[KaiserJeep]

Debbie Wasserman Schultz was given the position of "Honorary Campaign Chairman" in HRC's campaign for President. This is a legal fiction used in the past to cover up "dirty tricks" in a corrupt campaign. It enables the person so named to receive a multi-million dollar payout should such be needed for a legal defense of the "dirty tricks" used to win an election be challenged in court (for somebody who loses the subsequent election) or investigated in Congress (for somebody who wins the election). These funds can legally be paid by the national political organization (in this case the DNC) out of what are colloquially termed "slush funds" - uncommitted money donated to the party for no specific political campaign.

If no legal defense is required then history will record that however many "honorary chairpersons" received a nominal salary, usually $1. The last major use of slush funds for a legal defense was the GOP's use of such money to defend some of the Watergate burglars. That scandal of course caused Nixon to resign the presidency - but in the case of HRC, probably means exactly nothing. She will gladly assume office in the midst of scandal, just like her husband did in his second term. HRC is motivated by the lust for power, not money. These two things are often the same, but sometimes not.

Just a reminder for those of you who may have forgotten what having a Clinton in the White House is like. Hillary's spouse who was so dapper and lovey-dovey yesterday was involved in three overlapping sex scandals and one "aspirin factory" cruise missile attack when last we looked in on the "royals". There was the woman who said "Bill C raped me when he was governor!" (to which Bill said "statute of limitations") and the woman who said "Bill C groped me in the elevator!" (to which Bill said "He said/she said, I'm the President") and the woman who said "I performed oral sex in the oval office and I have a Blue Dress with the President's DNA" (to which Bill said "Talk to my wife - I mean my lawyers" and "That mark on my face is from bumping a door"). Meanwhile Hillary was still explaining how Rose Law firm documents were lost in the White House for two years and mourning her murdered lover Vince Foster.

We DO live in interesting times.

[Newfie]

I'm digging up this old chesnut because I think it's become very relevant. Perhaps not so much as a TV show but because there seems to me there is much manipulation of this election by the media, and even by the sitting government.

Just to list a few things that bother me.
The suppression of news about our attack on Assads forces leading up to the truce break down
The over top coverage of the supposed Russian attack on an aid convoy the next day.
DHS/FBI claiming Wikileaks is getting email hacks from Russia
Attempting to shut down Wikileaks today
Today's Wikileaks email exposing the Department of State engaging in a "quid pro quo" with FBI to reclassify data.
Locking of RT assets in UK.
Limited and misleading coverage on the failure of the nuclear material redeployment treaty.
Limited coverage of naval activities in Yemen.
Timing and coverage of the Mosel attack.


I'm sure there are more examples. It strikes me there is blatant managing of the news to present a favorable image in the run up to the election. Four more years of the same.

[dohboi]

"...blatant managing of the news..."

Wow, you really haven't been paying attention.

'blatant managing of the news' has been a central feature of our faux republic for decades.

Try to keep up, please!

[Sixstrings]

I know nobody agrees with me, but this is how I see it..

Yeah Fox is to the right, msnbc is to the left, but CNN really is "the centrist" channel.

If CNN is ever pushing for a particular candidate then really, in effect, *that's the position of centrists*.

CNN is a *broadcaster* and their audience is *most people*. If a candidate can't win over the CNN crowd (their reporters and viewers) then it's really that candidate's fault, not CNN.

[Subjectivist]

Newfie the one that bothers me the most is the bombing of the campaign offices in North Carolina. If it had been a Hillary office they would be pushing I'd 24/7, but it was a Trump office so there was barely a mention.

This kind of reporting disparity is how you manipulate people, not inform them.

Hillary is reported on as some combination of Saint being victimized by her mean male opponents. Trump is reported on as the most vile slime to wiggle out from under a rock in generations.

This disparity of coverage is the reason the news media has the lowest trust rating ever.

[KaiserJeep]

The media manipulation reached new heights this Summer with the 13-episode SF series BrainDead. The satire was brilliant if a little heavy-handed. The Earth was invaded by insects who came out of a meteorite which was a spaceship in disguise. They entered people's ears in DC and took over people as they munched away portions of their brains, but they had a plan, so mostly they took over politicians and other power brokers. The episode titles are illustrative:

S1, Ep1, 13 Jun. 2016: The Insanity Principle: How Extremism in Politics Is Threatening Democracy in the 21st Century
S1, Ep2, 20 Jun. 2016: Playing Politics: Living Life in the Shadow of the Budget Showdown - A Critique
S1, Ep3, 27 Jun. 2016: Goring Oxes: How You Can Survive the War on Government Through Five Easy Steps
S1, Ep4, 11 Jul. 2016: Wake Up Grassroots: The Nine Virtues of Participatory Democracy, and How We Can Keep America Great by Encouraging an Informed Electorate
S1, Ep5, 24 Jul. 2016: Back to Work: A Behind-the-Scenes Look at Congress and How It Gets Things Done (and Often Doesn't)
S1, Ep6, 31 Jul. 2016: Notes Toward a Post-Reagan Theory of Party Alliance, Tribalist, and Loyalty: Past as Prologue
S1, Ep7, 7 Aug. 2016: The Power of Euphemism: How Torture Became a Matter of Debate in American Politics
S1, Ep8, 14 Aug. 2016: The Path to War Part One: The Gathering Political Storm
S1, Ep9, 21 Aug. 2016: Taking on Water: How Leaks in D.C. Are Discovered and Patched
S1, Ep10, 28 Aug. 2016: The Path to War Part Two: The Impact of Propaganda on Congressional War Votes
S1, Ep11, 4 Sep. 2016: Six Points on the New Congressional Budget: The False Dichotomy of Austerity vs. Expansionary Policies
S1, Ep12, 11 Sep. 2016: Talking Points Toward a Wholistic View of Activism in Government: Can the Top Rebel?
S1, Ep13, 11 Sep. 2016: The End of All We Hold Dear: What Happens When Democracies Fail: A Brief Synopsis

There was the usual dose of pump-the-Democrats, urinate-on-the-Republicans that is typical of most American media, but it was so well done that I forgave them, the humor was nonstop. Highly recommended, it is available streaming online and via Amazon Prime.

[Newfie]

KJ,
what bothers me the most is the politicization of the FBI. We surely had that before in Hoovers time. It seems things had improved. Now it's back again.

My guess is that won't keep her from impeachment.

[KaiserJeep]

Newfie, I am convinced that a chess game is being played. Comey and the FBI investigators found the Clinton server E-mail archives, which contain records of messages sent and received even after the messages themselves are deleted. Therefore they have to pursue a slow process of identifying the destination server, getting a subpoena for that, and searching for still existent copies of the original messages - in which Hill and Bill always embed text that the message should be deleted by the recipient.

So the WikiLeaks crew hires hackers to do this without subpoenas, which is much faster than with subpoenas. They strike gold and begin negotiating with the FBI to disclose this, the only conditions being that Seth Rich, their confidential informant and the DNC employee who performs the IT tasks for Hillary and her private E-Mail server, has full immunity in return for authenticating the E-Mails. The frustrated FBI agrees to this. Then this happens:

...somebody walks up behind Seth Rich and shoots him in the head. Meanwhile Barack Obama and Attorney General Lynch are still running interference for HRC, in between bouts of conscience, because what is happening is really rather appalling, but there is no conclusive proof of wrongdoing - yet.

If you are a career LEO and politician like FBI Director Comey, and you wanted to take out HRC before she does the same to you, by issuing confidential memorandums from the White House to bury any and all FBI investigations of her, you would time the revelations as to happen in the weeks prior to the election, and ensure she never takes office.

It should come any day now. Unless the FBI Director himself dies as well. Rich the pawn was taken off the board, although we don't know if he was Black or White. Now Queen takes Knight, or Knight takes Queen?

Potentially, having HRC in the Oval Office will be even more entertaining than having Bill there.

[Newfie]

KJ,
We are the same age very nearly. What is your sense on this question. It strikes me that there is now more evidence for a cover up on Hillary than there was on Nixon when he resigned. I don't recall clearly but I think that's true.

Most specifically I don't think he perjured himself as she has done. By that I mean all the "I don't know" "I can't recall" stuff. I mean surely she knew the secure protocols, she says so in the debates, but denies it in testimony.

Nor do I recall any news article or op Ed piece calling her to task for that.

[KaiserJeep]

Well Newfie, Nixon was before the Impeachment of William J. Clinton by Congress, with the Chief Justice of SCOTUS sitting as the chairman. HRC had a close up view of this, probably advised Bill on how to act and when to lie, and he said all the "I don't know" "I can't recall" stuff", followed by "It depends on what the meaning of is is", and was still POTUS afterwards. HRC is probably justifiably certain she can do the same, when she also has the power to fire Comey or anybody else, or to quash investigations by the FBI or the DOJ using confidential memoranda from the White House.

If Comey had been willing to sacrifice his career to take her out, she'd be indicted and on trial now, is my belief. But Comey is seeking a solution that still leaves him with a job and a future.

Like I said before, when you regard politics as high comedy, it may be even more entertaining to have HRC as POTUS than her husband. Don't think that Bill himself is not looking forward to playing among the young female White House interns again, either - even at his more advanced age. Maybe she'll have him spayed to avoid the grief.

[Ibon]

When were politics not dirty with back room deals and subterfuge ? Would an individual who was of the highest morals and standards even be able to govern if elected?

[KaiserJeep]

That is an excellent point, Ibon. But the present extreme distaste for politics, extreme distaste of both major party candidates, and extreme distaste for the process itself must have some cause.

I think that the glaring spotlight of publicity, enabled by cell phones in virtually everybody's hands, the extremely polarised media that visibly and constantly pumps the Ds and urinates on the Rs, and the rank and one-sided political commentary from both sides (although truth to tell, the R 'side" is Fox News, and the D side is every other TV channel) is the major part of it.

The last piece of the puzzle is that honest, hard-working, and decent people will no longer consider running for office, and being smeared by the media. So we really do get the dregs from both parties.

The amusing thing for me with this particular election is that both major party candidates are Liberal Democrats. Donald Trump was one his whole life, and leopards do not change their spots. He is still an elite, liberal, NYC real estate magnate, amusing himself by running for office.

He still got my vote, as one of only two viable candidates, and the only one remaining in the race who did not represent mainstream establishment values. There is simply no way that an establishment candidate like HRC will change anything, ever. So voting for her is saying you are completely OK with the world as it is today.

[Ibon]

So voting for her is saying you are completely OK with the world as it is today.

You know I did vote for HRC absent tee already. I was considering Trump and I can state this because neither my wife, sister or daughters come on this site and read my posts

There is one very important thing you have to consider. We have this ground swell anti establishment sentiment in the electorate as you stated. You know one of the best ways to squash this sentiment? Is to have somebody like Trump who embodies this turn out to be an absolute failure in governing. This would then "paint" anti-establishment orientation as a failure. Call it the Ross Perot affect,he was caricatured in the media and by politicians as an eccentric clown and for at least decade afterwards the whole idea of an independent candidate suffered this association.

In the unlikely event Trump would get elected I can assure you that establishment republicans and democrats will orchestrate, along with the media, a scenario of complete chaos to the point that the electorate will be begging for an establishment candidate to come back and make things normal again.

This is the danger of having Trump be your pick as an anti-establishment candidate. The powers to be in the media, corporations and main stream politicians will destroy him and anti-establishmentism" along with it.

Next time someone comes along with genuine anti -establlishment ideas you can already here it ......"Oh YEAH, we tried that already with that trump clown, how did that turn out"

HRC is flawed but atleast her flaws reinforce what is broken. WE need a competent anti-establishment force. Trump isn't that and he will discredit the anti-establishment movement if elected.

[KaiserJeep]

Except that Trump has proven leadership record, as the head of a large and capable corporation (or in his case, several corporations that collectively show profits).

Hillary has an unbroken record of failure within the confines of an establishment political career, punctuated by a large number of mysterious deaths, and some not so mysterious. At best, she has to offer the same exact sort of stuff we have from Obama, but without the streak of idealism that Obama had when he entered office at least, and with a cold-blooded ruthlessness that includes (I really believe) murder as a tool.

Either of these Liberal Democrats will have to deal with a solid R majority in the House. Bi-partisanship lives, and Trump has the advantage here, being a D in an R's clothing.

[Ibon]

Trump has the advantage here, being a D in an R's clothing.

That was the most persuasive aspect that made me consider him......but he is simply too toxic and I could not vote for him.

[KaiserJeep]

So you voted for someone that very probably is a serial murderer?

You can't claim it was a case of Hobson's Choice, either, because there were two viable candidates as usual.

Maybe the last debate tonight will render the election moot. Anything to reduce the political cacophony to a dull roar.

You have no idea how much I wish I could go hide in a jungle, too.

[Newfie]

Great conversation.

Ibon, I get you thinking about Trump being a reform candidate and if elected no doubt he would have all of government against him.

Where we differ is that I suspect that the eatablishment will se the HRC term to make it even harder for a reformer to get elected, turning us into a pseudo one party (R/D= Estabmishment) system.

This may have been our one chance to see a non E elected.

KJ, buy a sailboat and sail off like me.

But I cheat. Because I'm a dualie I just tell folks I voted for Trudeau!

[dohboi]

Ibon said: "toxic"

Good word for him.

[KaiserJeep]

I suppose that it boils down to how deep your perception of the doodoo we are standing in is. HRC is saying things she doesn't mean about the environment, whereas when Obama said like things 8 years ago, he was entirely serious - and still never even made a dent. HRC will be too busy raking in the cash to even reference the environment in another speech after the election, is my guess.

Except for the annual State of the Union Address, of course. That's when the POTUS again lists the long laundry list of dirty things that one never cleans, only acknowledges once per year.

[dohboi]

Obama didn't have the millions who now support Sanders and Warren who are all committed to keep her feet to the fire.