Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
August 09, 2016

Clinton's False Assassination Outrage Only Helps Trump

The Hillary-bots are trying to construe some Trump babble as a call by him to 2nd amendment supporters to assassinate Hillary Clinton.

It is difficult to find such a suggestion even in the out-of-context sentences Clinton supporter are spreading around:

“If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks,” he said, adding: “Although the second amendment people – maybe there is, I don’t know.”

My first thought when reading that was that he called for 2nd amendment supporters to organize against Clinton picking supreme court judges that would limit the current 2nd amendment interpretation (in my view: back to its original meaning). That the NRA, which Trump mentions, has lots of political organizing power is well known. To interpret that as call for assassination is widely off the mark.

To see a real moron and psychopath openly calling for murder (of Russians and Iranians), turn to the former CIA bigwig and Hillary acolyte Mike Morell.

The quote the Clinton supporters cite sounds different when put into the wider context. Within the usual disjointed talk Trump was giving it doesn't even come near to an assassination suggestion or a threat.

Via Daily Beast reporter Gideon Resnick the full quote:


Those incoherent remarks were certainly off-the-cuff babble without a prepared script. Difficult to follow even if someone were interested in doing so.

Some pitiable opposition researcher at Hillary's campaign headquarter must have listened closely to Trump for some line that could, somehow, be construed as something OUTRAGEOUS. That was then blasted to all the usual Hillary bots who immediately spread it around.

The Clinton campaign does not get it. As suggested here earlier the "outrage" the Clinton campaign constructs out of such quotes will only help Trump to win more votes. It will also infuse more mistrust against the media who spread it around. The Trump campaign is already using it for that purpose.

The best of it, from Trump's view, is that he now gets another full news cycle of free advertising on every media channel. This while Clinton spends at least $13 million for TV adds around the Olympics where Trump spends $0.

There are many ways to beat Trump. Constructing arguably false outrage from some throw-away remarks certainly isn't on of them. The election will likely be decided on voter turn-out and get-out-the-vote volunteering efforts. There is little, if any, enthusiasm for Clinton. Trump is winning more hard-core believers with any such Clinton attack.

Posted by b on August 9, 2016 at 22:08 UTC | Permalink

next page »

I don't think Trump is a psychopath who wants her assassinated. I think he's a knucklehead who thinks it's okay to allude sarcastically to the possibility.

Posted by: falcone | Aug 9 2016 22:18 utc | 1

There is, of course, video.

It is bad, b. Trump is either calling for assassination or for civil war. Basically, that is what the 2nd amendment is about - giving people the power to fight if they wish to.

You could say, it was a joke. But you don't joke about stuff like this. Especially not in the US, but there is no place this could go down as acceptable in any context.

An equivalent would be - let's say Gysi as he is known as a joker - tell Merkel that there is of course a Syrian solution.

Trump's chances for presidency with rational voters are gone. All he can do now is call in the "2nd amendment people".

In his logic he might have meant to emphasize that nothing could be done about Clinton's judges. But this is not normal logic.

Posted by: somebody | Aug 9 2016 22:39 utc | 2

The way he put it, it wasn't totally outrageous. But as usual, almost.

I would vote for Satan before I would think of voting for Hillary.

Posted by: blues | Aug 9 2016 22:47 utc | 3

The only way Trump will win is if there are paper ballots that are put into clear boxes and supervised by someone besides Langley.

Posted by: Perimeter | Aug 9 2016 23:40 utc | 4

Since this is not the first time The Dickhead Donald has called for "Second Amendment Solutions" and it plays into a popular Tea Party trope, I do not see this as sarcasm. It is a threat he is making on behalf of his base. He's already declared in advance of his inevitable loss as it being due to the election being "rigged."

And for those who might doubt just how much of that Tea Party Kool-Aid The Donald has quaffed, here he is "rallying the troops," if you will, in Tennessee.

As I've said before, as an avowed smart-ass myself, I don't pick up on any of the usual signifiers of "sarcasm." When you get right down to it, The Donald is for all his boyish exuberance is a pretty grim, humorless guy, really. Well, unless you find bullying amusing. You're likely, then, his Chris Christie, then.

It is absolutely plain that the Rethuglicans are preparing for another four years of obstruction of an "illegitimate" Administration. They are said to be certain to retain control of the House (thanks to gerrymandering by Rethuglican state legislatures; if there was to be a fiddle, it will be at that level, where there are far more Red than Blue states). But perhaps they will loose the Senate. Obama made such masterful use of his brief majority; I'm sure his former Secretary of State will find the experience inspiring.

And in what parallel universe is a CIA official talking about his agency's tasking (which includes killing people) the moral equivalent of Presidential candidate asking for his rival to be offed? Sarcastically or not. Trumps patter smacks of the Senate gingering up mobs versus Tiberius Gracchus.

ps -- I might have given you Obama talking about how much he liked ordering murder by drone, though. I couldn't find a clip of him saying it, but this analysis notes his Administration "consistently pushed the limits of U.S. drone strike policy, [thereby]... solidifying his drone war as the most significant and lasting legacy" of his Presidency.

blues at 3 --

Vote the Republican line, you'll be able to vote for the Candidate you mention. "Please keep your distance/The trail leads to here/There's blood on your fingers/Brought on by fear."

Posted by: rufus magister | Aug 9 2016 23:52 utc | 5

Oops, bad href on the election being "rigged."

Posted by: rufus magister | Aug 9 2016 23:55 utc | 6

Maybe, just maybe, if Hillary wins enough people will decide that a revolution is in order. Whether they will actually risk it is another matter.

Hillary-bots is a great term. I am reminded on my 3 yr old grandsons favorite critters: minions. It seems to me that a large number of Hillary-bots react with almost (though not quite) the intellectual depth of the minions in Despicable Me. Not that the Trump-ists are any better.

Posted by: rg the lg | Aug 10 2016 0:01 utc | 7

somebody @1,

Civil war is almost certain; the only question is whether and with which right-wingers the left choose to ally. Whether the liberals like the fight they're presented with or not is, like all things liberal, utterly irrelevant outside their value system permeating their bourgeois ranks.

"Trump's chances for presidency with rational voters are gone."

It is rational to sell one's fellow man to slavers, even more rational to sell one's inferiors so. The value of this flavor of "rationality", which seeks above all to preserve some, any ruling class for the love of their imaginary friend, is therefore, like all things liberal, essentially inapplicable to anyone who doesn't adhere to the religion.

Posted by: Jonathan | Aug 10 2016 0:06 utc | 8

rufus magister @5,

Well, good. It's about time the system presented itself honestly instead of as its marketing spiel. Don't you think, or would you rather live the lie of liberalism?

Posted by: Jonathan | Aug 10 2016 0:09 utc | 9

Proves again Donald Trump is not a politician. He speaks "plain talk american" and joeandjill6pac on main street are awake. They understand Trump's speaking style.

The Trump campaign is a movement MSM and neocons will not embrace.

2nd amendment supporters not just members of the NRA will organize to get out the voters on 08 November.

Posted by: likklemore | Aug 10 2016 0:15 utc | 10

b, '... listened closely to Trump for some line that could, somehow, be construed as something OUTRAGEOUS. ...'

That's a joke, right? All of Trump's lines are outrageous. It's his stock in trade, as you point out. He dropped this one into their laps to get those expensive, Olympic tv minutes for free. And it worked, just as you point out. His hardcore supporters laugh along with him. Hillary-bots are literally driven to distraction.

He'll probably keep it up on this track till after labor day, when he'll become straight-faced and sober and deliver the real goods against Hillary: the imperialist, what's in it for us? analysis. At least that's how I'd imagine his best shot at a winning campaign would end. His hardcore are with him ... they'd vote for Satan before they'd think of voting for Hillary. If he can get his hardcore plus all the people begging to be lied-to on the imperialist front he might actually have a chance. As the latter will point out ... he might not be lying!

This is the same old setup. I'm voting to end Ground Hog's Day on 8 November.

Murray plays Phil Connors, an arrogant Pittsburgh TV weatherman who, during an assignment covering the annual Groundhog Day event in Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania, finds himself in a time loop, repeating the same day again and again. After indulging in hedonism and committing suicide numerous times, he begins to re-examine his life and priorities.

I hope that many 'others' join me. We don't have to vote for Satan, then claim that Hillary made us do it.

Posted by: jfl | Aug 10 2016 1:01 utc | 11

Posted by: Jonathan | Aug 9, 2016 8:06:55 PM | 8

I guess only a dead man is a free man, right?

Posted by: somebody | Aug 10 2016 1:28 utc | 12

in re 9 --

I was never a Maoist, but I always thought it a pity that the RCP slogan "Revolution in the Eighties -- Go For It!" never did work out.

'Til then, I'll just keep Rockin' in the Free World. "Don't feel like Satan but I am to them/So I try to forget any way that I can."

Posted by: rufus magister | Aug 10 2016 1:52 utc | 13

Geopolitical analyst Finian Cunningham has brilliantly nailed Hillary as an "Exemplar of Neo-Fascism."

Posted by: Karl Pomeroy | Aug 10 2016 2:18 utc | 14

More "election" theater. Discussing real issues is such a bore, but, I think, the reason for the outrageous things "The Donald" says. Keeps actual issues from being discussed.

Posted by: ben | Aug 10 2016 2:26 utc | 15

@rg the lg | Aug 9, 2016 8:01:17 PM | 7

Maybe, just maybe, if Hillary wins enough people will decide that a revolution is in order. Whether they will actually risk it is another matter.

Maybe just maybe I'll take your advice and vote Hillary, love to see a revolution. Remember get the Democrats first.

Hey folks buy your pitchforks now while it's still cheap!

Posted by: Jack Smith | Aug 10 2016 2:31 utc | 16

Here are the monsters your scorn should be heaped upon. Yes right here:

Posted by: blues | Aug 10 2016 2:54 utc | 17

Somebody on the Syria thread got me back on D. Orlov's site. He has a great writeup about how to 'vote' this time around (at least for the president).

Posted by: bbbb | Aug 10 2016 4:49 utc | 18

I have a few issues with trump, he really thinks fraking is good?!? Sad state of affairs. But, please no more wars.

Posted by: Shadyl | Aug 10 2016 5:06 utc | 19

I distinctly recall HRC pacing the 2008 DNC stage, furiously red-faced, making a thinly veiled reference to Obama and the assassination of Bobby Kennedy, then later shouting with great exasperation, "Ären't you going to 'do' anything about this (guy)", using 'do' in the full Mafia 'Trail of 50 Bodies' sense.

The Cgiseb Trotskyist Now has already rewritten that out of history.

Back then HRC was speaking without notes, ...directly from her psychopathic brain. Trump was clearly reading from a teleprompter, and you can gargle all you want about that, but the intent was clear, 'crystal', as they say in the halls of Mossad-CIA: 'Do' HRH if she is selected. Who do?

Then you have to wonder at the cynosure behind the curtain, and their intent, ...which seems to me to be clearly to foment civil war, resolving the inevitable stall and flat spin death spiral of QEn 'goosed' and 'juiced' global markets, so the looting can begin.

Chinyowinh made a compelling prediction that Bernie was a ruse to round up the Left and deliver them with roses and chocolates to Hillary on a silver plate, which he did; and also that Donald is a ruse to round up Right Wing Rabbinicals, Sovereigntists, Patriots and Crypto-Zionists, and drive them all off Nut Bar Cliff in a hand basket, which he is.

But that prediction, which seems to have come true, doesn't answer intent. What is the intent of the Chosen controlling all three houses of government, of course, forming a Holy Zionist Kleptocracy. Why? What is their goal, besides enslaving all the Earners?

Their Solution is all-out civil war, and killing off all the useless EBC mouths to feed.

Then you have to wonder why nobody has 'done' the cynosures yet, as the bodies pile up.
Why do we let the cynosure control dissent? Why do we let them hector in the arguments?
Why waste a NY nanosecond even talking about this psyop brainwashing stress positioning?

Nothing to see here, citizens, move on dot org.

Posted by: Alison DeBeers | Aug 10 2016 5:13 utc | 20


Hillary isn't Satan, but she can see Hell from her back limbic system.

Just remember that famous WWE Raw quote: "I don't have 30 days and 30 nights to show you why all the hoochies say there's nothing as Jill Stein." Because if Bernie don't get you, and Donald don't get you, they're hoping you'll vote Jill. Anything to preserve the grand old illusion that you're not a credit-debt slave to Mil.Gov.Fed. ...FOREVER...

Posted by: Alison DeBeers | Aug 10 2016 6:59 utc | 21

Maybe an assassinator who prevents WW3 should be a Nobel Peace Prize nominee.

Posted by: From The Hague | Aug 10 2016 7:06 utc | 22

Posted by: From The Hague | Aug 10, 2016 3:06:33 AM | 22

The assassin would have to kill both candidates. What do you think will billionaire Trump do should his followers ask for change from bourgeois world order? The solution is clear from Napoleon onwards - send them into a war to make "America great again". To sell this slogan as "peace" is Orwellian.

Clinton will act for rich interest groups like the Saudis. She will administrate maybe intensify the small wars. Her base does not intend to get involved in wars themselves. Neocons want to go back to the cold war for business reasons. They run into a Russia and China well entrenched in "Western" NATO business - see Erdogan.

So Clinton will continue a slow decline of US power while Trump has the potential to get the US close to the brink of external or civil war.

Trump has got that potential even without winning the election - see him claiming the election will be rigged - the logical sequence would be a regime change strategy when he loses (I wonder which color he will chose, does he have a logo?). If the US are lucky all he intends to do is a TV show.

Posted by: somebody | Aug 10 2016 9:57 utc | 23

Hillary will be the next president; except, maybe she won't.
There's a lot going on as things get frantic:

Posted by: V. Arnold | Aug 10 2016 10:05 utc | 24

"Those incoherent remarks were certainly off-the-cuff babble without a prepared script. Difficult to follow even if someone were interested in doing so."

If this is the best that can be said about a candidate, it is not a recommendation. "Vote Trump, he has most incoherent remarks!"

Most importantly, b correctly observes that Trump, a remarkably successful candidate, uses highly emotional barely coherent speech (or incoherent, if you are charitably inclined), so to compete with him one has to use methodical clear arguments and not an ounce of "false outrage". Just compare with GOP propaganda in the preceding week: there was a deal with Iran allowing access to "frozen" (de-facto, stolen money that belong to the state of Iran), and as a part of that deal some money were sent to Iran before restoring banking connections. Clearly, it was a mean trick on the side of Obama administration, as they are delaying the restoration of normal banking transactions, but GOP is no in full false outrage about "illegal payment", "treason" and so on.

How about the outrage that Democrats do not use expression "Islamist radical" often enough (or some other expression).

Emotional and rather base arguments are the specialty of GOP, so it is only fitting to respond in kind. In a counter-narrative, GOP is bent on supplying every right wing psychopath with a ton of machine guns and ammo so they can dispatch LGT folks, social workers, abortion clinics, the public in shopping malls (then and now an armed psychopath is simply, a-politically insane) and liberal politicians. This is an angle directed at "soccer mom" demographic.

And the situation is a bit scary. American gun nuts are numerous, organized, full of homicidal fantasies (check what "stopping power" means, one of their favorite phrases) and, quite regrettably, they have means to realize their fantasies when angry, depressed etc.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Aug 10 2016 10:31 utc | 25

Posted by: Alison DeBeers | Aug 10, 2016 1:13:23 AM | 20

The Clinton Robert Kennedy comment is not as bad as you recall - there is video - and she apologized. Basically she said to stay in the race because something might happen to Obama.

Personally, I find Trump's handicapped impersonation the worst a politician can do on stage. He just craves attention.

Contrary to b. I don't think "any publicity is good publicity" works for him with a nation wide audience. Not when people have to vote for him. How many of the 30 million Republican Party members voted for him? What is their percentage and voter turnout in general elections? How much of the electorate, black and brown people, women has he insulted by now?

Posted by: somebody | Aug 10 2016 10:37 utc | 26

It seems 'bad words' by Trump are worse than bad actions by Hillary.
He's not a politician (I agree with likklemore #10)

Talking about assassination: #SethRich

Posted by: From The Hague | Aug 10 2016 10:54 utc | 27

@15 Ben, with all due respect, without the underpinnings of the 1st & 2nd Amendments, discussion of "actual issues" is not possible. As a result, those 2 Amendments ARE the "actual issues" right now - everything else is merely arranging "deck chairs"

Posted by: xLemming | Aug 10 2016 11:06 utc | 28

So many Hillary bots have appeared. Guess the real polls numbers aren't looking good. You all do realise that the studies on influence you scripts are based on don't replicate... Muahahaha

Posted by: ThatDamnGood | Aug 10 2016 11:13 utc | 29

in re 17 --

What sort of gibberish is "blind hurdle dilemma"? Am I being asked to vote or not vote? I understand the SWP should be on the Jersey ballot, I'm a long-time Fourth Internationalist voter.

Posted by: rufus magister | Aug 10 2016 12:09 utc | 30

The media bias against Trump has reached unprecedented proportions.

I don't know he can be still considered a part of the establishment.

Instead of futile speculations about what Trump did not say fueled by the lame-scream media disinformation people should be talking about this:

WikiLeaks Offers $20,000 Reward For Information On Murder Of DNC Staffer

Posted by: ProPeace | Aug 10 2016 12:22 utc | 31

@Piotr Berman | Aug 10, 2016 6:31:21 AM | 24

"Trump, a remarkably successful candidate, uses highly emotional barely coherent speech (or incoherent, if you are charitably inclined)"

Because that's what vast majority of the US public deserves.

Posted by: ProPeace | Aug 10 2016 12:27 utc | 32


How can one be so blind not to see that it's Hitlary, who is surrounded by the bloodthirsty CIA people pushing openly for world war?

Are you high on something bad to claim that Killary will be "slow decline" instead of immediate, violent confrontation with the anti-empire block?!

Posted by: ProPeace | Aug 10 2016 12:32 utc | 33

Hillary's false 'The Russians are coming!' is having as widespread and as dire results as anything the Trump has said. Her program is institutional, with the guy 'who used to run the CIA' - right - plugging assassinations himself, and Hillary pledging to continue Obama's program of murdering 'suspects' and everyone surrounding them, or just people who seem to be acting like you'd think 'suspects' might - while viewing them through an 8 or 10,000 mile long drinking straw.

From the Olympics come the Americans ... booing the silver medal winning Russian, and her American competitors labeling her a cheater.

There comes also a 'selfie' from a young South Korean gymnast, with her new friend from North Korea. There is talk of the USA and its stooges in South Korea making her pay for her 'impure hatred' of the imperially defined other, her own flesh and blood!

World wide now ... who do love and who do you hate? The Americans? the Koreans? I'm loving the two young Koreans in their selfie myself. Feel sorry for the twisted American swimmers. Amazing they can still float with all the thick bile of hatred weighing them down.

Posted by: jfl | Aug 10 2016 12:34 utc | 34

@rg the lg | Aug 9, 2016 8:01:17 PM | 7

If Hitlary Killton makes moves directly threatening to turn Central Europe into a battlefield I will hold you, and dangerous idiots like you, personally responsible. And you do not want that.

Posted by: ProPeace | Aug 10 2016 12:37 utc | 35

It is a net gain for Trump because it directs the entire discussion to "what did he mean when he said that?" instead of concentrating on his total lack of experience and his entirely absent record of elective public service.

Posted by: ralphieboy | Aug 10 2016 12:43 utc | 36

@PP #31

"Trump, a remarkably successful candidate, uses highly emotional barely coherent speech (or incoherent, if you are charitably inclined)"

Because that's what vast majority of the US public deserves.

Trump is not a majority phenomenon. He just represents a very loud minority in the US, as election results will prove. He is currently polling at less than 10% with blacks and Latinos (who make up some 30% of the electorate) and less than 25% with women (of all races)

Posted by: ralphieboy | Aug 10 2016 12:46 utc | 37

@35,36 ralphieboy,
Why are you so glad with Hillary?
Because of her experience with Libya? (I like her plain talk!)
Or her experience with Russia? (Stephen Cohen - CNN; Must See!)

Posted by: From The Hague | Aug 10 2016 13:00 utc | 38

Re: Posted by: falcone | Aug 9, 2016 6:18:32 PM | 1

It was a very dumb thing to say.

If he can't see how suggesting second amendment supporters should stop Clinton if she wins the election is going to be construed as it has been the guy is a deadset moron.

Posted by: Jules | Aug 10 2016 13:01 utc | 39

"Trump DENIES he was inciting violence when he said Second Amendment defenders might 'do something' about Hillary appointing pro-gun SCOTUS judges"

Link to dailymail

Posted by: x | Aug 10 2016 13:03 utc | 40

Posted by: ProPeace | Aug 10, 2016 8:32:21 AM | 32

Do you really think there are a different set of CIA or military people surrounding Republican or Democrat Presidents? Do you expect Trump to get into a fight with the CIA or the military in the unlikely event he becomes president?

Iraq, Libyan and Syrian policies have been bi-partisan, and Obama has been part of it.

Posted by: somebody | Aug 10 2016 13:40 utc | 41


Actually, that's not the video where she made both those statements, but rather an after-play pre-rehearsed news event to immediately replace in the viewers' minds what was actually said, and the shocking raw horror of her psychopathy.

"We came, we saw, he died, caww, caww, caww!" Remember, she'd just watched Ghadaffi be anally raped to death with a bayonet on closed-circuit satellite feed to the War Room.
And that was her psycopathic response.

Here is an example. A still shot of Jackie climbing over the back of the limo as a Secret Service agent rushes up to the limo, and shot from what angle and azimuth, you might ask, since the far ground was level, except by a telephoto spotting scope.

Then watch the Zapruder video, which shows the agent already on the limo.

There are 1000's of examples like this from the 9/11 recasting, that's what the Cgiseb Trotskyist Now media people are for, to alter reality in real time, or very near to it.

19 Arabs who could not fly a Cessna flew two 757s through fighter jet maneuvers with full tanks at full payload dropped two skyscrapers for the first time in history, and two other mythical 757s accomplished what Einstein never did: "They just vaporized!"

"Hillary just meant that we need a good Vice President, know, just in case."

Cheney instituted a $5.8B domestic media Black Ops program, that continues to this day, and both Red Donald and Blue Hillary are owned by the same cartels that control the Ops.

Posted by: Alison DeBeers | Aug 10 2016 13:40 utc | 42

Trump has a huge advantage over his opponents and critics. He's not a bribed, corrupt politician. The Dems and Republicans are all in the pockets of the Owners of the Military/ Industrial/ Security/ Trade/ pro-Israel Complex. They, and their followers, aren't allowed to stray from the Handed-down Wisdom script. It's an insurmountable obstacle for the anti-Trump crowd and b's perspective, (their) outrage (and fake sincerity) only helps Trump, and can only get worse.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Aug 10 2016 13:51 utc | 43

Posted by: x | Aug 10, 2016 9:03:31 AM | 39

He is catering for his core voters who made him win the primary but that group won't get him elected in the general election.

He needs utter amnesia to change his image till October, and youtube and social media will make sure he does not get a chance.

I suspect that Clinton will have some bad news in terms of leaked emails and ties between state department and Clinton foundation so by November when elected she will be embroiled in legal fights.

It would be nice to see the Republican and Democrat Parties split.

Posted by: somebody | Aug 10 2016 13:55 utc | 44

Wikipedia on the National Rifle Association of America (NRA):
Membership surpassed 5 million in May 2013.

The effect of all that hysterical shouting and screaming of the Hillary-bots:
All members and all supporters of the NRA now know exactly what’s on stake.

Briljant PR from Trump; simple, effective and costless.

Posted by: From The Hague | Aug 10 2016 13:57 utc | 45

Connecting the dots.

“Clinton’s false assassination outrage” has accomplished its intent to suppress damaging emailo scandal articles on the front pages, and especially viral on the internet is

the Charlie Rose interview with ex-CIA chief Morrell who is backing Clinton

Kill Russians and Iranians, threaten Assad,’

“The ex-CIA chief, who worked with Clinton while she was secretary of state, told CBS This Morning co-host Charlie Rose that Iran and Russia should “pay a big price” in Syria – and by that he meant killing them.”
~ ~ ~ ~ ~

MSM global has it in the bag for Clinton but over the next weeks we will read the connections between her office and pay-for-play Clinton Foundation.

Today’s outing at The Wall Street Journal via ZH:

Latest Hillary Email Scandal Reveals State Department "Favors" To Clinton Foundation

~ ~ ~ ~

Not surprised. Quite revealing the list of CF Board of Directors. There is a descriptor for this that escapes one’s capacity to spell.

SO, HRC’s Chief of Staff served on the CF Board, (2004-2009) then to State Department and back to the Board (2013-present).

Peruse the others:

Posted by: likklemore | Aug 10 2016 14:07 utc | 46

oops @ my post 45.

RT link to article and Home page - at this time of posting server is down.

Posted by: likklemore | Aug 10 2016 14:11 utc | 47

It a hoot to finger all the zionists lurking about here undercover of red or some other phony label.
To me he was talking ballot box,but of course the counterfeit nobility disagree.

Posted by: dahoit | Aug 10 2016 14:19 utc | 48

“Rudy Giuliani went to bat for Donald Trump during the Republican nominee’s campaign rally in Fayetteville, North Carolina”

I listened to Donald Trump’s speech in Wilmington and what he said very clearly was that if Hillary Clinton were elected president she would get to appoint judges to the Supreme Court and among the other things that they would do to destroy us would be to do away with the Second Amendment and your right to bear arms.

~ ~ ~
Trump’s speech pattern, (as b, noted) can be described as a babble….as in good American street talk.

Posted by: likklemore | Aug 10 2016 14:22 utc | 49

@somebody #2
It was not a joke, he was goading Hillary. He does this on a routine basis, makes statements that freak Hillary out and cause her to go into tirades of outrage and separate herself from the truth. She's trying to "reintroduce herself" as likeable, so the more he can portray her as an angry old woman, the better his chances.

Posted by: Bill H | Aug 10 2016 14:25 utc | 50


How is this a "tirade"? Isn't Trump the one that freaks out at the slightest provocation?

Posted by: Inkan1969 | Aug 10 2016 14:44 utc | 51

In my view, Trump was speaking to the ballot box... those who support the 2nd ammendment (some of whom have probably never voted) turning out in November in enough numbers to "stop Hillary"

A TIME magazine cover recently depicted a headline "Can Hillary be Stopped"

Were the editors of TIME suggesting she be assassinated?

The media is merely a propaganda tool used to influence our every thought from buying toothpaste to voting for one of two candidates who will be "empty suits" (unless someone comes along who will resist the proffered script) called "President of the USA" -

The internet has been an efficient tool to awaken the people... TPTB (or TPTA) are not adjusting too well. Rather than falsely present a "close race" as is their usual MO, they have persuaded almost 100% of the media to pile on Trump - they think people are too stupid to realize what is going on - same thing with the "polls" - with the "swing states" etc. People are NOT buying it this go round though. Obama's hope & change and subsequent same ol same ol has done alot to "change" people to no longer hope. Then along comes Trump - definitely not one of the establishment.

The more the TPTB pile on Trump's every utterance, and the more they IGNORE the blatant crimes of HRC... imho, the more people will be inclined to vote Anybody But Clinton. Again, in my opinion, many Democrats will stay at home on election day. When in our history of elections has a candidate stolen an election and that fact been verified, and the guilty candidate as much as said to the Party "Deal with It"?

Apologize for the tirade, but I have been a Democrat (actually a LEFTY) for almost 7 decades... in this election cycle most democrats are gleeful over what they see as the decline of the Republican Party, totally BLIND to the evaporation of the Democratic Party. I will never again work or vote for a Democrat - local or national.

Posted by: crone | Aug 10 2016 15:30 utc | 52

"The election will likely be decided on voter turn-out and get-out-the-vote volunteering efforts."

If the primaries had been so decided Hillary would not still be in the race. Elections, no less than primaries, are decided by the (corrupt) vote counting.

Did you know that exit polls which document that Candidate B is winning are changed (falsified) to agree with the corrupt counting that holds Candidate C the winner? It's official, nonsecret policy of the companies that do exit-polling. Richard Charnin has documented the mathematical impossibility of the results in quite a few primaries.

Posted by: Penelope | Aug 10 2016 15:46 utc | 53

How is his verbal diarrhea winning him more votes?


You know that "People are NOT buying it this go round though" just because you do?

Posted by: Inkan1969 | Aug 10 2016 16:01 utc | 54

@51 Inkan1969

More than half the country?
You mean, more than half of <1000-3000>

From the comments in your link:

It's called scientific polling. although it's done on samplings of small groups-usually no more than 3,000 people and often as few as 1,000 people-it's done through a method that is supposed to show a cross section. Ever take a course in statistics? Mind numbing and difficult to understand, but if you play close attention, you will get what is done.

I spent some time in agricultural research. Setting out plots of different varieties of whatever crop we were studying is done with great care. Controls are placed to make sure things are done properly Polling is done much the same way. Can it be biased? Probably. But that's not the idea behind it. Pollsters get paid a lot of money to make sure they're getting a cross section view of what's going on.

That said, the only poll that matters is done on the first Tuesday of November. We have 146 million registered voters in the United States. Even if only half vote, it's a far cry from the 1,000-3,000 included in most polls.

Posted by: From The Hague | Aug 10 2016 16:24 utc | 55

must be @53 Inkan1969

NB I googled: Washington Post Trump
This is the first hit:

I think more than half the country understands The Washington Post sells lies, bias and bullshit

Posted by: From The Hague | Aug 10 2016 16:31 utc | 56

Killary campaign is unravelling fast imho.

Her health problems are all over the net, Assange seems to be hinting at the fact that Seth Rich (goog) was a source, the leaker of DNC mails. (Imho he was a conduit rather than source but who am I.)

What is nuts about the personal-server e-mails is that what is important now, as everyone seems to have copies, is who releases what when! (Assange, FBI, judiciary, others, possibly Trump …)

Some commentators correctly insist the personal server-classified info. etc. is secondary to the Clinton Foundation Slush Fund, imho simply a bribery-influence-peddling-dark-deals *criminal* enterprise. That angle seems to be also slowly coming to the surface.

So someone must be blamed and accused! The only candidate is Putin.

However it is Killary who is tied to ‘shady’ deals with Russia, the Uranium One matter.

Link from NYT, chosen on purpose as *MSM* o-so-supportive of the PTB, sober and prudent supposedly, mealy-mouthed + covering up, obfuscating liars, according to others.

NYT April 15 2015

behind paywall? - title : Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal

Another NYT article with laid-out time-line. Title: Donations to the Clinton Foundation, and a Russian Uranium Takeover

NYT April 22 2015

Posted by: Noirette | Aug 10 2016 16:34 utc | 57

I'm not sure why I should be responsible for anything Ms Killary does. Whether in the US or Europe or anywhere else.
True, I am pro-revolution as a means of getting rid of the oligarchs. (Real revolution as per the French or the Russians.) Alas, the spineless Amerikkkans are way too comfortable to be anything short of complicit in creating the situation we now find ourselves. Europeans would be well off if they revolted against their own Malignant Overlords.
I'm not quite sure what makes you think your moniker as 'Pro-Peace' matches your obviously hate filled rhetoric ... but come the revolution, I'm hoping you'll join the revolutionaries and not use 'peace' as a reason to maintain the status quo.

Rg The Lg

Posted by: rg the lg | Aug 10 2016 16:46 utc | 58

The cockamamie is strong in these parts, any ol' codswallop is being bought at full market value.

Has any one stopped long enough in spinning gold out of straw to consider candidate Trump's remarks as reference to the constitution without waving the bloody flag which such reference usually entails? A reasonable estimate of the percentage of the public having some sound knowledge of the constitution is vanishingly small outside their familiarity with the second amendment which would run upwards to 60% or slightly greater. This is the cost of not teaching civics in school. Trump's reference can only be understood as such, nothing more, nothing less.

The balderdash suggestion that the intent of liquidation was present is a factor only in the twisted imaginations of a few media manipulators. To give those manipulations any currency is at great risk (don't believe), give those enhancing currency wide berth (don't trust), don't be going selling the family milch cow for a handful of magic beans to that lot (run away as fast as you can). Interesting times to live in - indeed.

Posted by: Formerly T-Bear | Aug 10 2016 16:47 utc | 59

It is interesting to observe that in a highly polarized political landscape, like we see currently in USA (but also in a number of other countries, like Poland and Turkey), there is a wide belief that the candidate/president/leader of the other side is so awful that if only the public fully understood this awfulness he/she would become un-electable.

But, alas, it does not happen. In a milder times this was called "teflon effect", the most obnoxious dirt goes away after a gentle spray with water. But as the adversaries are perceived in increasingly demonic turns, perhaps a better metaphor is a vampire swiftly shrugging off any attempt to wound it and kill.

"Wampira można zabić przebijając jego serce drewnianym kołkiem, najlepiej osinowym, albowiem osika w wierzeniach Słowian miała moc odpędzania złych duchów." "One can kill a vampire by stabbing it through the heart with a wooden stake, and best of all, made of aspen, as in the Slavic lore, aspen had the ability to shun away the evil spirits". Vampires actually come from Slavic folk lore, I was actually surprised that Americans think that any type of wooden stake could be used. I guess "silver bullet" is a method closer to the imagination and home arsenal of contemporary Americans.

Thus we can see the quests for a silver bullet or for a stake made of a proper type of wood. How many times adversaries were cheered by the news that from now on, nobody could elect a Clinton, or Mr. Trump? Quite notably, e-mails proved to be worthless. You can make a stake out of e-mails and then drive it through a witch as many times as you want and she does not even need to regenerate: no traces of a wound can be observed at all! A more sober analysis would show that there are no records of e-mails dispelling evil spirits, killing vampires etc.

YouTube videos are perhaps a sterner material. But alas, showing the public that Mrs. Clinton reports a killing with a maniacal glee is a total non-issue in U.S. of A. As of now, it is inconclusive if it increased or decreased her popularity. Surely she became a darling of neocons and homicidal retirees from CIA, and there exists a demographic that detests it, but the pluses and minuses in electoral sense are so small that no one even tried to measure them.

And here comes sober foreign policy of Mr. Trump. He would pick fights only in American interests, e.g. he does not overly care about Crimea and Latvia, thus kissing good bye to the vote of ethnic Latvians and Ukrainians, but promises to shoot down Ruskies if they approach our ships and planes too closely. So, on the credit side, no proxy wars for dubious reasons, on the debit side, WWIII for no reason whatsoever. Promises to unleash torture programs above and beyond recent non-negligible American experience also have a reception that is too mixed to assess.

And indeed, periodically we learned about an exhalation of the Trumpian orifice that should bury his chances once for all. In general, Madam Secretary played that by the book. Mad dog attacks are done only by proxy. She can make a declaration of virtue: "You will never see me singing praises of foreign dictators and strongmen who do not love America". And who would not make little modest requirement, "praise the strongmen only if they love America"? Trump, apparently, for him it suffices that Putin calls him a genius (although that can be deconstructed as a love for America, and exquisite taste to boot.) But her attacks remains proper, grammatical and dignified.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Aug 10 2016 17:00 utc | 60

#54 - Nothing in that comment shows that this poll, or even polls in general, are inherently false.

#55 - That's a blog explicitly labeled an opinion blog. What does that have to do with polls?

Posted by: Inkan1969 | Aug 10 2016 17:10 utc | 61

Charles Hugh Smith (blogger) is a nice chap, afaik sincere, consistent, with a big following for long years. Has this perhaps counter-intuitive post up recently. For interest, plurality of opinion, etc.:

Could the Deep State Be Sabotaging Hillary?

His previous post was in the line of b, title: The More the Establishment Freaks Out Over Trump, the More Attractive He Becomes.

Posted by: Noirette | Aug 10 2016 17:15 utc | 62


I like Charles Hugh Smith somewhat on economics. I don't see anything in his conjecture on the winds in the deep state mafia- wishful thinking.

Posted by: hejiminy cricket | Aug 10 2016 18:09 utc | 63

@33, the complete story of NK is yet to be told us. Does anyone know or even care that Pyongyang made Dresden look like a weenie-roast.

Posted by: ruralito | Aug 10 2016 18:51 utc | 64

Re: Noisette @61

I think that the linked article is a satire. Look at that passage:

Hillary has exhibited the typical flaw of liberal Democrats: fearful of being accused as being soft on Russia, Syria, Iran, terrorism, etc. or losing whatever war is currently being prosecuted, liberal Democrats over-compensate by pursuing overly aggressive and poorly planned policies.
The forward-thinking elements of the Deep State are not averse to aggressive pursuit of what they perceive as American interests, but they are averse to quagmires and policies that preclude successful maintenance of the Imperial Project.

"Forward-thinking elements of the Deep State". This is really funny. That really calls for some definition of the Deep State. In USA, it is not that deep, I mean, denizens do not need to hide in cellars, abandoned mines etc. although some members could have private bomb shelters and other measures allowing to survive nuclear war. Instead we have a ruling class that socializes (mostly) in public, where we can discern money people, power people, media people and intelligentsia, think tanks and obedient sectors of the academia. The few who are "forward thinking" may be found among FORMER members or acquaintances of the current members, but those, by definition, have no decision making capacities.

GOP side of the ruling class is split: some would prefer a serial rapist over anyone who does not believe in decreasing taxes, regulations etc. and Trump, for all his faults, is not THAT bad. Additionally, an entire generation grew on hating anything related to Clintons. Other have various grievances. In particular, the Koch brothers who are close to the center of deep power in GOP side openly bet against Trump, working to assure that GOP will remain in the majority of both houses of Congress. In that scenario, Clinton will harmless. Importantly, from Koch perspective, overly energetic support of Trump may cost the majority in the Senate and dangerously weaken it in the House.

Democratic side of the ruling class is in the minority (at least, within their class) so it is more cohesive. Whatever minor foibles may be presented by HRC, there are barbarian at the gates that have to be repelled. As Trump the Barbarian approaches the capital, they recognize the familiar annoyance and will the their best to stop him.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Aug 10 2016 19:27 utc | 65

Where is the Clinton rebuke over this direct call from two of their own - call to assassinate public figures”

From ex-CIA Chief Morrell, a Clinton supporter, calls to kill Russians, Iranians and Assad. See link at 45
And today, from CNN host to assassinate Assange? Democratic Strategist Calls For The Assassination Of Julian Assange

"Amid the media-hyped furor over Donald Trump's 2nd Amendment comments and Wikileaks' suggestions about the untimely death of DNC-staffer Seth Rich, we thought it perhaps of note that Democratic strategist, and CNN host, has publicly called for the "illegal assassination of that son-of-a-bitch" Julian Assange...
Meet Bob Beckel - Democratic strategist, CNN host (former Fox host), and clear "treasonous, traitor" Assange-hater...
This strikes us as very dangerous talk... We wonder if he is being questioned or investigated for such a public and unquestionable demand for someone to be murdered? Forget due process... "just kill the son of a bitch."

Posted by: likklemore | Aug 10 2016 19:32 utc | 66

@65 This would be a good time for Trump to call Assange a hero. Just kidding.

Posted by: dh | Aug 10 2016 20:00 utc | 67

Ok, a coffee clatch of old duffers, like me or older, meets at a local hardware store to cuss and discuss various issues. I rarely join them, but today sat to listen. For the most part they are very anti-Hillary. That does not make them pro-Trump. In fact, they seem to be listing toward Johnson simply as a protest vote. They say a vote for Johnson is about the same as not voting at all. These guys seem to be pretty disgusted with the whole thing.

They are too old to rebel, but if a revolution started they just might be supportive. A few are Korean vets, a couple of guys like me are Vietnam vets, and many have been part of the MIC ... though once released from duty went back to farming or ranching.

Just thought this might be of some interest to those who haven't lost their ability to simply think before becoming a Killary-Bot or a Trump-ette.

Posted by: rg the lg | Aug 10 2016 20:10 utc | 68

@67 rg the lg

Gary Johnson:

Gary Johnson on Hillary: 'A Wonderful Public Servant'

Posted by: From The Hague | Aug 10 2016 20:24 utc | 69

@ somebody | Aug 10, 2016 9:40:00 AM | 40

Hitlary is a known absolute, unspeakable evil, there is a guarantee she'll escalate dramatically the world tensions. She's has done sbsolutely NOTHING positive during her campaign, zilch, nada. She's MSM's favorite. We have no chance for safe, normal life if she has presidential powers.

Trump, as many others observed, is an enigma, far less risky. Keeps us guessing but has already inflicted some real damage to the evil empire. MSM has played some really dirty, biased game against him. If he forfeits on his promises, his voters will tear him into pieces.

Personally I suggest voting AGAINST Killary, NOT for Trump.

There is absolutely no equivalence between these two alternatives.

Posted by: ProPeace | Aug 10 2016 20:32 utc | 70

ruralito@33: I just read Bruce Cumings superb history of the Korean War, as recommended by someone in these comments, perhaps you. An inclusive interpretation of neglected factors such as the political dynamic rooted in the Japanese occupation and invasion, followed by America's occupation and, as you noted, the West's bombing deep into the northern Korea rubble.

Posted by: Glorious Bach | Aug 10 2016 20:37 utc | 71

@rg the lg | Aug 10, 2016 12:46:05 PM | 57

You seem to support Hitlary Killton because it will hasten somehow the world revolution you've been dreaming about. Your remarks indicate that you have no respect for ensuing loss of innocent human life. By supporting that war mongering monster from hell you will have blood on your hands.

We need peace desperately, but we won't have it if Hitlary's supporters have their way. Thus they need to be stopped at all costs.

Posted by: ProPeace | Aug 10 2016 20:40 utc | 72

While the Clinton campaign tries to make everybody believe that Trump was calling for the assassination of Hillary, Hillary or someone associated very likely assassinated the DNC Wikileaks leaker Seth Rich a couple of weeks ago. The Russia did the hack is as bogus as the North Korea hacked Sony story and the most significant whistleblowing has up till now been done by individuals (Manning and Snowden). The Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich was shot in the back with no motives for his murder as all his belongings were still on him.

Posted by: nr27 | Aug 10 2016 20:47 utc | 73

@ralphieboy | Aug 10, 2016 8:46:20 AM | 36

Did you conduct or witness those polls personally? LOL They are worthless.

Personally I believe Hitlary is around 15%, Trump around 60%.

But I suggest some MoA commenters residing in the US try to do their personal polls over a few days and report them here. That would be very much appreciated.

Posted by: ProPeace | Aug 10 2016 20:48 utc | 74

@rg the lg | Aug 10, 2016 12:46:05 PM | 57

Such revolution must start _before_ she obtains presidential powers, it must prevent her from being authorized to launch bloody mayhem in Europe and elsewhere. Her being elected does not help anything, contrary to what you advocate.

And believe me, when the push comes to shove, I will not be offering the other cheek and I'm well aware who the enemy is in terms of specific names.

Posted by: ProPeace | Aug 10 2016 20:57 utc | 75

This is funny. Russia - RT - has decided to run US election spots.

Posted by: somebody | Aug 10 2016 20:58 utc | 76

@ somebody | Aug 10, 2016 9:40:00 AM | 40

BTW It's proven that Hellary ALREADY STOLE the nomination from Sanders.

Trump has not cheated in the elections so far.

So no, there is no equivalence here.

Posted by: ProPeace | Aug 10 2016 20:59 utc | 77

I'm impressed that an actual doctor who is involved with various professional associations has come out about this:

Is Hillary Clinton Medically Unfit to Serve?

Strangely silent is the mainstream media about the fitness of the Democrat candidate. And causes for concern are growing. Without considering any statements she has made or positions she has taken, and without presuming to speculate on psychiatric diagnoses, one can point to certain observations. ..

Videos widely circulated on the internet are, if authentic, very concerning. One shows prolonged, inappropriate laughter; another, strange head movements. In a third, she appeared momentarily dazed and confused, and lost her train of thought.

Strangely silent indeed. (I found out about that post from a piece at Breitbart, which mentions that Clinton's top aid said in an email that she is “often confused”.)

Posted by: Demian | Aug 10 2016 22:14 utc | 78

As much as I try to ignore the election travesty playing out, I can't help but notice Hillary is getting sloppy about her murders. What her and Bill could do in their previous roles they can't do now without drawing unwanted attention. This is why it's so important to own the press/newz. This is a psychopathic strategy of yesteryear, yet Hillary's handlers cling to it desperately. I'm not suggesting Hillary herself controls the press. Her masters are the same masters the NYT, WaPo, CNN and network newz answer to. Whether you buy into the whole psychopath-this and psychopath-that conspiracy, you have to admit Hillary (and Obama for that matter) go ballistic about 'leakers'. Far more so than you would expect ANY normal, powerful person to react. Denial and counter-accusations are 'normal'. Killing (or wishing the death) of leakers is not.

Wikileaks' Assange Hints Murdered DNC Staffer Was Email-Leaker, Offers $20k Reward For Info

The usual tactic (for psychopaths) is to immediately blame someone else for something they themselves are guilty of. Funny how Hillary's camp went nuts over Trump's reference to Second Amemdment people changing the law. Who the hell would interpret this - literally - as Trump suggesting they assassinate Hillary? You have to have a seriously sick and twisted mind to see that to begin with, and then wage a futile campaign of outrage about it in the media. Even Hillary supporters are starting to ask WTF??

Posted by: PavewayIV | Aug 10 2016 22:16 utc | 79

@ 77 Demian

Thanks, I missed the fact that Dr. Susan Berry is the author of that piece. I clicked on her name and found this:

"Dr. Jane Orient, executive director of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, observes that “strangely silent is the mainstream media about the fitness” for presidential office of Hillary Clinton. At AAPS’ website, Orient summarizes the concerns about Clinton’s health that she says are growing:"

Association of American Physicians and Surgeons website:

Dr. Orient has a lengthy article there, here are the last three paras:

"... The U.S. has had problems with incompetent leaders in the White House before. Mrs. Woodrow Wilson (the “First First Lady President”) was effectively President for the last year and a half of her husband’s term after he suffered a disabling stroke. She managed to conceal the seriousness of Wilson’s condition for a long time. This was the reason for the 25th amendment to provide for replacing the President in case of disability.

While the U.S. government knows more and more about our medical histories and other aspects of our lives, many details about the President are a secret. The press appears to care more about the tax returns of Republican candidates than the medical records of Democrat Presidents or candidates. And Secretary Clinton’s public appearances have been rather carefully controlled.

Is it conceivable that Hillary supporters would really be voting for Huma Abedin, Clinton’s top aide, or for the First First Husband President, Bill Clinton? The American people are entitled to know the objective medical facts about Secretary Clinton."

Posted by: crone | Aug 10 2016 22:49 utc | 80

@ProPeace #76:

It's proven that Hellary ALREADY STOLE the nomination from Sanders.

Trump has not cheated in the elections so far.

So no, there is no equivalence here.

Indeed. I guess that Western democracy has become so degraded that many people can't grasp or even notice this difference.

The way the system is rigged has been clear for some time, at least since Bill Clinton's second term. You have two parties that are more or less identical in terms of the policies they implement, except on social wedge issues. The candidate of both parties is pre-selected by the establishment.

What was unusual about the current election is that there were insurgencies in both parties. The Republican insurgency succeeded; the Democratic one failed. That alone is reason enough to vote for the Republican in this election (something I never even considered doing before).

The More the Establishment Freaks Out Over Trump, the More Attractive He Becomes

The Establishment is freaking out about Donald Trump for one reason: they didn’t pick him. The Establishment is freaking out because the natural order of things is that we pick the presidential candidates and we run the country to serve ourselves, i.e. the financial-political elites.

Donald Trump’s candidacy upsets this neofeudal natural order, and thus he (and everyone who supports him) is anathema to the Establishment…

Posted by: Demian | Aug 10 2016 23:30 utc | 81

Just in case one has forgotten, don't we all know what our "constitutionalist" ammosexuals are capable of? Who can forget Ammo-on Bundy and all the related fun at Malheur?

And do you really believe The Donald is clean? What NYC property developer and builder isn't mobbed up? I'm sure he's slid plenty of envelopes of cash across tables to state and local politicians. Isn't most of the New York legislature under indictment? Or just the leadership? Here is Jersey, our official motto is "The Pay-to-Play State."

And of course his penchant for shady business deals and bankruptcies fully vouches for his undeniable probity.

Posted by: rufus magister | Aug 10 2016 23:48 utc | 82

Yeah, both Hilary and Bill look pretty used up. Spent. For what...? Haha... Great entertainment. You seppos put on a great show. Would be pretty funny except for the fact you're all holding a gun to your head and everyone else's.

I enjoy Bill still though. A yank I like. His The Secret of Oz and The Money Masters are essential viewing for those who want to know HOW they rig it. Here is something i posted in the US Election thread, tho suits here now. Makes a great point about social media figures, the unspoken polls...(what is the future...or...perhaps the now...?)

@133 Demian
Yeah, Orwellian indeed...

I am in no doubt she is suffering. I remember Trump ripping her a new hole when she failed to appear with Bernie and O'Malley during a televised debate. Trump questioned her stamina then, and while Trump draws sell out crowds each day, sometimes twice a day, she is appearing only 3 times before Oct 9 I think.

You cant hide from what she's got. And she's got it bad.

The peoples champ and US patriot Bill Still does some Social Media viewing figures for us:

Still: How Clinton rigs the polls:

And of course Still on: Hilary's Handler Carries Diazepam Pen

Jovial stuff...

Haha...Trump, yeah hes a buffoon, but he's more MSM than the MSM itself and is playing it like a flute... Plus he's causing all sorts of chaos. Destroyed the Republicans already, Dems next.

Posted by: MadMax2 | Aug 11 2016 0:01 utc | 83

Just so you know, here is Sourcewatch on the good Dr. Orient's organization.

The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) is a group of conservative activist doctors who oppose the 2010 health care reform law, the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act."[1] Members of the group also believe that President Obama may have hypnotized voters and that climate legislation is a threat to human health. Some of the group's former leaders were members of the John Birch Society. Mother Jones wrote of the group, "Yet despite the lab coats and the official-sounding name, the docs of the AAPS are hardly part of mainstream medical society. Think Glenn Beck with an MD."

They're so bad they rate a good-sized article at Rationalwiki. How bad, you ask? Bad enough to not only claim, as Rationalwiki puts it, "that Barack Obama uses neuro-linguistic programming to exercise mind control" via his speeches (or what in a simpler time we knew as "oratory.") But apparently to have scrubbed the article from their site. Follow the link from here or the next item.

Many conservatives don't like them either. See here. She's either a liberal plant or "a dishonest polemicist who is used to inventing "facts" out of thin air, secure in the belief that no one in her audience will ever check ...."

Posted by: rufus magister | Aug 11 2016 0:07 utc | 84

And of course his penchant for shady business deals and bankruptcies fully vouches for his undeniable probity.

Posted by: rufus magister | Aug 10, 2016 7:48:51 PM | 81

I agree. Trump is exactly who you guys need. Someone who knows how to file bankruptcy.

Vote Trump. Vote Chaos.

Posted by: MadMax2 | Aug 11 2016 0:09 utc | 85

@rufus magister #81:

And do you really believe The Donald is clean?

Who cares if he's clean? What matters is that he's not a war criminal, and can't be bought. That he can't be bought is why the Establishment is so dead-set against him.

I can't understand your position, given your interest in Russia. Surely you're aware that Hillary would make Obama's relaunching of the Cold War look like a little skirmish? And she would not rest until Syria is destroyed like Libya. One of her advisers has said that he hopes she will kill Russians and Iranians in Syria; another said that NATO is too concerned about ISIS, and attention should go back to overthrowing the legitimate secular Syrian government.

Doesn't the world have enough instability? It would just get worse under Hillary. Yet you refuse to acknowledge that Trump is, at the very least, the lesser evil, apparently out of a liberal smugness and dislike for his populism.

And I don't understand why you can't see this from the Russian point of view. Lavrov keeps on talking about how the world is becoming multipolar, but that US elites refuse to accept this new reality. It is obvious that Trump understands and accepts this new reality. That's why US foreign policy types hate him.

Posted by: Demian | Aug 11 2016 0:24 utc | 86

@MadMax2 | Aug 10, 2016 8:09:49 PM | 84

Exactly! However, all polls from Realclealpolitics shows Hillary leading and most likely landslide in Nov.

Trump is no angel either, and his team of economic advisers consists of Oligarch. Between the two who is most evil?

Boils down to: Hillary love endless wars while Trump will strips everything we have left.

Buy your pitchforks before it’s too late..

Posted by: Jack Smith | Aug 11 2016 0:41 utc | 87

@Demian | Aug 10, 2016 8:24:14 PM | 85

Here we go again!

"Trump is, at the very least, the lesser evil.... "@rg the lg 7 posted "Maybe, just maybe, if Hillary wins enough people will decide that a revolution is in order."

Maybe just maybe we should follow rg the lg advice and votes for the most evil?

Posted by: Jack Smith | Aug 11 2016 0:54 utc | 88

"Buy your pitchforks..." another thinly veiled encouragement to assassination? For shame, Jack Smith, for shame!

Anyway, one eyebrow raising result in opinion polls is increase in the approval of Obama. I suspect that the citizenry appreciates him in the light of the next Administration.

Demian: preposition that "Trump understands" something is not obvious at all. Given how talkative he is and how much he speaks "off points", one can find isolated statements that can be liked. Yes, I like similar statements as you do. But to give you some perspective, consider what Erdogan have said over the years. You can find some that you like, but over all, the chap is a power hungry loose canon and the results are not pretty. Neither Erdogan nor Trump is an idiot, and they understand the basics of economics and personal profit, so they would rather refrain from clearly unprofitable ventures. Unfortunately, Gulfies have both inclinations and funds to make detestable ventures like fomenting civil war in Syria profitable.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Aug 11 2016 2:22 utc | 89

Demian, 85

Not a war criminal yet, as he has announced plans to torture and start wars of aggression. He is not bought by special interests, he is a special interest. His economic "plan" is the regurgitation of standard-issue Rethuglican Kochonomics as a slobbery, wet kiss to the donor class. With a few meaningless buzzwords about trade thrown in for effect.

Mad, 84

Wishful thinking. Our present leadership may be morally bankrupt. But it need not remain so. For the sake of the whole planet, we'd all best hope "the sole and exceptional superpower" runs in the black until management can be changed.

As I never tire of saying, do not blow shit up if you do not know where the big pieces will land and how you might put them together again. This includes especially political systems. IMHO.

Posted by: rufus magister | Aug 11 2016 2:28 utc | 90

@Piotr Berman #88:

Unfortunately, Gulfies have both inclinations and funds to make detestable ventures like fomenting civil war in Syria profitable.

Maybe Putin would be able to offer him a better deal LOL.

We shall see what happens. Nobody knows whether or to what degree Trump would avoid being subdued or co-opted by the system. No matter how unsavory Trump may be, I hope that you would at least agree that his candidacy is not part of the script for American managed democracy. I find him preferable for that reason alone, but I do not expect everyone to accept my line of thinking here.

If Hillary wins, it will be one more election in which the system was able to suppress the will of the people. Each time that happens, American democracy dies further, making it less likely that it will ever come alive again.

Posted by: Demian | Aug 11 2016 2:40 utc | 91


This last weekend went off on a much needed break, to a small country inn between the mountain and the sea, my bottle of water and boiled peanuts in hand, ready for a day climbing the mountain, 34C, and no sooner had I shoved off, than forgot all about MoA.

And at the top, sweating profusely, then alarmingly, on down steep slopes beyond, there
was the Little Buddha in the clearing, adorned with butterflies and bees. Still silence.
I forgot incense, but offered the waterbottle and peanuts, and got my Bodhisattva high.

Then it seemed to me, on the meandering walk back down through the jungle, that for the future of the Earth itself, we must vote for Trump. A no vote is no vote. A vote for the Clinton Crime Family is a vote for a coach ride to Charon's Gate. The Devil Incarnate.

If Trump is elected, the bloviating buffoon, then all the piss-pot Americanisms that we have suffered with, will be lanced like boils, every bit of Exceptionalism blown back in their faces, ultimate Ugly American egotists. The Universe's way uses shaming laughter.

Mission Accomplished! Yeah, sure George, whatever you say, haww, haww, hawww.

Hillary has no shame. Hillary has no corporeal being. She is a, clothsack over a demon, words failed me in the dense heat. She is Gog-Magog. Kali Devi. The End of All Things.
Maybe the vote is rigged, maybe it's a charade, but we must not voluntarily select her.

Anyway, that's what the Buddha seemed to whisper...I don't know, he doesn't talk much.

Posted by: Alison DeBeers | Aug 11 2016 2:46 utc | 92

further to 89 on Russia.

Since he's selling properties to Russian oligarchs, wants their investments, and wants into the Russian market, he sometimes speaks well of Russian policy and leaders. But who does he get to implement his policy? Will this be an issue where he suddenly becomes "responsible"? Is this all just words to be walked back later?

And since it will actually be his COO, Gov. Pence, doing the governance, shouldn't we really be checking on his views?

Assuming the blowhard with the questionable business record and skyscraper-sized anger issues actually gains the Presidency.

I doubt that policy towards Russia would improve under a Trump "Administration." Not that it would matter, with the economy wrecked, the Middle East in flames, a trade war with China, and Mexico and Central America in an uproar over the wall.

Turning the planet into a wasteland thanks to increased global warming will take a few years, but plenty of damage to get done before that.

Posted by: rufus magister | Aug 11 2016 2:56 utc | 93

and to 92 --

And hasn't flip-flopped on the whole question of does he know Putin? Used to be buds, now he's never heard of the guy.

Posted by: rufus magister | Aug 11 2016 3:02 utc | 94

Ok, I'm guilty. Guilty of hoping the malignant overlords get their comeuppance. I doubt if it will happen. The primary reasons are: 1)AmeriKKKans like the status quo; 2) no one wants to take responsibility for the fact we've consistently voted FOR evil for a long time, calling it lessor does not make it less evil, just evil by a different name; 3) the idea of pitchforks seems to turn people off ... that a revolution requires blood shed.

Ok. So?
Does the current anti-war gang have any affect on the Military-Industrial- Complex? No, and hell no. They simply gather to whine about deaths ... not ever bothering to recognize blood on their own, and especially on their ancestors, hands. The system is rotten to the core. How do you plan to fix it?

The voting booth is meaningless. Protest marches are ignored. Wringing ones hands has no affect ... except to be watched heading home to wring your hands after doing so at some pro-peace feel-good meeting.

I advocate doing something about the problem ... taking real action ... a real revolution, not a sappy rhetorical one like Sanders (or Obama before him) who made people feel good ... but then acted in their own best interests.

This country has never (ever) taken my (or my ancestors) interests seriously. A few are rapacious overlords, and the rest too damned comfortable with the status quo to bother to actually do something more than say, "oh my, how awful!"

Against Custer the native Americans acted. Sure they lost, but they acted. The Little Big Horn needs to be redone every year or so ... wiping out some of those idiots who 'fight and bleed' for the Empire.

One tired of it all soldier, sick of the hypocrisy, would do the world a favor to blow Washington DC to pieces with a nuclear warhead. He'd be #1 on my hit parade for someone with the balls/nerve/guts to do something rather than wring his hands and blather peace. Manning tried to act ethically, and look where it got him? We desperately need thousands of Mannings or one nut-case with his finger on the button. Ironically, with the election of Killary, we just might get that person.

Posted by: rg the lg | Aug 11 2016 3:02 utc | 95

Tell us then o seer, for what were the Opium Wars a punishment? Or the 1895 war with Japan? The collapse of the Manchus, the rise of the warlords, and the Rape of Nanking?

And what does the Buddha say the Dalai Lama is paying for with his exile? Maybe a dozen or more centuries of brutal exploitation of the peasants by landlords and temples?

Maybe the Buddha should focus his ministrations on his native land. What does it say that his ethical critique was suppressed by the ritualistic formulations of the Brahmins he directed it against?

Sigh... at least old chipnik was fun.

Posted by: rufus magister | Aug 11 2016 3:16 utc | 96

Hillary has no shame. Hillary has no corporeal being. She is a, clothsack over a demon, words failed me in the dense heat. She is Gog-Magog. Kali Devi. The End of All Things.
Maybe the vote is rigged, maybe it's a charade, but we must not voluntarily select her.

Anyway, that's what the Buddha seemed to whisper...I don't know, he doesn't talk much.
Posted by: Alison DeBeers | Aug 10, 2016 10:46:20 PM | 91

Killing a lesser witch is simplicity itself, but a major one, "no corporeal being", is a different matter. According to some authorities, the only way to kill a witch (a major one, I presume) is to use the blood of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Not impossible! What you need is some wine that was not treated with sulphur (hence, not from your neighborhood liquor store) and a competent priest who can perform Transubstantiation. As I have discussed, a witch survives with ease e-mails and YouTube videos, but she may be vulnerable to press conferences.

On yet more encouraging note, the running mate of Clinton seems somewhat anti-imperialist. For example, in his opinion, Obama needed an approval to "act against ISIS", which hints the opposition to "limited mayhem" policies of the current Administration.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Aug 11 2016 3:30 utc | 97

And what does the Buddha say the Dalai Lama is paying for with his exile

-probably something like there goes another stooge for the Brahmin class, vomiting Mara all over my eightfold path

Posted by: hejiminy cricket | Aug 11 2016 3:39 utc | 98

The folks who vote for Hillary will not spend any significant length of time thinking about her crimes. They won't worry about the slush fund either, the Clinton Foundation, which is maybe wired up with the Deep State, and has probably evolved into an instrument of foreign policy interference and bribery, and covert violence, -- a hotwired instrument of depravity, or more than that,--some kind Junior league BCCI, an enormous sow with many teats.

Over at the Alex Jones place, they are reprising the old story of the little assassination gag Hillary made at Barack's expense, during the 2008 primary race. But hey, what's a little friendly joke between two partners in crime?

I personally think "ex" CIA man, Mike Morell's, sinister comment that Trump, if elected, would be some kind of "national security threat" had a hell of a lot more ominous tones, than anything that could be parsed out of Trump's barely intelligible words about "Second Amendment people".

Posted by: Copeland | Aug 11 2016 4:23 utc | 99

Will it really matter who gets elected?
I think not; we're well past that point...

Posted by: V. Arnold | Aug 11 2016 4:55 utc | 100

next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.