho through the EU structure which was quasi-created and heavily supported by the US since the Marshall plan.

The EU was implemented to control from above (and a super-structure does a fantastic job) and to prevent ‘rogues’ from ‘splintering’ and generally to not have 30 interlocutors (presidents, parliaments, voters, etc.) but to be able to deal with say Juncker and Merkel and whomever and not more. To destroy the Nation States of Europe, some of whom are still quite powerful. The EU project is clearly based on the idea of “Regions” - with their own folklore, food, and local cash-flow kitty - run by the EU.

What has happened now, ppl say, is merely that the masks have come off. This subservient EU was supposed to be a bulwark against Russia, but during the Cold War and then the USSR crash collapse, ostensive activation was unecessary.

Once Russia rose from the ashes the threat of a Europe-Russia not exactly alliance but strongly integrated economical, *energy*, cultural, partnership, etc. (“Lisbon to Vladivostok”) became an existential danger to US supremacy. The screws had to be applied! Therefore Ukraine, the expansion of NATO, and so on. The US loosing power is another factor.

All this is more or less correct, imho, and posted on thse lines before, but ignores the grip of economic models (néo-libéral in F; corporatist, capitalistic or even fascist, if you will), and other matters.

Posted by: Noirette | Jun 9 2016 21:04 utc | 82

@82 noirette

Maybe, like me, bolasete had thought that supine inattention/inaction in the face of monstrously stupid as well as monstrously criminal government policies and actions was a peculiarly American trait, and that the Europeans were not 'just like us'. But in fact they are.

Posted by: jfl | Jun 9 2016 22:22 utc | 83

It is nice to know that there are others that are as cynical about this Election season as I am.

Fiver, a long-time commenter at, points out that whether Sanders was part of the farce or not, no change was going to be allowed:

To assert Sanders ‘lost’ the election implies it was possible for him to win it, that he therefore either did not intend to win it, or otherwise did not do that which could have won it for him.

I believe Sanders could’ve hit Clinton much, much harder with nothing but the truth of her own making, and taken her out of the race. He did not do it, and it’s not likely we’ll ever know precisely ‘why’. That said, what did transpire made it abundantly clear that so far as power was concerned, it was anybody but Sanders [actually, more like: nobody but Hillary] and popular, progressive political success via the ballot box was simply not going to be tolerated absent a far more robust, peaceful but determined, negative reaction from the electorate.

If that very simple but awful truth is not sufficient of itself to galvanize a mass response by at least one of the tens of millions of the now essentially disenfranchised [thankfully, the more cynical Sanders supporters are awake and strongly #NEVERHILLARY] , including the bulk of the best people of the next generation, it’s very difficult to imagine what will unless Sanders now chooses to make legitimacy itself his fight... The gauntlet’s been thrown. If not recognized for what it is and picked up to return to sender with a little something extra on it, and now, there is no guarantee whatever another opportunity to get even this close to a peaceful transfer of power back to the people will ever again present itself.

<> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>

I continue to believe that it DOES matter if Sanders was a willing participant in the election farce because it is further proof - to those that need it - of how rotten our political system is AND that the Democratic Party can not be reformed.

Lets not forget, that while Hillary has many problems (emails + Clinton Foundation), Obama has very troubling scandals as well, like:

> Lack of prosecutions of Wall Street executives; Continued 'Too Big To Fail' problem; continued suspension of mark-to-market accounting; bogus mortgage relief for homeowners; etc.

> War on Whistle-blowers & lack of transparency;

> IRS scandal;

> Benghazi lies (to ensure 2012 election);

> Continued wars & a new Cold War;

> Solution to inequality: more low-paying jobs;

> Made Bush tax cuts permanent ("Fiscal Cliff!") while cutting social benefits (Sequester);

> Obamacare

- how it was enacted/pushed;

- reneged on promise for 'public option';

- Lies: "If you like your Doctor, you can keep your doctor";

> Obamatrade (TTP, TTIP): secrecy, anti-constitutional

> and much more.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jun 9 2016 23:06 utc | 84

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jun 9, 2016 7:06:10 PM | 84

> charter schools

Hillary Clinton tends to be less right wing than Obama (except foreign policy but that is only in style not substance), but Obama has the superior brand, Nobel peace and all ...

Posted by: somebody | Jun 10 2016 1:22 utc | 85

This is so horrid, I feel the need to point it out:

She's a woman! Latinos can relate! La Hillary es muy caliente!

I do believe her about the hot sauce though; I've got a bottle of Cholula three inches from my left arm, myself.

Posted by: RudyM | Jun 10 2016 1:27 utc | 86

Sanders whole raisson d'etre was to hold HRC's Left Flank, so she could maintain her Hawkish and Pro-Banker status. It's the same controlled dissent ploy that The Elites used with OWS, by sending waves of feckless penniless students off to Wall Street to be pissed on and jeered, while sending their monied parents off to WADC to fecklessly picket in front of the White Hose. Had the opposite occurred, Obama would be on the ropes, and Wall Street on its knees.

The Elites have Controlled Dissent down to Data Science, using the same tools as 538, and controlling every new uprising of faith, by starting a new Facebook Church to subvert it.
Besides, it's all a carney show casino fantasy. Think Las Vegas when you think WADC. They just grifted away $70B of your last life savings to a foreign country of Puerto Rico, underwriting and backstopping the Elites' synthetic gambling debts with your children's inheritance, the same way They pledged $50B of your savings to backstop the Israeli junta coup in Ukraine.

A-a-a-and ... it's gone. They don't give a frack about you.

"I can't tell you where all the money went!" Benhamin

Posted by: Norel | Jun 10 2016 1:46 utc | 87

Killary’s e-mails to be released after the election, on Nov. 31. (sic). What a lovely typo or sly joke: as Nov. 31 doesn’t exist!
Posted by: Noirette | Jun 9, 2016 3:44:07 PM | 81

Yeah ... a bit like the 12th Of Never (and that's a long, long, time).

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jun 10 2016 1:52 utc | 88

pb at 70, in re 73

So you've been warned, more enthusiasm during the next Two Minutes Hate. It's a "MofA value," I'm given to understand.

"A seemingly racist Trump with otherwise unpredictable policies may be less damaging to the world than an unreconstructed neolibcon Clinton." I think our Innkeeper is off his game.

Only "seemingly"? I think "longtime" would be more accurate Takes after his dad, it seems, who had ties to the KKK and was the subject of a 1979 housing discrimination suit.

If he's only passing, he done a good enough job to convince the white nationalist movement.

But the biggest error is buying into is the foreign policy myth that The Donald is some sort of Dove as he wings it. It often manifests itself in the notion that a Trump Presidency (given his management style, "Administration" seems too strong a word).

How can the brazenly open and commonplace infliction of torture combined with bombastic militarism be better for the world?

In the past five years, Trump has consistently pushed one big foreign policy idea: America should steal other countries’ oil.

He first debuted this plan in an April 2011 television appearance, amid speculation that he might run for the GOP nomination. In the interview, Trump seemed to suggest the US should seize Iraqi oil fields and just operate them on its own.

“In the old days when you won a war, you won a war. You kept the country,” Trump said.

Asked about it two years later, Trump told Fox News “I’ve said it a thousand times.” And it came up in the notorious interview with the WaPo editorial board.

The piece concludes with an interesting discussion of the Jacksonian tradition in American foreign policy.

“The first Jacksonian rule of war is that wars must be fought with all available force,” [Bard College's lar Walter Russell] Mead writes. “Jacksonian opinion takes a broad view of the permissible targets in war. Again reflecting a very old cultural heritage, Jacksonians believe that the enemy’s will to fight is a legitimate target of war, even if this involves American forces in attacks on civilian lives, establishments and property. ”

Trump’s foreign policy ideas sound outlandish today because the Jacksonian tradition has fallen out of fashion. In this post–Cold War world of unquestioned American military dominance, neoconservatives and liberal interventionists’ loftier ideals have controlled US foreign policy discourse.

Trump is fond of quoting Patton and MacArthur, the last prominent Jacksonians.

Posted by: rufus magister | Jun 10 2016 2:40 utc | 89

rufus magister @89

I keep telling folk it is all about finance.
Trump's foreign policy stance as a tool of private finance is to continue its world wide control of finance.

Russia is a challenge to that domination.
Libya was a threat to that domination.
China says it is communist so it may be a threat to that domination.
All of South America is in its 2nd generation of Shock Doctrine tactics.

Trump is applying for benevolent despot and many Americans have been brainwashed into thinking that is better than extending the Clinton dynasty. I understand that some are pushing for Trump because they want shit to get worse faster so maybe change will come sooner....I can't get behind that fatalistic strategy.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Jun 10 2016 3:03 utc | 90

All that said I expect to vote for Jill Stein again because there is no way I can vote for a war criminal

Posted by: psychohistorian | Jun 10 2016 3:14 utc | 91

Denis @ 78, Your fury at my accusing Clinton in last week's murder is ill-placed. I said:

"There's no proof that the execution of the husband of the asst DA had any connex w the Epstein/Clinton matter. For that matter, I only saw in 2 places that Asst DA Camila was working on the case, due to the residency of some of the girls in Georgia. It's a story that's out there; I certainly don't know if this particular murder is connected to the Clintons."

I was following Bill Clinton as Gov of Arkansas before he became a Prez candidate, and anyone who was cannot avoid being aware of the many murders surrounding the Clintons. I GAVE you links which corroborate this. But of course you didn't look at them. I try not to let my present judgements preclude considering new data. I recommend this course of action to you. Then at least if you disagree w someone you're arguing about data.

Posted by: Penelope | Jun 10 2016 6:10 utc | 92

As Obama endorses Clinton, Sanders signals readiness to back campaign

“I spoke briefly to Sec. Clinton on Tuesday night, and I congratulated her on her very strong campaign,” he said. “I look forward to meeting with her in the near future to see how we can work together to defeat Donald Trump and create a government that represents all of us and not just the one-percent.”

The sheepdog bays at the moon.

Posted by: jfl | Jun 10 2016 6:45 utc | 93

Sanders' incipient support of Hillary's candidacy should remind us all of the support the wars in general received once they became - 7 now, and counting - demoblican wars. Warren, that other demoblican 'pwogwessive', has just thrown in with Clinton.

As long as they were republicrat wars they were b-a-a-aaaad. But as soon as they become demoblican wars it was ... hey, no problem.

That alone might be reason enough to hand the reins back to the republicrats. Being anti-war would become 'fashionable' again.

Can anyone argue that Obama was any better in any way than Bush XLIII?

While it is true that Obama was a much better liar than Bush, he was also 'really good at killing people'. At least as good as Bush, who left that stuff to his underlings rather than getting in there and pressing the button himself ... close as he could, anyway, every Tuesday. So too, with Hillary and 'I came, I saw, he died'.

A pox on both Hillary and Trump. Let's work to really clean the house over the next 10 or 12 years. At this juncture, there is no lessor of 2 evils argument, it's evil, all the way down. Until we do something to change it.

Posted by: jfl | Jun 10 2016 7:22 utc | 94

Jackrabbit @ 63

I voted Stein in '12. Will do so again if given the opportunity.

No, we don't. The establishment works to divide us.

So we are simply helpless in trying to resist their efforts to divide? Were you expecting powerful economic and political forces to step aside a cede power to the will of the people?

It's interesting that we have all been drawn to this blog presumably due to a receptiveness to the author's interpretation of world events. Yet a cursory review of the comments above show a complete spectrum of perspectives and gripes. I almost see, in the comments, a total rejection of political process as though there will be some other intervening force that will absolve power structures and inequality.

Posted by: IhaveLittleToAdd | Jun 10 2016 11:45 utc | 95

66;Yes Trump would destroy Biden Warren in a heartbeat.At least a 25% margin on Bitem and Pochahontas.
And EW says,I'm ready to be VP candidate"!Yes,she is an ambitious deer in the headlights of reality,another bubblehead to join the chief bubblehead clinton.
Obomba backs the hell bitch!Like he wasn't going to?Holy sh*t its flying around today.She has the black vote sewn up already.The failed POTUS(who knows that actual reality 38,000 jobs?)pontificates.
And liberalism today consists of libertines who deny others the liberty to say they are f*cking losers.

Posted by: dahoit | Jun 10 2016 13:01 utc | 96

90;Whats the score?Bottom of the 9th 2 outs 2 strikes.Trump is Americas only chance to throw off the yoke of Zion that has US on our knees in poverty,slavery and war.Is he going to,and not kow tow to the monsters?We will see.
Funny,the Vietnamese are commies still,Russia aint,but Russia is the bad guy.
Does not compute,except to Trotskyite scum.

Posted by: dahoit | Jun 10 2016 13:05 utc | 97

This article is a bit sloppy and confused, but a good read nonetheless (as it fits in w. my view of the US! ) It *is* about the US election. By George Eliason on Washingtonblog.


Posted by: Noirette | Jun 10 2016 13:51 utc | 98

Posted by: Noirette | Jun 10, 2016 9:51:04 AM | 98

It is by George Eliason, an American journalist living in Ukraine

I would not take this at face value. Interested parties have made interested Ukrainians believe the US would support them in a war against Russia. It is obvious the US won't risk a single NATO soldier, but is happy to have Ukrainians get their heads kicked in.

Posted by: somebody | Jun 10 2016 14:40 utc | 99

It is more like this

How Clinton Donor got on sensitive Intelligence Board

more fallout from the Emails to come ...

Posted by: somebody | Jun 10 2016 14:47 utc | 100

next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.