Geen evolutie en ecolutie zonder revolutie!

Albert Einstein:

Twee dingen zijn oneindig: het universum en de menselijke domheid. Maar van het universum ben ik niet zeker.

zaterdag 4 november 2017

Campagne Clinton, smeriger dan gedacht............

Naar nu blijkt heeft Hillary Clinton de macht over het Democratic National Committee (DNC) in 2015 in feite overgenomen, nadat ze dit comité redde met een financiële injectie uit het Hillary Victory Fund......

Het DNC had die tekorten te danken aan voormalig wanpresterend voorzitter Wasserman Schultz en het gebrek aan toezicht op dit comité door Obama.

Dat hare kwaadaardigheid Clinton de voorverkiezingen ten koste van de andere Democratische kandidaat Sanders op een heel smerige manier heeft gewonnen, was geen geheim, echter met deze nieuwe feiten wordt nog eens bewezen dat niet de Russen, maar juist het DNC en dan m.n. Clinton een wel heel smerig spel heeft gespeeld......... Niet vreemd dus, dat figuren als Seth Rich, die deel uitmaakte van het Clinton team, uit pure frustratie zaken hebben gelekt naar de pers.......

Donna Brazile Bombshell: ‘Proof’ Hillary ‘Rigged’ Primary Against Bernie

Afbeeldingsresultaat voor Donna Brazile Bombshell: ‘Proof’ Hillary ‘Rigged’ Primary Against Bernie

November 2, 2017 at 10:18 am
Written by Jake Johnson

(COMMONDREAMS) — In an explosive and “deeply disturbingpiece for Politico Magazine on Thursday, former interim chair of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) Donna Brazile drew upon her brief experience at the organization’s helm to reveal the extent to which the 2016 nomination process was “rigged” in favor of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

In her account, Brazile details the deep “internal corruption” of the DNC, the role the ostensibly neutral governing body played as a “fundraising clearing house” for the Clinton team, and how those dynamics unfairly handicapped primary challenger Bernie Sanders.

Many of the DNC’s most deeply embedded issues, Brazile notes, spring both from former chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s poor management and former President Barack Obama’s neglect, which left the committee deeply in debt.

In August 2015, the Clinton campaign—along with the joint fundraising vehicle with the DNC, the Hillary Victory Fund—came to an agreement with the committee to begin to pay off this debt, which had soared to $24 million. In exchange, the DNC’s finances were placed “fully under the control” of the Clinton team, “which seemed to confirm the suspicions of the Bernie camp,” Brazile writes.

When the party chooses the nominee, the custom is that the candidate’s team starts to exercise more control over the party,” Brazile observed. “This victory fund agreement, however, had been signed…just four months after Hillary announced her candidacy and nearly a year before she officially had the nomination.”

Brazile goes on to describe the terms of the agreement, which she describes as “unethical”:
The agreement…specified that in exchange for raising money and investing in the DNC, Hillary would control the party’s finances, strategy, and all the money raised. Her campaign had the right of refusal of who would be the party communications director, and it would make final decisions on all the other staff. The DNC also was required to consult with the campaign about all other staffing, budgeting, data, analytics, and mailings.

Brazile concludes the piece, which is an adapted excerpt from her forthcoming book, by detailing a conversation she had with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) shortly after she found the “cancer” at the heart of the DNC—this so-called “Joint Fundraising Agreement.”

How much control Brooklyn had and for how long was still something I had been trying to uncover for the last few weeks. By September 7, the day I called Bernie, I had found my proof and it broke my heart,” Brazile writes. “I explained that the cancer was that she had exerted this control of the party long before she became its nominee….Bernie took this stoically. He did not yell or express outrage. Instead he asked me what I thought Hillary’s chances were.”

Unsurprisingly, Brazile’s account immediately caught fire on social media, provoking a mixture of outrage and vindication—particularly given that it comes from a “stalwart” establishment insider who admitted to passing debate topics to the Clinton team during her time as a CNN contributor.
Shame on the DNC, on Hillary Clinton, and every Democratic operative responsible for this bullshit. What a mess,” The Intercept‘s Shaun King wrote on Twitter.

If you ask ANYONE who is close to operations of the DNC today they will tell you that things are still a complete mess there financially. 

Since the election, it is not clear that the DNC has dealt with these problems yet,” writes Clio Chang of Splinter News, building on King’s point. “Tom Perez was installed as DNC chair over Keith Ellison, a move that was largely seen as giving Democratic elites more control over the party….The DNC is not doomed to repeat the problems of the past, but from Brazile’s account, it’s clear that the organization requires a major reckoning.”

Oooooweeee! “You can put truth in the river 5 days after lie, truth gone catch.” -Grandma
Thank you @donnabrazile 


Zie ook:

Twitter Admits It Censored Tweets About the #DNCLeak Ahead of

Het volgende artikel werd gisteren door Anti-Media gepubliceerd:

Democrats in Denial After Donna Brazile Says Primary Was Rigged for Hillary

November 3, 2017 at 1:42 pm
Written by Kevin Gosztola

(SHADOWPROOFEvidence that the Democratic National Committee rigged the 2016 presidential primary in favor of Hillary Clinton has been known for well over a year. But the leadership of the Democratic Party has refused to address evidence, preferring to “move forward” by coercing Democrats who supported Bernie Sanders into uniting with the very elements of the party responsible for losing to President Donald Trump.

Now, former interim DNC chair Donna Brazile has given credence to claims that the DNC rigged the primary, which is what members of the Sanders campaign and supporters have repeatedly asserted—even though most DNC officials or Clinton supporters treat such claims as the product of sexism or downright foolishness.

Brazile found a copy of the joint fundraising agreement between the DNC, Hillary Victory Fund, and Hillary For America. It was signed by former CEO of the DNC Amy Dacey and Robby Mook, who was Clinton’s campaign manager. The Clinton campaign’s legal counsel, Marc Elias, was copied.

It specified that Clinton would “control the party’s finances, strategy, and all the money raised. Her campaign had the right of refusal of who would be the party communications director, and it would make final decisions on all the other staff. The DNC also was required to consult with the campaign about all other staffing, budgeting, data, analytics, and mailings.” Now, former interim DNC chair Donna Brazile has given credence to claims that the DNC rigged the primary, which is what members of the Sanders campaign and supporters have repeatedly asserted—even though most DNC officials or Clinton supporters treat such claims as the product of sexism or downright foolishness.

The agreement was inked in August 2015, which was months before the first votes were ever cast in the primary.

As Brazile put it, “The funding arrangement with HFA and the victory fund agreement was not illegal, but it sure looked unethical. If the fight had been fair, one campaign would not have control of the party before the voters had decided which one they wanted to lead. This was not a criminal act, but as I saw it, it compromised the party’s integrity.”

A story from Politico in May 2016 revealed how the Clinton campaign setup a fundraising operation through state party apparatuses that was essentially money laundering. States only kept less than a half percent of $82 million raised. This was a method to circumvent campaign finance limits. It also put Sanders at a disadvantage, as the state parties weren’t fairly making these funds available to his campaign.

DNC chair Tom Perez appeared on CNBC and was asked about what Brazile wrote. “Well, hey, we’re moving forward. We’re building, you know, I’ve been asked that question a number of times since I started.”

Perez suggested he would ensure plans for the nomination process in 2020 were fair and transparent. The primary debate schedule would be set in advance before any officially declared candidates are known. But what if DNC officials already have a candidate for 2020 in mind, like they did with Clinton?
In October, as widely reported, Perez “stripped a number of longtime party officials of their ‘at-large’ delegate status or leadership positions, while appointing a slate of 75 new members that include[d] Clinton campaign veterans, lobbyists, and neophytes.” Many of those demoted were progressives who backed Sanders or Minnesota Representative Keith Ellison when he ran against Perez for DNC chair.

Some of the people tied to corporate interests, who were granted superdelegate votes, included Joanne Dowdell, who was a registered lobbyist for News Corp (which owns Fox News) and Manuel Ortiz, a lobbyist for CITGO Petroleum Corporation and Citigroup. And ten other newly appointed superdelegates had previously registered as federal lobbyists.

Indiana Democratic Representative Andre Carson also was on CNN and asked what he thought of Brazile’s allegations. Initially, Carson refused to address them and said he knew Brazile and would probably read her forthcoming book. Wolf Blitzer pressed him, and Carson deflected. He maintained he had no knowledge of any fundraising deal between the Clinton campaign and DNC.

If what Donna Brazile is saying in this new book is true, I assume you’d be pretty upset that there was this formal arrangement to use the DNC, the assets of DNC, which are considerable, to help this one presidential candidate and in the process hurt others who may want to challenge her for the nomination,” Blitzer added.

It did not visibly bother Carson at all. Addressing Clinton and Sanders supporters, Carson answered, “Going forward, we need to come together. Though we may have our differences and different approaches in terms of methodology. We have to come together and use our numbers to make sure we don’t re-elect Donald Trump or see another Donald Trump rise.”

This strategy for unity, which involves forcing conformity among Sanders supporters, failed at the Democratic National Convention, and it failed to ensure Clinton had the turnout among working class people of color and young people that was necessary to defeat Trump, especially in swing states. It has, however, helped officials obstruct accountability, transparency, or any transformation away from the very centrist agenda that has ensured the party remains weak.

One of the few Democrats to recognize reality was Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren. She appeared on CNN and emphatically answered, “Yes,” when asked if she thought the DNC rigged the primary. She said the Democratic Party needed to be “held accountable.”

Warren was hounded throughout the 2016 Democratic primary by Sanders supporters for remaining silent about who she supported. Her silence was regarded as a favor to the Clinton campaign that was intended to help the campaign ensure the scales did not tip against them in key New England states.

What Warren said flustered several Democrats, including Joy Ann Reid, a Democrat and MSNBC host with quite the following on Twitter.

Reid contended, “The question is: what does the DNC actually do, and can it, even if it wanted to, rig 50+ primaries for any given candidate?” She added, “Even if one objects to the [joint fundraising agreement], as Donna did, it didn’t hurt Sanders financially. By April, he’d raised as much as [Clinton].” She insisted Clinton won the nomination because she received more votes than Sanders.

However, what those in denial refuse to confront is that Clinton may have received more votes because citizens believed it was impossible for Sanders to win, since the news media kept reporting Clinton had so many more superdelegates than him. Plus, whether Sanders was able to overcome the impact of an unethical fundraising agreement does not change the reality that it made the primary unfair.

Hillary Rosen, a prominent Democratic Party strategist who regularly appears on CNN, insisted Democrats could not reckon with Brazile’s allegations when attention must be paid to the GOP’s tax proposals. She also misleadingly argued Brazile could not find any evidence that the system was rigged against Sanders, which is not what Brazile wrote. Brazile said she could not find any evidence to support widespread claims until she came across the joint fundraising agreement.

The voters chose Hillary Clinton, not Bernie Sanders, and it had nothing to do with any staff person at the DNC,” Rosen asserted.

In May 2016, Rosen said, “Bernie Sanders is losing this race, and instead of taking it like a man, he’s working the ref. He’s encouraging his people to think that the system is rigged. The system he signed up for as an independent to run in a Democratic primary. This constant sort of whining and complaining about the process is just really the most harmful thing, in some ways, he could do because he’s encouraging his supporters to think that the process actually is cheating them, and they’re not.” So, Rosen has an interest in maintaining her denial of reality.

The reality is hundreds of superdelegates pledged their allegiance to Clinton before votes were cast in Iowa, a limited number of debates were scheduled to ensure voters had the least amount of exposure to Clinton opponents, the DNC and Clinton campaign falsely accused the Sanders campaign of “stealing” voter file data, and Democratic women supporting Sanders faced forms of retaliation for not supporting Clinton.

By Kevin Gosztola / Republished with permission / Shadow Proof / Report a typo

Zie ook: 'WikiLeaks belooft The Guardian 1 miljoen dollar als het haar leugens i.z. Assange en Russiagate kan bewijzen.......'

        en: 'Russiagate? Britaingate zal je bedoelen!'

        en: 'Facebook gebruikte 'fake news' beschuldiging om de aandacht voor schandalen af te leiden'

        en: 'New York Times: eerste Israëlische inval in Gazastrook sinds 2014 >> fake news!'

        en: 'Noord-Koreaans 'bedrog met nucleaire deal' is fake news o.a. gebracht door de New York Times'

       en: 'WikiLeaks: Seth Rich Leaked Clinton Emails, Not Russia'

       en: 'Hillary Clinton en haar oorlog tegen de waarheid........ Ofwel een potje Rusland en Assange schoppen!'

       en: 'Murray, ex-ambassadeur van GB: de Russen hebben de VS verkiezingen niet gemanipuleerd'

      en: ''Russische manipulaties uitgevoerd' door later vermoord staflid Clintons campagneteam Seth Rich......... AIVD en MIVD moeten hiervan weten!!'

      en: 'Obama gaf toe dat de DNC e-mails expres door de DNC werden gelekt naar Wikileaks....!!!!'

      en: 'VS 'democratie' aan het werk, een onthutsende en uitermate humoristische video!'

      en: 'Democraten VS kochten informatie over Trump >> Forgetting the ‘Dirty Dossier’ on Trump'

      en: 'Hillary Clinton moet op de hoogte zijn geweest van aankoop Steele dossier over Trump........'

      en: 'Flashback: Clinton Allies Met With Ukrainian Govt Officials to Dig up Dirt on Trump During 2016 Election'

      en: 'FBI Director Comey Leaked Trump Memos Containing Classified Information'

      en: 'Publicly Available Evidence Doesn’t Support Russian Gov Hacking of 2016 Election'

      en: 'Russia Is Trolling the Shit out of Hillary Clinton and the Mainstream Media'

      en: 'CIA chef Pompeo waarschuwt voor complot van WikiLeaks om de VS op alle mogelijke manieren neer te halen....... ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!'

      en: 'Russische 'hacks' door deskundigen nogmaals als fake news doorgeprikt >> Intel Vets Challenge ‘Russia Hack’ Evidence'

      en: 'Rusland krijgt alweer de schuld van hacken, nu van oplichters Symantec en Facebook....... ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!'

       en: 'Russiagate, of: hoe de media u belazeren met verhalen over Russische bemoeienis met de VS presidentsverkiezingen........'

       en: 'CIA de ware hacker en manipulator van verkiezingen, ofwel de laatste Wikileaks documenten.........'

       en: 'CIA speelt zoals gewoonlijk vuil spel: uit Wikileaks documenten blijkt dat CIA zelf de verkiezingen manipuleerde, waar het Rusland van beschuldigde........'

      en: 'CIA malware voor manipulaties en spionage >> vervolg Wikileaks Vault 7'

       en: 'CIA deed zich voor als het Russische Kaspersky Lab, aldus Wikileaks Vault 8.....'

       en: 'Kajsa Ollongren (D66 vicepremier): Nederland staat in het vizier van Russische inlichtingendiensten....... ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!'

       en: 'Ollongren gesteund door Thomas Boesgaard (AD), 'Rusland verpakt het nepnieuws gekoppeld aan echt nieuws.....' Oei!!'

       en: 'RT America één van de eerste slachtoffers in een heksenjacht op westerse alternatieve media en nadenkend links......'

       en: 'WannaCry niet door Noord-Korea 'gelanceerd!''

       en:  'False flag terror' bestaat wel degelijk: bekentenissen en feiten over heel smerige zaken..........'

       en:  'FBI, de spin in het Russiagate web........'

       en:  'CIA 70 jaar: 70 jaar moorden, martelen, coups plegen, nazi's beschermen, media manipulatie enz. enz.........'

       en: 'CIA en 70 jaar desinformatie in Europese opiniebladen............'

       en: ''Russiagate' een complot van CIA, FBI, Hillary Clinton en het DNC...........'

Zie vervolgens ook:
Was Democratic Primary Rigged Against Bernie Sanders? Elizabeth Warren Says ‘Yes’

Geen opmerkingen:

Een reactie posten