Is Donald Trump a Clinton Stalking Horse?

trump_wedding_clintons 2006
Trump and the Clintons have long been close allies; Trump may have started his candidacy as a favor to Bill and Hill, but there is no honor among thieves, even billionaire thieves.

 

In politics, a stalking horse is a public figure who either tests a concept or mounts a challenge against someone on behalf of an anonymous third-party.  For example, Eugene McCarthy served as an insurgent candidate in the 1968 Campaign in an attempt to unseat President Lyndon Johnson’s and keep him from running for a second term.

When he had a strong showing in the New Hampshire primary and proved there was a substantial sentiment for ousting the sitting President, Bobby Kennedy stepped in to mount a bid for the nomination, stealing McCarthy’s thunder. Kennedy was succeeding all the way to the California Primary, until he was murdered by yet another “lone assassin” (sic) in June of 1968.

In the case of McCarthy, he may not have realized he was doing Kennedy’s dirty work in going up against a very powerful sitting President and so his role as stalking horse may have been unwitting.  Kennedy operatives had convinced McCarthy to run and the Senator took the political risks while Bobby Kennedy watched on the sidelines; nevertheless, McCarthy was a Stalking Horse nonetheless.

In the present run for the White House, it has long been apparent that Donald Trump since the earliest phases of his candidacy was not behaving like a normal candidate and seemed, in fact, to be doing just about everything he could to be outrageous and get himself eliminated from the running, even as he disrupted the whole Republican primary system.

Before the race began Jeb Bush was Wall Street’s chosen Republican candidate, just as Hillary Clinton still is on the Democratic side.  In truth, Bush was eminently electable, not only being a moderate with broad appeal to the general electorate, but with a built-in appeal to Hispanics, a key Democratic demographic.  His wife is Mexican and he speaks fluent Spanish; certainly, as candidate he could easily have won against Hillary’s version of Wall Street Corporatism.

Of course, insofar as the billionaires who run our country were concerned, either candidate was acceptable–so long as Wall Street retained control of the political system.  However, after eight years of dog-whistle race-baiting and immigrant hating, the GOP establishment had made Bush’s primary run a much harder one, having enabled racists and right wing extremists to speak openly without fear of criticism.  So, despite all the money behind Jeb Bush, his candidacy went nowhere.  Instead, Trump did not just blow up Jeb’s run, but the Republican Party’s whole scheme.

Out of the blue in comes Trump, all full of piss and vinegar, to upsets the whole Repugnican game.  Already a media celebrity, The Donald comes out with one outrageous statement after another and the Great Unwashed eat it all up.  Although Donald Trump is a billionaire many times over, he is not, nor has he ever been, beholden to Wall Street or multi-national corporations for his wealth or candidacy.  His wealth was the result of real estate dealings, not manufacturing or international trade, which is why he has been willing to call out NAFTA and the TPP for the Corporatist scams they really are.

For all those not familiary with New York City and its rather unique cultural and social mix, Donald Trump, despite his billions, has always been looked down on by the Manhattan money crowd as a brash outsider.  He hails from Queens,  one of the Outer Bouroughs, which has always been regarded with disdain by the elite, not just of Wall Street, but of Manhattan in general.  An oil sheikh with a dozen wives would be more warmly greeted by the Manhattan elite than this Outer Bourough upstart–and that is regardless of whether they are left or right, Democratic or Republican.

In fact, the very large chip on Donald Trump’s shoulder with regards to Wall Street and the Manhattan elite may be a large part of his appeal to all the of blue collar and redneck Republicans who have propelled his insurgent candidacy forward.  The fact that Trump has come out solidly against the disasterous trade deals, like TPP, that have cost America millions upon millions of jobs, plus his rhetoric about creating jobs, is also something that resonates with working class voters, just as it has with Bernie Sanders supporters.

That Donald Trump has disrupted the GOP primary game is not in dispute; what some may find controversial is that, at least initially, he was doing so to aid the Clinton candidacy.  While this may seem a stretch to some, consider the facts: Donald Trump has long been on friendly terms with Bill and Hillary, donating to their cause (themselves) and it is no secret that the Clintons attended his wedding in 2005 his latest wife.  Hardly the actions of avowed enemies, no?

CNN recently posted an interesting video which contrasts Trumps current rhetoric against his earlier opinions of the Clintons dating back not only to 2008, but all the way back to the 90’s.  It is clear that his current criticisms of the Dynamic Duo, Bill & Hill, is a recent creation and almost certainly an artificial animosity, of a kind with Hillary’s opposition to the TPP and her alleged taking her friends on Wall Street to task.

While the 1% had the election rigged for their chosen candidates from the beginning, it seems obvious that the Clinton Machine had other ideas in mind.  They had no intention of running against a serious Republican contender, such as Jeb Bush, who conceivably have won the election.  In steps their old friend The Donald.  To him it was not about money–unlike the Democratic politicians they have bought and paid for across the country, Trump doesn’t need the Clinton’s cash. In fact, the Donald has been a generous donor to the nefarious Clinton Machine over the years.

No, Donald joined the Republican primary just for the fun of it, to see how much mayhem and confusion he could cause against the Wall Street establishment that has always looked down on him.  Trump’s candidacy resembled nothing so much as the scenario from the classic Mel Brooks movie The Producers. Two con artists decide to produce the worst play they could find, knowing that nobody ever questions the finances of a flop.  So they produce “Springtime for Hitler” assured that the play will close on opening night.  Well, guess what, like Springtime for Hitler, the Trump candidacy has become a runaway hit.

Trump being Trump, loves being the center of attention and being an egomaniac feeds on being the center of attention. What better forum for him than running for President? Now, with the success of his candidacy, all bets with his old friends the Clintons are off.  Trump still spews politically incorrect invectives, but one has to wonder is this just for media attention, or is Trump still trying to sabotage his Republican Presidential hopes?  The Donald may well be in it to win it now; only time will tell. But just as the Clintons have pulled every dirty trick in the book against the Sanders candidacy, so too have they sabotaged the entire Republican electoral machine in their avarice and hunger for power.

In their evil genius, one must concede the Clinton’s brilliance, even as one recognizes the massive corruption they have wrought on the Democratic Party.  The level and brazeness of the Clinton voting fraud perpetrated in the Democratic primaries far exceeds even Karl Rove’s vote rigging in the general election of 2oo4.   As far as the Republican Party is concerned, it was already thoroughly corrupt; the GOP’s only hope is if Hillary Clinton’s Corporatist presidency explodes in her face just as Nixon’s did due to Watergate.

Thomas Nast political cartoon
The Party of Abraham Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt long ago sold out to corporate interests; now the Clinton’s Stalking Horse, Donald Trump, is wreaking havoc with the hollow shell.

 

Advertisements

HILLARY’S DIRTY DOZEN

 

clinton_machineIf you haven’t heard by now, the Clintons have wealthy friends; VERY wealthy friends.  And they show their friendship in many ways, but mostly through giving them money; LOTS of money. No secret here.  Also no secret is that Bill and Hillary will do just about anything for their friends; change their vote in Congress, steer lucrative government contracts their way; make sure they get nice shiny new bombers and missiles and other military hardware that her foreign friends think they may like to play with.  Friends like that you can’t put a price tag on except, actually, you can.

 

Hillary's boys
You Gotta Friend in Me

 

Through the Clinton Foundation, Super PACs, Shell Corporations in the Cayman Islands and any number of other dodges and subterfuges that elude even the most diligent forensic accountants, Bill and Hillary shift money around the nation and around the world like your grandpa shifts checkers on a checkerboard.  Because I like to keep it simple, however, today let’s just look at the top dozen contributors to Hillary’s current primary election campaign.  Now this is the list as reported a short while back, so no doubt the list has grown much bigger and the rankings may have changed since last reported.  It also does not take into account speaking fees, super PAC money, Clinton Foundation donations, in kind donations, influence peddling, or any other back door ways of obtaining lucre, filthy or otherwise.  So these contributors, whom I call the Dirty Dozen, are but a small tip of the iceberg of the Clinton Cash Machine.  In fact, I have every confidence that these same donors are also giving far more money through other avenues than straight to her campaign; but like I said, I wanted to keep it simple.

So here they are, The Dirty Dozen:

  1. Emily’s List……………………….907,510
  2. Citigroup…………………………..891,500
  3. DLA Piper………………………….856,873
  4. Goldman Sachs……………………831,523
  5.  J P Morgan Chase…………………801,380
  6. Morgan Stanley……………………765,202
  7. University of California………….686,509
  8. Time Warner……………………….603,170
  9. Skadden, Arps et al……………….562,182
  10. Coring Inc…………………………..492,750
  11. Kirkland & Ellis…………………….491,066
  12. Paul, Weiss et al……………………430,919

Now, on this list are the usual suspects: Goldman Sachs, J P Morgan, Morgan Stanley; and considering how much they give Goldwater Girl Hillary an hour to speak at their meetings (where are the transcripts Hillary?) these are, comparatively, modest sums for getting THEIR CANDIDATE elected. Of course, as noted before, these are the outright campaign contributions, not any of the dark money donations. hqdefault

Of special note is the fact that one these big money donors is Time Warner, the media conglomerate, whose subsidiary is CNN, the cable news giant.  So, when the CNN folks pretend to be objective and then give Bernie fifteen minutes of news coverage to hours for Hillary, we should not be too surprised.  Also, when they have a conga line of “commentators” asking why Bernie just doesn’t give up and cede the race to the heir apparent to the throne, this too should be taken for the simpering attempt to control the message in this election that it is.

Clinton-Propped-NRD-990Time Warner, along with other media giants, is a BIG (or as Trump would say HUUUGE) backer of the Trans Pacific Partnership or TPP, that really awful giveaway to multinational corporations which will undermine national sovereignty (and all local laws the corporations don’t like) as well as transfer more high paying US jobs overseas to nations where they’ll become starvation wage jobs, as well as further hurting the US balance of trade and indirectly increase the Federal deficit. So once Slick Hillary assumes the mantle of power, expect the TPP deal to slide through like a case of diarrhea due to Asian Flu.  Did I mention that this and other so-called “Free Trade” deals have nothing to do with trade and are anything but free?money-game

At the top of the list is EMILY’s List, a Pro-Choice, pro-Gay and Transgender, pro-Democratic Party, Feminist organization, dedicated to getting women elected to public office.  They bill themselves as a Progressive.  So, at first glance Emily’s List is a perfect fit for Pro-LGBT, Pro-Progressive, Vote for Me Because I’m a Woman Hillary.  No Progressive Democrat, male or female, could quibble with this group donating to get a Democrat elected, right? Wrong.

According to one media pundit, “basically every Democratic woman candidate is petrified to speak publicly about EMILY’s List’s shenanigans.”  Evidently, whenever they give to a candidate’s race, there is an unspoken requirement that they hire a certain media consulting firm, whose president just happens to be the wife of EMILY’s List Campaign Director!  The donated money must be spent on the beltway media firm, whose performance is reported to be something less than stellar and who some candidates have blamed for their losing the election.

Apparently liberal candidates are forced to go along with the scam because EMILY’s List is working hand in glove with senior Democratic Party officials to fleece candidate’s campaigns. Obviously, a few high powered party establishment operatives are benefiting from this scam at the expense of the Progressive wing of the party; I wonder who they could be, Bill and Hillary?

More curious on the Dirty Dozen list is the University of California, weighing in at more than three quarters of a million dollar donation.  It is ethically dubious even for a private university to contribute to a political campaign; it is even worse for a PUBLIC university to do so.  A “Fact Sheet” distributed by U. of C. in fact denies that the school makes any political contributions or funds any political action committees.  They do, however, say that “sometimes organizations that track campaign contributions, such as http://opensecrets.org, take the official data provided by the FEC about campaign contributions and report by demographic breakdown, such as by industry or employer” and UC characterize such listings as “misleading.”  So technically, no, the University of California did not directly give; but some pundits note that there is a “revolving door” between political lobbyists and government officeholders and the members of UC administration and the University does “track” bills in Congress as well as any Executive Branch’s proposed rules and regulations which may affect the university and higher education in general.  Also, there are political operatives who do “bundling” of UC employee contributions, plus there is the dark world of PACs, who are legally separate from their beneficiary organization, but who unofficially coordinate their activities with it.  So the truth here is, let us say, somewhat murky.

Then we have the big money law firms.  Hillary is a lawyer; they’re lawyers; what could be more natural, right?

Up near the top is DLA Piper, a GLOBAL multinational law firm, with offices in over 30 countries; it is the largest law firm in the world with billions in revenue; virtually every lawyer in the firm is a multi-millionaire.  Just a bunch of poor ol’ country lawyers.  It should come as no surprise that its legal staff has included, not just US senators and cabinet members, but former Prime Ministers and other high international Muckey-Mucks.  According to the watchdog, Above the Law, “the firm makes for great copy; there’s always something funny, ridiculous, or salacious going down over there.”  This includes accusations of over-billing its filthy rich clientele (no tears here over that) and the firm’s involvement with a fossil fuel executive who claimed to be working for the CIA in order to get into the panties of two Khazakh women, whom he had “rescued” from a brothel (or was it a seraglio?), as well as more serious scandals over the years.

Skadden Arps is perhaps not so colorful as DLA Piper, but it too is an international law firm with tentacles firmly in the Washington establishment, doing lobbying for major corporations and with a notable tilt towards Democratic politics.  Love ya Hill baby.

Paul, Weiss is another lobbying law firm with headquarters in New York City but major offices in Washington and overseas.  Besides buttering up pols such as Bill & Hill, they do entertainment law and manage corporate mergers and takeovers, in addition to the occasion pro bono good deed, such as representing detainees held in durance vile in Gitmo.

Kirkland & Ellis is similarly a heavy hitter law firm who do entertainment and corporate law; they went to bat for BP when the oil giant polluted the entire Gulf Coast and got some of its workers killed in the Deepwater Horizon oil spill fiasco.  They didn’t clean up the heavy crude, but did try to clean up the legal mess for their multinational client.  They trend toward Dems, being a major backer of Obama in 2008 and have their own PAC to distribute additional largesse.  Apparently they want to get in Hillary’s good graces before she becomes the Anointed One.

There are, of course, very many more law firms and lobbyists on the Hillary hit list; we have only looked at the tip of the iceberg here.  Where the real influence peddling with Bill & Hill goes on is in the murkier nether regions of the Clinton empire, namely the Clinton Foundation and the spiders webs of PAC’s and other organizations.  Of course, as the email and Panama Paper scandals unfold, more will be revealed; that’s when the real fun begins.

As one Repugnican pundit has observed, on the campaign circuit Hillary Clinton travels around with two jets; one for Hillary and her entourage, and one for her baggage.

October 16, 2015

FRAUD IN WYOMING FLIPS IT TO CLINTON

ballot-box-thumb1
Caucuses do not normally allow absentee voting, yet in Wyoming hundreds of “surrogate” ballots appeared magically on caucus day.

 

Although the mainstream media covered Senator Sanders landslide win in Wyoming and the subsequent skewed delegate apportionment in favor of Hillary Clinton, what is not being covered is the emerging evidence of egregious vote manipulation and fraud by the Clinton Machine.

Senator Sanders racked up an impressive 56% win to Clinton’s 44%, yet after the fuzzy math was done by the Democratic Party establishment, out of the states’ 18 total potential delegates, Hillary Clinton received 11, in effect reversing the decision of the caucus goers.  Even deducting the 4 super-delegates, who are uncommitted and are expected to vote for whichever candidate has the most committed delegates coming to the convention, that still means Clinton netted half of the delegates. Sanders nets 40% of the caucus delegates despite a respectable lead?  This peculiar math was commented on even by Joe Scarborough and the other political commentators on MSNBC’s Morning Joe:

“I’m sorry,” Joe Scarborough exclaimed after reviewing the facts, “that’s a crushing victory!”

Unfortunately, Joe, you don’t know the half of it.  Laramie County is the state’s capital and more populous than most of Wyoming, a rural state.  The caucus turnout in Laramie County was heavy, with the attendees overwhelmingly in favor of Bernie Sanders: 689 to Clinton’s 111. But magically, 620 absentee ballots suddenly appeared on the day of the caucus in favor of Hillary Clinton! 

Bear in mind, Wyoming is a caucus state, where the candidate is only chosen by those voters who are attending in person NOT by either electronic vote and still less by absentee ballot.  Surrogate voting is only allowed in the caucus under rare and extenuating circumstances. 

So how is it that that so many persons in this one county suddenly developed La Grippe or, say, absent on military duty? Such a skewed surrogate vote is statistically IMPOSSIBLE—at least in an honest election. 

The MSNBC reporter in the field, Kristen Dahlgren, reporting from Laramie, observed that “clearly there were clearly a lot more Bernie Sanders supporters here at the caucus.”  When she asked Democratic Party official and Clinton loyalist Kathy Karpon whether she was surprised at the big Hillary vote, when so many attending the caucus were clearly for Bernie, she slyly responded that she was not surprised “because we knew we had the surrogate ballots out there.”

Over at CNN (a network owned by a major Clinton donor) a Clinton flack was dispatched to provide spin control to avoid any embarrassing questions about the peculiar results coming out of Wyoming.  The Clinton stooge claimed that, unlike the 82% or 86% votes coming out of the other western caucuses, Wyoming was held down to a 12 point lead by Sanders because, he alleged, of Wyoming’s “onerous vote-by-mail rules” that anyone filing a surrogate ballot had to have voted as a Democrat in the 2014 mid-terms.  That, he said, was their “secret sauce.”  The only problem with this excuse is that it is a total fabrication: a quick glance at state Democratic voting rules reveals no such mid-term restriction.

The “secret sauce” in Wyoming was Clinton minions’ ballot stuffing and egregious voter fraud.  Reports have been trickling out of other states of voting irregularities and sabotage, all pointing to a concerted campaign of vote fraud on the part of the Clinton Machine.  This has largely gone unreported by the mainstream media and so far the Sanders campaign has been reluctant to investigate the reports and file official complaints, perhaps out of fear of being accused of “sour grapes.” 

 

Stuffing-The-Ballot-Box
Evidence of voting irregularities are emerging in primary states but have yet to be adequately investigated.

 

Rigged elections are a serious issue. Wyoming is a small state in so far as numbers of delegates go; but because of that, the Clinton dirty tricks were more obvious than in a bigger electoral state.  Wyoming is not an isolated case.  There is a trail of fraud and manipulation attributable to the Clinton Campaign since at least the Massachusetts primary.  The Democratic establishment may fear that the Clinton money machine will come to an end if Bernie Sanders wins the nomination, but the looming Clintongate scandal may well explode in their well-heeled Wall Street funded faces, just as Watergate did to Richard Nixon and the Republicans.