Robert Creamer visited Obama’s White House 340 times
October 19, 2016
The political consulting firm Democracy Partners is at the center of the Project Veritas investigation exposing Democrat operatives instigating violence at Trump rallies and plotting potential voter fraud.
Robert Creamer is the founder of Democracy Partners and a frequent visitor to the Obama White House. Logs show Creamer making 340 visits to the White House, with 45 of those meetings including President Obama.
Creamer’s meetings at the White House include two meetings with President Obama in March 2011 and June 2013 where the total number of people is listed as just two. Presumably, just Creamer and Obama.
Stanford study: “As such, as a whole, these data suggest that election fraud is occurring in the 2016 Democratic Party Presidential Primary election. This fraud has overwhelmingly benefited Secretary Clinton at the expense of Senator Sanders.”
Clinton Vows to Get Money Out of Politics
July 29, 2016
Hillary Clinton promised to get big money out of politics during her Democratic National Convention speech on Thursday in Philadelphia as she accepted the party’s presidential nomination.
In her nearly hour-long speech, Clinton tried to woo Bernie Sanders supporters as she urged for unity among Americans. She also attacked her opponent, Donald Trump, asking people to imagine what it would be like to have him in the oval office with the nuclear codes.
She then criticized his Republican National Convention remarks in which he said he could fix the country on is own.
“Americans don’t say ‘I alone can fix it,’” Clinton said referring to Trump, “We say, ‘We’ll fix it together.’”
The former senator said she will pass a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United, the 2010 Supreme Court decision that allows unlimited corporate spending in elections.
During the 2008 presidential campaign, Citizens United, a nonprofit corporation, made a documentary about the former secretary of state called “Hillary: The Movie,” in which she was highly criticized. Citizens United intended to show the documentary by buying airtime and having it accessible to viewers for free through on-demand.
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, a 5-4 decision, ruled that money to influence elections and policy is a “free speech” constitutional right. The decision overruled a previous 6-3 decision, Austin v. Michigan State Chamber of Commerce, that allowed prohibitions on independent expenditures by corporations.
“That’s why we need to appoint Supreme Court justices who will get money out of politics and expand voting rights, not restrict them,” said Clinton at the DNC as crowds cheered.
“And if necessary, we will pass a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United!” she added.
Clinton had previously promised to overturn Citizens United within her first 30 days in office.
According to a poll by Bloomberg Politics last year, 78 percent of those surveyed said the Citizens United ruling should be overturned, while 17 percent called it a good decision.
In her DNC speech Clinton went after big banks and corporations.
“I believe American corporations that have gotten so much from our country should be just as patriotic in return. Many of them are, but too many aren’t. It’s wrong to take tax breaks with one hand and give out pink slips with the other,” she said.
“And I believe Wall Street can never, ever be allowed to wreck Main Street again,” she added.
However, Clinton has been criticized for benefiting from PACs throughout her career, with donations from individual donors from JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Goldman Sachs.
Clinton has twice as many six-figure donors
By Associated Press
October 15, 2016
Hillary Clinton has at least twice as many six-figure donors as Donald Trump.
A joint fundraising account for Clinton and Democratic Party groups saw 317 who gave at least $100,000 between July and September, while a joint fundraising account for Trump and Republican Party groups counted 158 over those same three months.
Both presidential candidates use “victory” funds to enable generous donors to far exceed the $2,700 per-donor, per-election limit. The large donations are parceled out to the campaign, national party committees and state party groups.
Overall, the Hillary Victory Fund raised $261 million in the three-month time period while Trump Victory raised $61 million. The unconventional Republican nominee has struggled to raise money from the kinds of traditional donors who write the biggest campaign checks.
Clinton has another joint fund for big donors, while Trump has another account for his campaign and the party that’s aimed at small donors.
Italy: African Muslim destroys invaluable historic statues in four Roman churches, terrorizes tourists (two minute video)
Jill Stein: “On the issue of war and nuclear weapons, it is actually Hillary’s policies which are much scarier than Donald Trump”
The following was recently said by Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein:
It’s important to look at where we are going. It’s not just a moment in time, but where has the strategy of voting for the lesser evil taken us?
All these times you have been told to vote for the lesser evil because you didn’t want the wars, or the meltdown of the climate, or the offshoring of our jobs, or the attack on immigrants, or the massive bailout for Wall Street, but that is actually what we have gotten. By the droves.
Because we with public interest allow ourselves to be silent, and voted for the lesser evil. But the lesser evil doesn’t solve the problem.
The Obama administration, even with both houses of Congress, actually did all of these fossil fuel emissions. “All of the above” gave us some renewable energy but it completely amplified and intensified our carbon production, which has been incredibly destructive to the climate.
The wars have gotten bigger, we are now bombing seven countries.
It is important to not just look at the rhetoric but also look at the track record and the reality is the lesser people and greater people is a race to the bottom, and even Donald Trump in the right wing extremism grows out of the policies of the Clintons, in particular Nafta, which sent our jobs overseas and Wall Street deregulation, which blew 9 million jobs up into smoke.
That is what is creating this right wing extremism. A vote for Hillary Clinton isn’t going to fix it…
It is now Hillary Clinton that wants to start an air war with Russia over Syria by calling for a no fly zone.
We have 2000 nuclear missiles on hairtrigger alert. They are saying we are closer to a nuclear war than we have ever been.
Under Hillary Clinton, we could slide into nuclear war very quickly from her declared policy in Syria.
I sure won’t sleep well at night if Donald Trump is elected, but I sure won’t sleep well at night if Hillary Clinton elected. We have another choice other than these two candidates who are both promoting lethal policies.
On the issue of war and nuclear weapons, it is actually Hillary’s policies which are much scarier than Donald Trump who does not want to go to war with Russia.
He wants to seek modes of working together, which is the route that we need to follow not to go into confrontation and nuclear war with Russia.
A trophy hunter pays $350,000 to legally kill a specific male rhinoceros which is old and has stopped breeding, and which has been harassing the younger males and preventing them from breeding. The money is used to pay to care for the living rhinos. Under this kind of policy, one population of rhinos increased from 100 to 18,000.
I myself am a vegetarian, but I have to admit that the logic in this video is quite sound. This is a good lesson in economics and the benefits of property rights.
I do understand why some people might have emotional objections to this, but even they can’t argue against the real world results of this kind of policy.
If the opponents of trophy hunting wanted to bring an end to it, all they would have to do would be to outbid the trophy hunters. As of yet, I don’t see any examples of them having done so.
Halloween Costume Choices
October 10, 2016
October brings fall weather and Halloween. If you choose to participate in Halloween activities, we encourage you to think about your choices of costumes and themes. Some Halloween costumes reinforce stereotypes of particular races, genders, cultures, or religions. Regardless of intent, these costumes can perpetuate negative stereotypes, causing harm and offense to groups of people. Also, keep in mind that social media posts can have a long-term impact on your personal and professional reputation. The University of Florida’s Division of Student Affairs Diversity and Social Justice Statement reminds us that UF fosters a community that values and respects diversity. An inclusive definition of diversity recognizes the variety of personal and social experiences that make individuals and communities different from one another.
As a community, we aspire to demonstrate integrity, respect, and compassion that strives to maintain an affirming campus climate for all members of our community. If you are troubled by an incident that does occur, please know that there are many resources available. Please take advantage of the 7 day a week presence of the U Matter, We Care program at the University of Florida by emailing email@example.com. Additionally, there is a 24/7 counselor in the Counseling and Wellness Center available to speak by phone at 352-392-1575. Lastly, the Bias Education and Response Team at the University of Florida is able to respond to any reported incidents of bias, to educate those that were involved, and to provide support by connecting those that were impacted to the appropriate services and resources. You may submit a bias incident report at http://www.umatter.ufl.edu/stopbias . Thank you for being mindful of these values, and have a fun and safe Halloween.
U. S. Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division, Voting Section
Trial Attorney, GS-14/15
The U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division is seeking up to 10 experienced attorneys for the position of Trial Attorney in the Voting Section in Washington, D.C. The Civil Rights Division is primarily responsible for enforcing federal statutes and executive orders that prohibit, among other things, unlawful discrimination in voting, education, employment, housing, police services, public accommodations and facilities, and federally funded and conducted programs. The Voting Section enforces federal statutes designed to safeguard the right to vote. These statutes include the Voting Rights Act, as amended; the National Voter Registration Act; the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act; and the Help America Vote Act.
Trial attorneys are responsible for conducting investigations, litigation, and other activities addressing all aspects of the Voting Section’s enforcement duties. These positions may require extended hours and some positions may involve significant travel.
APPLICATION PROCESS: The primary method of applying for this vacancy is online via the Internet at http://www.avuedigitalservices.com/dojjmd/applicant.html. If you do not have access to the Internet you are strongly encouraged to visit your library, state employment commission, or a commercial establishment that provides Internet access to apply online. If you are unable to apply online, you may call the contact phone number listed on this announcement to obtain a copy of the vacancy announcement, applicant qualification form (Form No. F-15566-AVUE), and instructions for completing the form. No other form of application will be accepted. Applications sent by fax, e-mail and mail will not be accepted.
Applicants using the Avue on-line system for these positions do not need to complete the Work History portion of the on-line profile; instead please attach the following after clicking the Attach Resume and Supporting Documents tab: a cover letter (highlighting relevant experience), a resume, a brief writing sample (10 pages or less) that is the applicant’s own work, and a current performance appraisal. If you are a current or former federal employee, please attach a copy of your most recent SF-50 (Notification of Personnel Action).
The core duties of Trial Attorneys in the Voting Section are: conducting investigations to assess alleged violations of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) and other voting statutes enforced by the Section, including reviewing investigative files, materials and records, and applying relevant case law, interviewing witnesses, requesting additional information and documents, analyzing data and evidence, and drafting written recommendations for further investigation and/or enforcement litigation; developing cases for trial, including conducting written discovery and depositions, developing litigation and trial strategy, drafting complaints, motions and other court filings, representing the United States in federal court at arguments, evidentiary hearings and trial; negotiating settlement agreements and/or consent decrees resolving enforcement matters; assisting in coordinating the federal observer program during elections; and assisting in the administrative review of voting changes submitted pursuant to the preclearance requirements of the VRA. The complexity of the matters assigned, and the level of supervision required, varies depending on the Trial Attorney’s years of specialized experience.
MINIMUM FEDERAL QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS:
Applicants must possess a J.D. degree, be an active member of the bar in good standing (any jurisdiction), and have a minimum of three (3) years post-J.D. experience. Applicants must have substantial litigation experience, such as handling discovery, litigation strategy, motions practice, brief writing, interviewing witnesses, taking and defending depositions, trial preparation, trial practice, and negotiations. Applicants must have excellent interpersonal skills, be mature and self sufficient, communicate effectively orally and in writing, and possess excellent professional judgment.
In addition, the following qualifications are preferred: (1) substantive knowledge of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) and other statutes enforced by the section; (2) familiarity with the various analytical approaches utilized to review voting changes under Section 5 of the VRA; (3) experience investigating and/or litigating voting rights or civil rights cases; (4) federal judicial experience; (5) experience serving as the lead attorney in federal court cases; (6) familiarity with statistical methodologies used in civil rights cases; (6) and fluency in Spanish, Chinese, Korean, or vietnamese languages.
Current salary and years of specialized experience will determine the appropriate salary level within the GS-14 to GS-15 range ($105,211.00 through $155,500.00 per annum). Final selection for these positions will be subject to budgetary funding constraints.
As part of the on-line application process, applicants are asked to provide – on a voluntary basis – demographic information on their race/ethnicity/national origin, sex and disability. Applicants are also asked to indicate how they learned about this vacancy. This information is used to determine if our recruitment efforts are reaching all segments of the population, consistent with federal equal employment opportunity laws.
No individual personnel selections are made based on this information. Your voluntary responses will be treated in a highly confidential manner, and any disability-related information will be kept confidential and used only in accordance with the Rehabilitation Act and 29 C.F.R. §1630.14(b)(1). Only summary data are reported and only in a format which cannot be broken out by individual applicants; no individual data will be provided to members of the public at any time. In addition, demographic data are separated from your application materials, and no individual data are provided to selecting officials or anyone else who can affect your application at any point during the selection process. No information from this form is ever placed in your personnel file, and failure to provide the requested information will not affect your application in any way. The authority for requesting this information is 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16 and the Rehabilitation Act. This notice of the uses of this information is provided pursuant to Public Law 93-579 (“Privacy Act of 1974”), and the information provided becomes part of a Privacy Act System of Records as identified in 5 C.F.R. 552a; any disclosure of this record or information contained in this record is in accordance with routine uses found in OPM/GOVT-7, Applicant Race, Sex, National Origin, and Disability Status Records.
We encourage you to provide this vital information, which we cannot obtain from any other source; we can get it only from you. Thank you for helping us to provide better service.
The Civil Rights Division encourages qualified applicants with targeted disabilities to apply. Targeted disabilities are deafness, blindness, missing extremities, partial or complete paralysis, convulsive disorder, mental retardation, mental illness, severe distortion of limbs and/or spine.
Experts said Arctic sea ice would melt entirely by September 2016 – they were wrong
October 8, 2016
Dire predictions that the Arctic would be devoid of sea ice by September this year have proven to be unfounded after latest satellite images showed there is far more now than in 2012.
Scientists such as Prof Peter Wadhams, of Cambridge University, and Prof Wieslaw Maslowski, of the Naval Postgraduate School in Moderey, California, have regularly forecast the loss of ice by 2016, which has been widely reported by the BBC and other media outlets.
Prof Wadhams, a leading expert on Arctic sea ice loss, has recently published a book entitled A Farewell To Ice in which he repeats the assertion that the polar region would free of ice in the middle of this decade.
As late as this summer, he was still predicting an ice-free September.
Yet, when figures were released for the yearly minimum on September 10, they showed that there was still 1.6 million square miles of sea ice (4.14 square kilometres), which was 21 per cent more than the lowest point in 2012.
For the month of September overall, there was 31 per cent more ice than in 2012, figures released this week from the National Snow and Ice Data Centre (NSIDC) show. This amounts to an extra 421,000 (1.09 million square kilometres) of sea ice, making the month only the fifth lowest since records began.
CNN cut big 3rd party support from debate focus group coverage, participant says
October 7, 2016
A participant in the CNN focus group conducted Tuesday during this year’s only vice presidential debate says the cable network omitted a strong showing of third-party support.
Justin Smith says participants were asked after the debate ended if they support the ticket led by Democrat Hillary Clinton, Republican Donald Trump or a third-party candidate, with 12 indicating third-party support, five backing Clinton and two Trump.
Such a result would not reflect national polling, and Smith wrote on Facebook “once they saw the response,” the third party option was dropped in favor of “undecided” — with the second question asked twice before being aired live, yielding 11 votes for “undecided.”
“As you see a majority here in this room at the University of Richmond still undecided,” CNN reporter Pamela Brown told anchor Wolf Blitzer in the segment that aired.
“Interesting stuff,” Blitzer said.
Europe tells British press NOT to reveal if terrorists are Muslims
October 6, 2016
Meddling Brussels has said the British press should not report when terrorists are Muslims in a slew of demands to the Government to crack down on the media.
A report from the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) found there was an increase in hate speech and racist violence in the UK from 2009 to March 2016.
Blaming the press, ECRI Chair Christian Ahlund, said: “It is no coincidence that racist violence is on the rise in the UK at the same time as we see worrying examples of intolerance and hate speech in the newspapers, online and even among politicians.”
The report makes a whopping 23 recommendations to Theresa May’s Government for changes to criminal law, the freedom of the press, crime reporting and equality law.
And despite the report not analysing coverage of the historic Brexit vote, Mr Ahlund saw fit to comment on the UK’s decision to leave the EU.
In a sweeping statement, he said: “The Brexit referendum seems to have led to a further rise in ‘anti-foreigner’ sentiment, making it even more important that the British authorities take the steps outlined in our report as a matter of priority.”
The report lays into the British press and urges the government to “give more rigorous training” to reporters.
In the 83-page report, the Commission said: “ECRI considers that, in light of the fact that Muslims are increasingly under the spotlight as a result of recent ISIS-related terrorist acts around the world, fuelling prejudice against Muslims shows a reckless disregard, not only for the dignity of the great majority of Muslims in the United Kingdom, but also for their safety.
“In this context, it draws attention to a recent study by Teeside University suggesting that where the media stress the Muslim background of perpetrators of terrorist acts, and devote significant coverage to it, the violent backlash against Muslims is likely to be greater than in cases where the perpetrators’ motivation is downplayed or rejected in favour of alternative explanations.”
Despite the creation of the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO) in 2014 as an independent regulator for newspapers and magazines, the “ECRI strongly recommends that the authorities find a way to establish an independent press regulator according to the recommendations set out in the Leveson Report. It recommends more rigorous training for journalists to ensure better compliance with ethical standards.”
But as Britain prepares to leave the crumbling bloc, the Government waded in to defend freedom of expression.
In a written statement to the ECRI, the Government said: “The Government is committed to a free and open press and does not interfere with what the press does and does not publish, as long as the press abides by the law.”
ECRI is a human rights body of the Council of Europe, composed of independent experts, which monitors problems of racism, xenophobia, antisemitism, intolerance and racial discrimination.
The group writes reports on every member state every five years and says the documents are “analyses based on a great deal of information gathered from a wide variety of sources.
ECRI visited the UK in November 2015 as it gathered evidence for the report.
In a statement, ECRI said: “ECRI welcomed, among other things, the entry into force of the Equality Act 2010 and the generally strong legislation against racism and racial discrimination in the country, as well as the government’s new hate crime action plan and substantial efforts to promote LGBT rights in the UK which have led to a significant change in attitudes.
“At the same time, the commission noted considerable intolerant political discourse in the UK, particularly focusing on immigration. It said that hate speech continues to be a serious problem in tabloid newspapers, and that online hate speech targeting Muslims in particular has soared since 2013.”
MSNBC host asks millennial women if they feel connected to Clinton, entire crowd yells “NO!”
October 4, 2016
In 2005, consenting adult Alicia Machado had sex when she knew that she was being recorded for a Spanish reality TV show called “La Granja VIP.” The recording of her having sex was later broadcast on that show.
Now, the New York Times claims that the tape of Machado having sex is not a sex tape:
Donald Trump Bashes Alicia Machado Again, Alleging a ‘Sex Tape’ (Without Evidence)
September 30, 2016
Donald J. Trump went on a morning Twitter tirade on Friday, denouncing the former Miss Universe winner he once shamed for gaining weight and directing the American public to seek out a sex tape that he said she participated in as evidence of her sordid past.
The attack, in a flurry of tweets on the topic posted from 5:14 to 5:30 a.m. Eastern time, was the latest effort by Mr. Trump, the Republican presidential nominee, to discredit the beauty queen, Alicia Machado, after Hillary Clinton used her as an example of his sexism during the debate on Monday night. Fact-checkers have found no evidence that Ms. Machado, who was featured in Playboy, appeared in a sex tape. Her critics may be referring to a risqué scene that she appeared in on a reality television show.
Mr. Trump maintained this week that Ms. Machado’s weight and attitude were problematic after she won the 1996 pageant and his campaign circulated information about her previous brushes with the law.
On Friday, Mr. Trump suggested that there was more to be revealed about Ms. Machado and offered the theory that Mrs. Clinton, his Democratic opponent, helped her attain American citizenship.
Donald Trump tweet: “Did Crooked Hillary help disgusting (check out sex tape and past) Alicia M become a U.S. citizen so she could use her in the debate?”
Mr. Trump had been modulating his tone in the weeks before the debate, but his uneven performance appears to have caused him to lash out. He has increasingly flirted with leveling more personal attacks on Mrs. Clinton’s history of marital problems and he has doubled-down on his charges that the news media is rigging the election.
While Mr. Trump had little to say when Mrs. Clinton brought up Ms. Machado on the debate stage, he said in his Friday tweets that she “duped” Mrs. Clinton. He called this a sign of bad judgment.
“Wow, Crooked Hillary was duped and used by my worst Miss U. Hillary floated her as an ‘angel’ without checking her past, which is terrible!” Mr. Trump wrote.
Ms. Machado, who told CNN this week that she is “not a saint girl,” was also accused in the late 1990s of abetting an attempted murder committed by her then-boyfriend, who shot a family member in Caracas, Venezuela.
She was said to have been seen driving a getaway car, but did not face charges.
Since he reshuffled his campaign’s leadership in August, Mr. Trump’s team has tried to instill a more disciplined approach that has been heavier on scripted speeches and policy. Twitter, however, has continued to be an outlet for Mr. Trump to vent without a filter, and rants such as the one unleashed on Friday undermine his efforts to appear presidential.
Backers of Mrs. Clinton seized on Twitter storm as more evidence that Mr. Trump is unfit to be president.
Correct the Record, a “super PAC” that supports the Democratic nominee, suggested that Mr. Trump was showing frustration about a recent batch of weak polls.
And John Podesta, Mrs. Clinton’s campaign chairman, advised that Mr. Trump might want to resist the urge to grab his phone when he wakes up “in the middle of the night.”
Mrs. Clinton responded later in the morning on Twitter by calling Mr. Trump “unhinged” and said his treatment of Ms. Machado was unwarranted.
Editorial: A principled option for U.S. president: Endorsing Gary Johnson, Libertarian
By Editorial Board
September 30, 2016
As Nov. 8 looms, a dismayed, disconsolate America waits and wonders: What is it about 2016?
How has our country fallen so inescapably into political and policy gridlock? How did pandering to aggrieved niche groups and seducing blocs of angry voters replace working toward solutions as the coin of our governing class? How could the Democratic and Republican parties stagger so far from this nation’s political mainstream?
And the most pressing question: What should tens of millions of voters who yearn for answers do with two major-party candidates they disdain? Polls show an unprecedented number of people saying they wish they had another choice.
This is the moment to look at the candidates on this year’s ballot. This is the moment to see this election as not so much about them as about the American people and where their country is heading. And this is the moment to rebuke the Republican and Democratic parties.
The Republicans have nominated Donald Trump, a man not fit to be president of the United States. We first wrote on March 10 that we would not, could not, endorse him. And in the intervening six-plus months he has splendidly reinforced our verdict: Trump has gone out of his way to anger world leaders, giant swaths of the American public, and people of other lands who aspire to immigrate here legally. He has neither the character nor the prudent disposition for the job.
The mystery and shame of Trump’s rise — we have red, white and blue coffee mugs that are more genuinely Republican — is the party’s inability or unwillingness to repulse his hostile takeover. We appreciate the disgust for failed career politicians that Trump’s supporters invoke; many of those voters are doubly victimized — by economic forces beyond their control, and by the scorn of mocking elitists who look down their noses to see them. He has ridden to the White House gate on the backs of Americans who believe they’ve been robbed of opportunity and respect. But inaugurating a bombastic and self-aggrandizing President Donald Trump isn’t the cure.
The Democrats have nominated Hillary Clinton, who, by contrast, is undeniably capable of leading the United States. Electing her the first woman president would break a barrier that has no reason to be. We see no rough equivalence between Trump and Clinton. Any American who lists their respective shortcomings should be more apoplectic about the litany under his name than the one under hers. He couldn’t do this job. She could.
But for reasons we’ll explain — her intent to greatly increase federal spending and taxation, and serious questions about honesty and trust — we cannot endorse her.
Clinton’s vision of ever-expanding government is in such denial of our national debt crisis as to be fanciful. Rather than run as a practical-minded Democrat as in 2008, this year she lurched left, pandering to match the Free Stuff agenda of then-rival Bernie Sanders. She has positioned herself so far to the left on spending that her presidency would extend the political schism that has divided America for some 24 years. That is, since the middle of a relatively moderate Clinton presidency. Today’s Hillary Clinton, unlike yesteryear’s, renounces many of Bill Clinton’s priorities — freer trade, spending discipline, light regulation and private sector growth to generate jobs and tax revenues.
Hillary Clinton calls for a vast expansion of federal spending, supported by the kinds of tax hikes that were comically impossible even in the years when President Barack Obama’s fellow Democrats dominated both houses of Congress. The nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget calculates that Clinton’s plan would increase spending by $1.65 trillion over a decade, mostly for college education, paid family leave, infrastructure and health-related expenditures. Spending just on debt interest would rise by $50 billion. Personal and business taxation would rise by $1.5 trillion. Sort through all the details and her plan would raise the national debt by $200 billion.
Now as in the primary season, Clinton knows she is proposing orgies of spending, and taxing, that simply will … not … happen. She is promising Americans all manner of things she cannot deliver.
That is but one of the reasons why so many Americans reject Clinton: They don’t trust what she says, how she makes decisions, and her up-to-the-present history of egregiously erasing the truth:
In the wake of a deadly attack on American personnel in Libya, she steered the American public away from the real cause — an inconvenient terror attack right before the 2012 election — after privately emailing the truth to her daughter. The head of the FBI, while delivering an indictment minus the grand jury paperwork, labeled her “extremely careless” for mishandling emails sensitive to national security. In public she stonewalled, dissembled and repeatedly lied — several were astonishing whoppers — about her private communications system (“There is no classified material,” “Everything I did was permitted,” and on and on). Her negligence in enforcing conflict-of-interest boundaries allowed her family’s foundation to exploit the U.S. Department of State as a favor factory. Even her command and control of a routine medical issue devolved into a secretive, misleading mission to hide information from Americans.
Time upon time, Clinton’s behavior affirms the perception that she’s a corner-cutter whose ambitions drive her decisions. One telling episode among the countless: Asked by a voter if she was for or against the Keystone XL pipeline from Canada, she replied, “If it’s undecided when I become president, I will answer your question.” As we’ve asked here before, will Hillary Clinton ever get over her consuming fear of straight talk?
Taken together, Trump and Clinton have serious flaws that prevent us from offering our support to either of them. Still, come Nov. 8, tens of millions of Americans with make a draw that they consider beyond distasteful.
We choose not to do that. We would rather recommend a principled candidate for president — regardless of his or her prospects for victory — than suggest that voters cast ballots for such disappointing major-party candidates.
With that demand for a principled president paramount, we turn to the candidate we can recommend. One party has two moderate Republicans — veteran governors who successfully led Democratic states — atop its ticket. Libertarians Gary Johnson of New Mexico and running mate William Weld of Massachusetts are agile, practical and, unlike the major-party candidates, experienced at managing governments. They offer an agenda that appeals not only to the Tribune’s principles but to those of the many Americans who say they are socially tolerant but fiscally responsible. “Most people are Libertarian,” Johnson told the Tribune Editorial Board when he and Weld met with us in July. “It’s just that they don’t know it.”
Theirs is small-L libertarianism, built on individual freedom and convinced that, at both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue, official Washington is clumsy, expensive and demonstrably unable to solve this nation’s problems. They speak of reunifying an America now balkanized into identity and economic groups — and of avoiding their opponents’ bullying behavior and sanctimonious lectures. Johnson and Weld are even-keeled — provided they aren’t discussing the injustice of trapping young black children in this nation’s worst-performing schools. On that and other galling injustices, they’re animated.
We reject the cliche that a citizen who chooses a principled third-party candidate is squandering his or her vote. Look at the number of fed-up Americans telling pollsters they clamor for alternatives to Trump and Clinton. What we’re recommending will appeal less to people who think tactically than to conscientious Americans so infuriated that they want to send a message about the failings of the major parties and their candidates. Put short:
We offer this endorsement to encourage voters who want to feel comfortable with their choice. Who want to vote for someone they can admire.
Johnson, who built a construction business before entering politics, speaks in terms that appeal to many among us: Expanded global trade and resulting job expansion. Robust economic growth, rather than ever-higher taxation, to raise government revenue. A smaller, and less costly, federal government. Faith in Americans’ ability to parlay economic opportunity into success. While many Democrats and Republicans outdo one another in opposing the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal, or TPP, we’re amused by this oddity: Today the nation’s two most ardent free-traders arguably are Barack Obama and Gary Johnson.
That said, Obama and Johnson are but two of the many candidates we’ve endorsed yet with whom we also can disagree. Johnson’s foreign policy stance approaches isolationism. He is too reluctant to support what we view as necessary interventions overseas. He likely wouldn’t dispatch U.S. forces in situations where Clinton would do so and where Trump … who can reliably predict?
But unless the United States tames a national debt that’s rapidly approaching $20 trillion-with-a-T, Americans face ever tighter constrictions on what this country can afford, at home or overseas. Clinton and Trump are too cowardly even to whisper about entitlement reforms that each of them knows are imperative. Johnson? He wants to raise the retirement age and apply a means test on benefits to the wealthiest.
What’s more, principled third-party candidates can make big contributions even when they lose. In 1992 businessman H. Ross Perot won 19 percent of the popular vote on a thin but sensible platform, much of it constructed around reducing federal deficits. That strong showing by Perot the relative centrist influenced how President Bill Clinton would govern.
We wish the two major parties had not run away from today’s centrist Americans. Just as we wish either of their candidates evoked the principles that a Chicago Tribune now in its 170th year espouses, among them high integrity, free markets, personal responsibility and a limited role for government in the lives of the governed. We hope Johnson does well enough that Republicans and Democrats get the message — and that his ideas make progress over time.
This year neither major party presents a good option. So the Chicago Tribune today endorses Libertarian Gary Johnson for president of the United States. Every American who casts a vote for him is standing for principles — and can be proud of that vote. Yes, proud of a candidate in 2016.
Yesterday, I made this post about how debate “moderator” Lester Holt was biased against Donald Trump.
Now we have some more interesting news along the same issue of bias. The Commission on Presidential Debates had just made the following admission:
“Regarding the first debate, there were issues regarding Donald Trump’s audio that affected the sound level in the debate hall.”
This is completely in line with the following comment that Trump had made right after the debate:
“And they also had, gave me a defective mic. Did you notice that? My mic was defective within the room… No, but I wonder, was that on purpose? Was that on purpose? But I had a mic that wasn’t worked properly, with, working properly within the room.”
Here’s a five minute interview with a refugee who fled an Islamic hellhole so she could come to the U.S.
This whole thing is great, but the best part – I think – is when she asks why “western feminists” want their own countries to import the same kinds of scumbags that she came here to get away from:
Lester Holt asked Trump 15 questions, Clinton 2 questions
September 27, 2016
A close analysis of the transcript of the first presidential debate on Monday night shows that moderator Lester Holt of NBC News asked 15 questions exclusively of Republican nominee Donald Trump, and only 2 questions exclusively of Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. The analysis, posted on social media and drawing intense attention on Reddit, walks through the entire 90-minute exchange and notes Holt asked six questions of both candidates, in addition to Trump’s 15 and Clinton’s two.
Holt, a newcomer to presidential debate moderation, faced intense pressure from the Clinton campaign and the mainstream media to be tough on Trump. Some explicitly called for Holt to “fact-check” Trump — the implication being that Trump is more ignorant or dishonest — and implied that he would face the same fate as NBC’s Matt Lauer and Tonight Show host Jimmy Fallon, both of whom were slammed by liberal media critics for the crime of treating both candidates fairly.
Moreover, most of Holt’s questions prompts were overly friendly to Clinton’s point of view, while hostile to Trump. In one of the last exchanges of the debate, for example, Holt strongly implied Trump was a sexist when asking about a past criticism he had made about Clinton lacking a “presidential look.” He also introduced the opening topic of the debate by praising Obama’s economic performance, ignoring the fact that growth never reached 3% under Obama and labor force participation has fallen.
Breitbart News noted that Holt intervened several times to “fact-check” Trump — often erroneously — while never checking Clinton’s facts, even when she was completely wrong, as in her claim that she had never flip-flopped on the Trans-Pacific Partnership. In addition, the Washington Examiner‘s Eddie Scarry notes Holt asked Trump six follow-up questions, and none of Clinton, leaving Trump “having to debate the highly anticipated event’s moderator as well as his Democratic opponent.”
Holt Interrupted Trump WAY More Than Clinton In Debate
September 27, 2016
Moderator Lester Holt was much harsher on Republican nominee Donald Trump than he was on Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton during the debate Monday evening.
Holt interrupted Trump a whopping 41 times, either to “fact-check” the Republican nominee, or to ask a follow-up question. Clinton was only interrupted seven times during the course of the 90-minute debate.
Holt interrupted Trump the most during a particularly heated exchange about Trump’s stance on the Iraq war. Both candidates attempted to dodge their former stances. Holt challenged Trump in particular, cutting him off several times to assert the business mogul did indeed support the war in Iraq when it was popular.
Holt interrupted Trump 10 times during the exchange, and demanded at least five times why Trump thought that he had better judgement than Clinton.
In the first majority-Muslim U.S. city, residents tense about its future
November 21, 2015
HAMTRAMCK, MICH. — Karen Majewski was in such high demand in her vintage shop on a recent Saturday afternoon that a store employee threw up her hands when yet another visitor came in to chat. Everyone wanted to talk to the mayor about the big political news.
Earlier this month, the blue-collar city that has been home to Polish Catholic immigrants and their descendents for more than a century became what demographers think is the first jurisdiction in the nation to elect a majority-Muslim council.
It’s the second tipping for Hamtramck (pronounced Ham-tram-ik), which in 2013 earned the distinction of becoming what appears to be the first majority-Muslim city in the United States following the arrival of thousands of immigrants from Yemen, Bangladesh and Bosnia over a decade.
In many ways, Hamtramck is a microcosm of the fears gripping parts of the country since the Islamic State’s attacks on Paris: The influx of Muslims here has profoundly unsettled some residents of the town long known for its love of dancing, beer, paczki pastries and the pope.
“It’s traumatic for them,” said Majewski, a dignified-looking woman in a brown velvet dress, her long, silvery hair wound in a loose bun.
Around her at the Tekla Vintage store, mannequins showcased dresses, hats and jewelry from the mid-20th century, and customers fingered handbags and gawked at the antique dolls that line the store, which sits across the street from Srodek’s Quality Sausage and the Polish Art Center on Joseph Campau Avenue, the town’s main drag.
Majewski, whose family emigrated from Poland in the early 20th century, admitted to a few concerns of her own. Business owners within 500 feet of one of Hamtramck’s four mosques can’t obtain a liquor license, she complained, a notable development in a place that flouted Prohibition-era laws by openly operating bars. The restrictions could thwart efforts to create an entertainment hub downtown, said the pro-commerce mayor.
And while Majewski advocated to allow mosques to issue calls to prayer, she understands why some longtime residents are struggling to adjust to the sound that echos through the city’s streets five times each day.
“There’s definitely a strong feeling that Muslims are the other,” she said. “It’s about culture, what kind of place Hamtramck will become. There’s definitely a fear, and to some degree, I share it.”
Saad Almasmari, a 28-year-old from Yemen who became the fourth Muslim elected to the six-member city council this month, doesn’t understand that fear.
Almasmari, the owner of an ice cream company who campaigned on building Hamtramck’s struggling economy and improving the public schools, said he is frustrated that so many residents expect the council’s Muslim members to be biased. He spent months campaigning everywhere in town, knocking on the doors of mosques and churches alike, he said.
“I don’t know why people keep putting religion into politics,” said Almasmari, who received the highest percentage of votes (22 percent) of any candidate. “When we asked for votes, we didn’t ask what their religion was.”
Past clashes with present
Surrounded by Detroit, Hamtramck is Michigan’s most densely populated city, with about 22,000 residents occupying row after row of two-story,
turn-of-the-century bungalows packed into two square miles. Polish Catholic immigrants began flocking to Hamtramck, which was originally settled by German farmers, in 1914 when the Dodge brothers opened an auto assembly plant in town.
While the city’s Polish Catholic population has shrunk from 90 percent in 1970 to about 11 percent today, in part as the old residents have moved to more prosperous suburbs, Polish American culture still permeates the town.
Labor Day, known as Polish Day here, is marked with music, drinking and street dancing. The roof of the Polish cathedral-style St. Florian Church peaks above the city landscape, and a large statue of Pope John Paul II, who visited the city in 1987, towers over Pope Park on Joseph Campau Avenue. The Polish pope’s cousin, John Wojtylo, was a Hamtramck city councilman in the 1940s and 1950s, according to local historian Greg Kowalski.
The once-thriving factory town now struggles with one of the highest poverty rates in Michigan. In 2009, American Axle shut down its plant in Hamtramck, laying off hundreds of workers. There is a new class of entrepreneurs, including Igor Sadikovic, a young Bosnian immigrant who plans to open a coffee shop with an art gallery by next summer, and Rebecca Smith, who owns a handbag store that employs Muslim women.
But the new businesses have not been enough to offset the loss of a manufacturing base and reductions in state revenue sharing. Since 2000, Michigan has twice appointed an emergency manager to the city, which has an annual operating budget of $22 million.
Hamtramck’s exceedingly low home prices and relatively low crime rate have proved especially attractive to new immigrants, whose presence is visible everywhere. Most of the women strolling Joseph Campau Avenue wear hijabs, or headscarves, and niqabs, veils that leave only the area around the eyes open. Many of the markets advertise their wares in Arabic or Bengali, and some display signs telling customers that owners will return shortly — gone to pray, much in the same way Polish businesses once signaled that employees had gone to Mass.
Tensions rise in volume
Many longtime residents point to 2004 as the year they suspected that the town’s culture had shifted irrevocably. It was then that the city council gave permission to al-Islah Islamic Center to broadcast its call to prayer from speakers atop its roof.
“The Polish people think we were invading them,” said Masud Khan, one of the mosque’s leaders, recalling that time in an interview earlier this month. “We were a big threat to their religion and culture. Now their days are gone.”
The mosque, which attracts about 500 people for its Friday prayer services, has purchased a neighboring vacant limestone building in the heart of the city that once was a furniture store. The mosque’s leaders plan to put a minaret — a spire — on the building and use it to continue broadcasting a call to prayer five times a day.
The private sale enraged city leaders, including the mayor, who sees the area as key to commercial growth. Mosque leaders estimate that the 20,000-square-foot building will hold up to 2,000 people once the renovation is finished next year.
The town’s transformation caught Mike Bugaj off guard. When the Hamtramck native left to join the Air Force in 1972, the city was widely referred to as “Little Warsaw.” When he returned from the military in 1995, “the Muslims were here,” said Bugaj, who is of Polish and Native American descent.
The new majority Muslim council has Bugaj worried that old traditions, like the Polish festival and Fat Tuesday’s paczki day, soon will be wiped away.
He and other residents are “concerned about what they would want to change, that they could mistreat women,” said Bugaj, who wore feather earrings and a T-shirt with wolves on it. “Don’t come over to America and try to turn people to your way of thinking.”
Wayne Little, who has been a pastor for nearly 40 years at Corinthian Baptist Church, said many of the city’s African American residents are also waiting to see whether the new Muslim-majority city council will represent their interests.
“They are clannish and stick together. . . . The jury is out on them.” Little said.
But Hamtramck’s Muslim population is hardly a monolith — the city is about 23 percent Arabic, 19 percent Bangladeshi and 7 percent Bosnian. The predominantly Muslim groups don’t intermingle much because of language differences, according to Thaddeus Radzilowski of the Piast Institute, a census information center.
Adding to the city’s burgeoning diversity are the young, white hipsters who have begun to migrate here from surrounding areas for the food, bars and art shows.
On a recent Saturday, about 40 people crowded into a one-room studio to sip wine from red Solo cups and enjoy a watercolor exhibition by African American artist Olayami Dabls as reggae music thumped in the background. The nudity and sexuality portrayed in Dabls’s paintings provided a startling contrast that afternoon to the handful of veil-clad Muslim women poring over produce at the Yemeni-owned grocery store visible across the street through the window.
Even some residents who are nervous about the new council speak of the city’s diversity with pride, noting the eclectic mix of restaurants and the fact that at least 27 languages are spoken in Hamtramck schools.
Frank Zacharias, an elderly Polish American usher at St. Ladislaus, the Catholic parish across the street from the mosque, is intimately familiar with life on Hamtramck’s streets, which he tromped for 28 years as a mail carrier before retiring. The changes have stunned him, he said.
“It was hard at the beginning,” he said, referring to 2004, when the mosque began the call to prayer.
But, he added: “They’re human. You gotta live with them. Hamtramck is known for diversity.”
University of Michigan at Dearborn professor Sally Howell, who has written a book on Michigan and U.S. Muslims, said that although some outsiders have equated the election results with “a sharia takeover,” that is not a fear she hears expressed by Hamtramck’s non-Muslims.
It all boils down to “a fear that this city council won’t represent the community,” Howell said. Her own sense, she said, is that it will.
The discord intensified in the weeks before the election, beginning when several senior citizens living in an apartment complex complained about the volume of the 6 a.m. call to prayer from a nearby mosque.
Susan Dunn, who was on her fifth unsuccessful run for city council, raised the issue before the governing body.
“I have my own rights, as well,” she said while baking her son’s birthday cake in her kitchen. “I’m not a hater. It wasn’t a calculated move.”
At one point as she spoke, a mosque close to Dunn’s house began broadcasting the call to prayer. “You try reading a book in your back yard while your dog is barking to that,” Dunn said, clearly exasperated.
On the eve of the vote, then-candidate Almasmari sent a photo of a flier he said he had found on the street to Majewski, the mayor, and Dunn. “Let’s get the Muslim out of Hamtramck in November 3rd. Let’s take back our city,” it read. The photo of the flier, which was illustrated with images of three white candidates, including Dunn, began circulating on Facebook. Dunn said she had nothing to do with it.
Then, after the election, a Muslim community organizer upset many residents when he praised the composition of the new council.
“Today, we show the Polish and everybody else,” said Ibrahim Algahim in an address to fellow Muslims that was captured on video.
Muslim community activist Kamal Rahman said he empathizes with the older residents’ concerns and has been working to help unify the town by meeting with city leaders.
Rahman, who in 1986 became one of the first Bengalis to attend a Hamtramck high school, said he considered moving to a mostly white Detroit suburb but decided against it once he discovered that a Ku Klux Klan group also had an address there. Instead, he built a five-bedroom home next to a Yemeni mosque just outside of Hamtramck, and sends his children to charter schools in the city.
Rahman encourages other Muslims to watch their language, because it can seem threatening.
“It sends the wrong message. If I were white, I would feel scared,” he said.
As he sat in a Yemeni restaurant neatly dressed in a blue dress shirt and dark blue striped tie, Almasmari, the council member, recalled feeling shaken in the weeks leading up to the election, when he discovered that dozens of the yard signs touting his candidacy had been spray-painted with an “X.”
On a boarded-up building on the city’s main street, a poster to re-elect council member Anam Miah had been partially covered with big block letters — “DON’T VOTE” — and a swastika was drawn on Miah’s forehead.
But Almasmari insists that longtimers’ fears are unfounded. Already, he said he has scheduled a meeting with residents who wish to talk about their concerns — economic, educational and otherwise.
“People talk about Muslims by talking about ‘them,’ but we’re not going to be as single-minded as people think,” said Almasmari, a married father of three who covered his Facebook profile picture last week with the French flag filter.
Back in her vintage shop down the block, Majewski said she sympathizes with the stories of immigrants in search of a better life. It is a subject the mayor knows something about, having specialized in immigration and ethnicity when she earned her doctorate in American culture at the University of Michigan, said Majewski, who works at UM’s Institute for Research on Labor, Employment and the Economy.
A few minutes later, she pointed to a large, vacant building down the street that she said had once housed a popular department store. It was purchased by a Yemeni immigrant and has sat empty for two years, she said.
“It creates a lot of resentment and drags down the property values. That’s a real source of tension,” Majewski said. “Is that ethnic? . . . What do you call that? Can you criticize his lack of action? There’s certainly an ethnic element, the feeling that they don’t care about the city. How do you disentangle those?”
She paused to tell a shopper that the red plaid shirt he was trying on looked like a good fit before concluding aloud that the new conflicts in Hamtramck have less to do with ethnicity and religion and more about to do with what it means to be a good neighbor.
“We live on top of each other,” she said. “You can pass your plate through the window to the person next door.”
Alicia Machado tells CNN host “That happened 20 years ago” after he asks her if she was the getaway driver from a murder, and if she threatened to kill a judge
This is the woman whom Hillary Clinton defended during Monday’s debate: