MSNBC Morning Joe Scarborough NBC Poll Showing Donald Trump Losing Badly Was ‘Cooked, via YouTube, October 11, 2016
(Please see also, Media Polling Fully Exposed – About That NBC/WSJ Clinton +11 Point Poll…. There’s a lot more there. –DM)
Archive for the ‘Media and Hillary Clinton’ category
MSNBC Morning Joe Scarborough NBC Poll Showing Donald Trump Losing Badly Was ‘Cooked
October 12, 2016Who recorded the Pu**y Gate conversation? Who released it now and why?
October 9, 2016Who recorded the Pu**y Gate conversation? Who released it now and why? Dan Miller’s Blog, October 9, 2016
(The views expressed in this article are mine and do not necessarily reflect those of Warsclerotic or its other editors. — DM)
The private conversation between Billy Bush and Donald Trump was surreptitiously recorded by someone. It was provided to NBC approximately eleven years later and shortly before the October 9th presidential debate. We have not been told by whom or why, but it’s not difficult to figure it out.
As reported in an October 7, 2016 Washington Post article titled An unlikely Bush finally did some damage to Donald Trump: Billy Bush,
Billyhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9uf1AqoBOw Bush is first cousins with former Florida governor Jeb Bush, who was favored to win the Republican nomination before Trump came along and started calling him “low-energy” and attacking him daily on the stump.
That means Billy Bush is also first cousins with former president George W. Bush, who Trump has suggested is to blame for 9/11 and who started an Iraq War that Trump has labeled a disaster.
And he’s a nephew of former president George H.W. Bush, who has reportedly said he will support Hillary Clinton over Trump, and former first lady Barbara Bush, who has said “I’m sick of” Trump and that she doesn’t know how women can vote for him.
None of the Bushes is backing Trump in this campaign. And those who have tried have failed to halt his momentum.
But they continue to try.
I don’t know who recorded the Trump-Bush conversation or why. Nor do I know who released the recording or why. However, according to Wikipedia,
After working as a correspondent on Access Hollywood, a syndicated entertainment-news show from 2001 to 2004, Bush was a primary anchor from 2004 until 2016, when he left to become a co-host of the third hour of The Today Show.
Although there has been speculation that NBC might fire Bush as a Today Show anchor, that apparently will not happen.
An NBC executive said Saturday Billy Bush would remain a “Today” show host despite his role in a shocking 2005 video with Donald Trump in which they discussed groping women.
“There are no plans to take Billy off the show Monday, and there have been no discussions of any type of disciplinary action,” the exec said.
Another well-placed executive said Saturday that it would be difficult to take action against Bush because the vile talk with Trump happened 11 years ago. [Emphasis added.]
“What are they going to do, suspend him? For something that happened a decade ago?” the executive said. “There’s been a lot of water under the bridge since then.”
In any event, Bush was Trump’s host on the Hollywood Access bus where they had their conversation. To speculate that he recorded their conversation, apparently without making Trump aware that he was doing so as NBC has acknowledged, and/or had principal access to the recording, and that he or another member of the Bush Clan released it to NBC just before the next Trump-Clinton debacle debate would not be over the top. Writing at American Thinker, Greg Richards says outright that
This was a conversation meant to be private. The person disgraced by this conversation isn’t Trump; it is Bush. First recording and then publishing this conversation are the actions of a person with low or no character, a bottom-feeder never to be trusted with anything.
He is probably correct. In any event, guy talk of the sort in which Trump and Bush engaged is harmless — unless and until it has been made public. Then, it can damage the reputation of the jokers but also females about whom they were joking. It probably won’t harm the female in the case, because she rejected Trump’s advances. Good for her.
The Clintons’ hypocrisy
Bill Clintons predatory conduct toward young women was substantially more damaging to them than to either Clinton. Hillary’s disparagements of, and threats to, Bill’s victims are in a different class altogether than anything Trump did or said or has even been claimed to have done or said.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9uf1AqoBOw
I did not have sex with Monica Lewinsky:
According to Hillary, it’s all about Hillary:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQ2DW4seyUs
Not really:
Ms. Lewinsky talks a lot about “public shaming.” Has Trump been “publically shamed” for his guy talk? The Clinton campaign, the media and some Republicans are doing just that.
Here’s a link to a list of other female victims of “Slick Willie” and “Crooked Hillary.”
Conclusions
Today (October 9th), Democrats told Trump to leave Bill Clinton out of tonight’s debate because it’s old news. Yet Trump’s guy talk eleven years ago should apparently be fair game and they want to “focus on the issues.” Right.
Democratic House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi struck a similar chord in an interview with NBC’s “Meet the Press” host Chuck Todd, saying that she did not believe Trump would bring up the former president. “No, because you know why? Elections are about the future. They’re about the future. He’s talking about something, Bill Clinton, he’s not on the ballot.”
But Hillary, Bill’s enabler and enforcer, is on the ballot. And she is dangerous.
We don’t know why the guy talk tape was released shortly before the October 9th debates but in ample time for trump to be publicly shamed by it, but it’s not difficult to figure out why. As noted here,
[I]f you want to destroy someone’s reputation or credibility or both, you simply accuse him of the same type of thing you have been doing yourself and with the help of a compliant and prostitute media you can usually bring it off and appear to be taking the moral high ground, when actually your “high” ground is usually lower that that of the person you are trying to drag through the mud. [Emphasis added.]
. . . .
[T]he whole deal here is to make Trump look horrendous to the public at large right before the next presidential debate, which is tonight, October 9th. Why they had to hold one of these things on a Sunday is beond me. They couldn’t have waited until Monday? They had to drag this thing into the Lord’s Day?
That the intent of this tape is to portray Trump as the scum of the earth there can be no doubt. And its effect has been demonstrated among the gutless wonders that parade as Republican politicians as they rush to distance themselves from Trump on so-called “moral” grounds. Most of them owe their souls to the Ruling Republican Establishment and so never wanted Trump to begin with, as his candidacy threatened to disrupt the CFR/Trilateralist agenda of their bosses for moving this country toward One World Government. [Emphasis added.]
So let’s attempt to put this into perspective, looking at the situation as it pertains to Trump and the Clintons. For Trump, this is one comment he made eleven years ago. As far as the prostitute press is concerned he might as well have said it ten minutes ago, but he said it eleven years ago. And he has apologized for it. Not that this makes any difference to the managed media. The comment is touted and the apology ignored. [Emphasis added.]
. . . .
So here we have something that Trump said, but it was only talk, lewd locker room talk admittedly, but still talk. Kind of like the talk we hear about Hillary being indicted for her corruption–just talk.
Yet we are now supposed to concentrate totally on Trump’s talk and totally forget all about Hillary’s thoroughgoing corruption over the decades. And we are also supposed to disremember all things pertaining to her “significant other” and what he did to all those women whose names you all have seen in the news over the years and we are all now supposed to forget how Hillary was basically an enabler for her husband’s activities and how she tried to silence all the women that brought rape allegations against Bill. We are all supposed to forget Monica Lewinsky and the “blue dress” and all that like it never happened. None of that is to be remembered tonight at the debate–only Trump’s eleven year old statement. All Klinton indiscretions are to be forgotten–wiped out of memory as surely as Hillary’s email servers were wiped off and Trump is to be raked over the coals not only by Hillary, but also by the supposedly neutral “moderator” who, in reality, will be the second person on Hillary’s debating team. [Emphasis added.]
Yep. And most Republicans appear to think that’s what’s going on. According to a survey of 1,549 registered voters, including 1,390 likely voters, which was conducted on Saturday by Politico/Morning Consult poll,
While 70 percent of Democrats called on Trump to leave the 2016 race, only 12 percent of Republicans said the same. And of those Republicans, only 13 percent of women said Trump should drop out.
A substantial majority of Democrats want Trump to drop out. Might that be because they have a sense that he will defeat Hillary?
PU**YGATE: Horrors! Trump Caught in Guy Talk!
October 8, 2016PU**YGATE: Horrors! Trump Caught in Guy Talk! Dan Miller’s Blog, October 8, 2016
(The views expressed in this article are mine and do not necessarily reflect those of Warsclerotic or its other editors.– DM)
The left apparently believes that the Trump campaign must end in disgrace because, in 2005, Trump was recorded (apparently surreptitiously) bragging in a private conversation with George H.W. Bush’s nephew, Billy Bush, about how he tried (but failed) to get a Hollywood starlet to have sex with him. For shame! Wait a minute. That’s “guy talk” and most healthy males occasionally engage in it when not in mixed company. Methinks I smell a bit of hypocrisy.
“Girl talk?” I don’t know. Do they discuss how sexy voting should be?
Juanita Broaddrick, one of Bill Clinton’s “alleged” rape victims, had this to say about Trump’s words:
“How many times must it be said,” she tweeted Saturday morning.
“Actions speak louder than words. (Donald Trump) said bad things! (Hillary Clinton) threatened me after (Bill Clinton) raped me.”
Broaddrick’s dose of perspective comes as the mainstream media has been silent and uninterested in the ongoing accusations against Bill Clinton and Hillary’s attempts to silence his accusers.
But in the last 24 hours, they’ve reported ad nauseam about Trump’s 2005 locker room talk caught on a hot mic.
I agree with this statement in an article at Kingsjester’s Blog:
This has to be one of the biggest exercises in hypocrisy that I have ever seen.
Modern American Liberals are the same ones who brought us a crucifix in a jar of urine and a painting of Christ with elephant dung smeared all over it, applauding them both as avant-garde art and the “artists” who created those vile exhibits as “artistic geniuses”.
The same followers of the political philosophy who have been supporters of relative morality and situational ethics, are now acting so grossly offended by an 11-year-old video of Donald J.Trump engaging in a private conversation with a friend, in which he used a word that can be heard in every men’s and boys’ locker room across this nation, that they are curled up in their safe spaces, clutching their pearls and their blankie, sucking their thumbs, and crying out for their Mommy to “make the bad man stop”. [Emphasis added.]
The overwhelming hypocrisy of it all is that they want Americans to be so reviled by Donald Trump’s use of that word that they overlook the documented fact that Bill Clinton is a Serial Adulterer and that Hillary Clinton swears like a drunken sailor and has admitted in documents released by Julian Assange yesterday that she is “far removed from the troubles of Middle Class Americans”. [Emphasis added.]
I stole this cartoon from that article, and it fits:
I also agree with this article at Canada Free Press titled Liberals are Prudes — Who Knew?
Recently much ado has been made of some crude comments that Donald Trump made some years back. Media mavens are all aflutter with outraged disgust. I do not know what convent these shocked sisters came from, but I have heard similar male braggadocio my entire adult life. Perhaps they need to get out more. [Emphasis added.]
Apparently many of the pundits we watch on TV have been closet Puritans all this time – who knew? Many of them are the same ones that informed us that displaying Christ crucified in a jar of human urine is art; that murdering fetuses in order to harvest their organs is not obscene, and who insist that our children be taught the ins and outs of fornication at younger and younger ages (pun noted)—so one can be forgiven for being somewhat surprised by their air of affronted prudery. Poor dears, one does wish them a speedy recovery – hand out the smelling salts please.
So Donald Trump has feet of clay—guess what? I like him that way! I am so sick of polished, slick talking, glad-handing, backstabbing, dishonest corrupt politicians that I could scream. I’ll take the real deal—I’ll take Trump with his rough edges and sharp elbows, warts and all, over any of the oh-so-refined thoroughly corrupt bought-and-paid-for globalists being shoved down our throats. Now they are disgusting.
Trump’s “nasty” talk was hardly unique. Here are some audio cuts of former presidents, and even the current president for whom Ms. Dunham thought voting for would be sexy, being “nasty:”
In one of his many addresses to his troops during World War II, General George Patton commented that “a man who won’t f**k won’t fight.” The quote is from a 2011 Washington Post article titled “No sex, please. We’re soldiers.” That address, like many of General Patton’s others, was well laced with profanity; it helped to motivate the troops and they loved it. Would today’s “metrosexuals?” They would not likely admit it even if they did.
Patton’s grim expression did not change. “There are four hundred neatly marked graves somewhere in Sicily”, he roared into the microphone, “All because one man went to sleep on the job”. He paused and the men grew silent. “But they are German graves, because we caught the bastard asleep before they did”. The General clutched the microphone tightly, his jaw out-thrust, and he continued, “An Army is a team. It lives, sleeps, eats, and fights as a team. This individual heroic stuff is pure horse shit. The bilious bastards who write that kind of stuff for the Saturday Evening Post don’t know any more about real fighting under fire than they know about fucking!”
The men slapped their legs and rolled in glee. This was Patton as the men had imagined him to be, and in rare form, too. He hadn’t let them down. He was all that he was cracked up to be, and more. He had IT!
“We have the finest food, the finest equipment, the best spirit, and the best men in the world”, Patton bellowed. He lowered his head and shook it pensively. Suddenly he snapped erect, faced the men belligerently and thundered, “Why, by God, I actually pity those poor sons-of-bitches we’re going up against. By God, I do”. The men clapped and howled delightedly. There would be many a barracks tale about the “Old Man’s” choice phrases. They would become part and parcel of Third Army’s history and they would become the bible of their slang.
. . . .
He could, when necessary, open up with both barrels and let forth such blue-flamed phrases that they seemed almost eloquent in their delivery. When asked by his nephew about his profanity, Patton remarked, “When I want my men to remember something important, to really make it stick, I give it to them double dirty. It may not sound nice to some bunch of little old ladies at an afternoon tea party, but it helps my soldiers to remember. You can’t run an army without profanity; and it has to be eloquent profanity. An army without profanity couldn’t fight its way out of a piss-soaked paper bag.” [Emphasis added.]
I remember that many years ago (1959 or 1960) when I was in ROTC at Yale — then an all-male college — an instructor (an Army captain) mentioned that he hadn’t seen one of the cadets with his date much over the weekend. The cadet responded, “even the best ***** gets moldy.” We all laughed.
From the Washington Post article linked above,
As late as the 1980s, officers’ clubs on military bases in the United States and abroad regularly featured performances by strippers. “I think we used to call them exotic dancers,” Scales recalled.
Some things have changed in our current enlightened age. Obama is gung-ho for diversity in the military and wants as many women and “others” as possible in combat branches. While the left still praises “art” such as “a crucifix in a jar of urine and a painting of Christ with elephant dung smeared all over it,” it finds guy talk and cartoons depicting Mohammad disgusting.
Paul Ryan was apparently “sickened” by Trump’s remarks.
He decried Trump’s newly revealed comments in stark terms.
“I am sickened by what I heard today,” Ryan said. “Women are to be championed and revered, not objectified. I hope Mr. Trump treats this situation with the seriousness it deserves and works to demonstrate to the country that he has greater respect for women than this clip suggests.”
Congressman Ryan must be “sickened” quite easily, but then perhaps there was never any guy talk in his presence, lest he “sicken.” Assuming that many others also are unaware that men engage in guy talk when women are absent and find Trump’s insulting comments outrageous, perhaps they should keep in mind that he is an equal opportunity insulter. Although he does not likely engage in guy talk with women and does not have sex with men, otherwise he treats men and women the same.
Leftists insist that we be politically correct and say nothing that they find offensive — No cartoons depicting Mohammad, no disparaging references to Sharia law, Islamist persecution of non-Muslims, sex slaves and even Muslim females, no “racist” comments that “Black Lives Matter” is racist, and no opposition to uncontrolled, unvetted immigration and resettlement of refugees from Islamic areas where Sharia law and Islamist violence are endemic. And, of course, there must be no mention of Hillary’s many lies, her corruption, the Clinton Foundation, or her foul treatment of Bill’s bimbos. That would be “sexist” or something. Boo hoo.
Trump’s dirty talk versus Hillary’s corruption
October 8, 2016Trump’s dirty talk versus Hillary’s corruption, American Thinker, Jack Hellner, October 8, 2016
In the past week:
– Justice drops the case against a gunrunner from Hillary’s Libya fiasco whose testimony would certainly have harmed Obama and Hillary.
– Evidence surfaced that the White House participated in the cover-up of Hillary’s violation of national security laws with her private server even though they said they absolutely knew nothing about the server and would not interfere with an investigation.
– We have learned more this week about how the investigation of Hillary by the Justice Department and FBI was a pure sham as they gave immunity to so many, took so much stuff off limits, and even carried out the destruction of evidence. The email investigation was pretend, just like the IRS investigation and any supposed investigation of the Clinton Foundation. It is clear that the White House, Justice Department, State Department, and IRS are working specifically to protect Obama and Hillary instead of working for the American people.
– Aleppo and Syria are deteriorating rapidly despite Obama and Kerry being extremely tough and telling Russia and Assad to stop it.
– Obama partially blamed the Civil War in Syria on a drought he says was caused by humans. That is one of the most ignorant statements ever. The war is because Assad is a tyrant, and the Mideast is essentially a desert that has had continued droughts for millennia.
– An NBC News man topped Obama’s stupidity by saying the worthless Paris climate agreement would stop hurricanes.
– Obamacare is collapsing rapidly. The multiple lies to pass the law are more obvious every day. The law is greatly harming the middle class and small employers and reducing the potential for full-time jobs.
– An NSA contractor who committed the same crime as Hillary by keeping classified documents at home on several nonsecure devices is under arrest. Why isn’t Hillary?
The media, of course, don’t focus on any of these things. Instead they trot out a tape of Trump talking dirty about women eleven years ago. I know that no other men would ever talk like that on a bus, in a locker room, at a bar, or at a bowling alley. The media and Hillary are absolutely shocked. According to Hillary, no one who ever talked like that or treated women like that can ever be president. (That is really rich coming from the wife of Bill.)
Of course, every night on TV, people can see Trump’s language compounded. (I have heard that the Girls show starring Hillary supporter Lena Dunham is especially sweet and pure.)
Shows that use dirty language win all sorts of awards, and now the media pretends words spoken eleven years ago are a disqualifier. I think everyone should watch the Rob Lowe roast on Comedy Central to see truly repulsive stuff.
The Clintons divert massive amounts of money from Haiti for their Foundation and friends, which left the poor more vulnerable to the hurricane than they should have been. And then there were those kickbacks to the Foundation and Bill himself to sell a big chunk of our uranium reserves to the Russians.
And the media say Trump is the disqualified person.
Hillary and Kaine continually brag about her being in the Situation Room for Osama when she wasn’t needed, but why weren’t Hillary and Obama in the Situation Room the night of 9/11/12, when Americans were under attack in Benghazi? They had no idea how long the attack would last, yet they did absolutely nothing to save the Americans. They did have time to concoct a lie to protect their political power before the election. Why isn’t the media curious as to what President Obama did that night?
Bill Clinton was accused of rape, and he mistreated and lied about many women to destroy their lives. Hillary sought to destroy any woman who dared tell the truth about Bill. Bill also used a cigar on an intern and got fellated from the same intern in the sacred Oval Office suite – and Hillary has the gall to say Trump talking dirty disqualifies him to be president.
I have heard the CBS radio news a few times since the tape came out, and they mention the tape prominently. Somehow, they have not mentioned the Wikileaks documents that came out within a few hours of the Trump Tape. It must be as accidental as all the selective editing done by the supposed fact-tellers in the media. In the leaked documents, Hillary essentially kisses up to investment bankers and others who are paying her $250,000 per speech. She also says absolutely that she is for open borders and open global trade. Hillary and Kaine are campaigning on the lie that she is for more secure borders and very strict trade agreements.
And the media say Trump is unfit to be president.
I am absolutely not defending what Trump said eleven years ago, but if bragging about conquests with women were a disqualifier, at least Kennedy and Clinton would never have been president. Hillary should be declared unfit because she lies continuously, committed perjury, has taken kickbacks throughout her public life, tried to destroy women and any other people who got in her way, violated multiple security laws and other laws, and left Americans to die. Other people have been dispensable throughout Hillary’s and Bill’s lives. Basically, everything the Clintons have done is to increase the power and wealth for themselves. They certainly have little thought for the rest of us.
I have never seen a media so in the tank. The media show every day their bias by what they report, how they report, and especially what they choose not to report. Our freedoms are in danger, and since they have no actual accomplishments to tout for their chosen candidate, they have to destroy the other. They also sought to destroy Bush, Palin, McCain, and Romney, so they have been at the personal destruction game for a long time.
Cartoons of the Day
October 1, 2016
Witnessing the Final Demise of “Mainstream” Media
October 1, 2016Witnessing the Final Demise of “Mainstream” Media, Power Line,
If this year’s presidential election has a silver lining, it is the final demise of “mainstream media.” Which is not to say that liberal media are going away; they aren’t, of course. But liberal media’s claim to being mainstream–reliable, objective, fair, unlike fringe or partisan news sources–is gone forever. That is a good thing.
No one could follow this year’s campaign without understanding that the media formerly known as mainstream (sorry, Prince) have jettisoned any pretense of neutrality, or even of journalistic integrity, in their desperation to preserve the status quo by electing Hillary Clinton president. Fair enough. We know where they stand.
One of the last vestiges of liberal media’s pretense to authority is its legion of “fact checkers.” “Fact checkers” like PolitiFact, the Washington Post’s Glenn Kessler and others purport to rule judiciously on claims made by candidates of both parties. In fact, as those who pay attention have long known, “fact checking,” in pretty much all cases, is just liberal activism under another name.
All of which is preface to this: Rasmussen Reports finds that voters are no longer fooled, if they ever were, by newspapers’ fact checkers:
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that just 29% of all Likely U.S. Voters trust media fact-checking of candidates’ comments. Sixty-two percent (62%) believe instead that news organizations skew the facts to help candidates they support. …
Eighty-eight percent (88%) of voters who support Trump in the presidential race believe news organizations skew the facts, while most Clinton backers (59%) trust media fact-checking. Among the supporters of Libertarian Gary Johnson and Green Party candidate Jill Stein, sizable majorities also don’t trust media fact-checking.
It stands to reason that a slim majority of Democrats trust media fact-checkers. Why not trust those who are in the business of agreeing with you? What could be more objective than that?
A college friend of mine once said, “Objective is what I think. Subjective is what you think.” That sums up the fact-checker mentality very well, and after all these years, no one–not even the Democrats who purport to trust the fact-checkers–is fooled. Breitbart.com is a sort-of-conservative news source, while the New York Times is a massively liberal news source. Neither is impartial or has any inherent authority. Which one is more reliable is a case-by-case, day-by-day evaluation that is left up to the reader, and as to which there will be nothing like consensus.
If just about everyone now understands this, it is a good thing.
Hill on Bill’s Women: ‘We Reached Out to Them’
September 30, 2016Hill on Bill’s Women: ‘We Reached Out to Them’ American Thinker, Jack Cashill, September 30, 2016
In a halfway honest front-page article Thursday, the Washington Post posed the following question in the headline, “Enabler or family defender? How Hillary Clinton responded to husband’s accusers.”
I say “halfway” because reporter Shawn Boburg knew the answer to his question. Hillary provided it herself during a crucial “60 Minutes” interview to which Boburg alluded more than once. That interview took place on January 26, 1992, the day America first met Hillary Clinton.
Earlier that same month, Arkansas state employee Gennifer Flowers confessed to a tabloid that she and Bill Clinton had had a 12-year affair. In a Hail Mary attempt to save Bill’s candidacy, the Clintons agreed to the interview with CBS’s Steve Kroft.
When Kroft asked Bill about the affair, he answered, “That allegation is false.” Hillary, her hands lovingly intertwined with Bill’s, nodded her approval. Of course, they were both lying, Bill with much greater skill.
At this point in the interview, Hillary explained how Flowers’s claim surfaced. “When this woman first got caught up in these charges,” she said, “I felt as I’ve felt about all of these women: that they had just been minding their own business and they got hit by a meteor, and it was no fault of their own.”
Hillary then followed up with the assertion that answered the Washington Post’s question: “We reached out to them. I met with two of them to reassure them they were friends of ours.” (italics added) Yes, Hillary was — and still is — an enabler.
Hillary did not do all her own dirty work. As the Post acknowledges, in 1992 the Clinton campaign hired private detective Jack Palladino “to investigate the accusers involved in two dozen allegations.”
At the time, the Clinton campaign was insisting that these women were being pressured to lie by tabloids waving cash. Palladino’s role, as Clinton aide Betsy Wright memorably told the Post’s Michael Isikoff in July 1992, was to manage the “bimbo eruptions.”
Among the presumed bimbos the Clinton campaign “reached out” to was a former Miss Arkansas, Sally Miller Perdue. In July 1996, Perdue appeared on the Sally Jesse Raphael show to discuss her 1983 affair with Clinton, an affair later corroborated by several Arkansas State troopers. In his article a week after Perdue’s appearance, Isikoff noted that Palladino had done a sufficiently good job smearing Perdue that “no major news organization has reported the account.”
In August 1996, still worried about Perdue’s potential to disrupt the campaign, the Clintons had Democratic party operative Ron Tucker speak to Perdue. According to Perdue, Tucker told her, “There were people in high places who were anxious about me and they wanted me to know that keeping my mouth shut would be worthwhile.”
“Worthwhile” meant a GS-11 or higher job with the federal government. If she turned down the offer and talked to the media, “He couldn’t guarantee what would happen to my pretty little legs.” After harassing phone calls and damage to her car, Perdue chose to go into hiding.
Perdue was the least of the Clintons’ problems in 1992. More potentially troublesome were the women that Clinton had assaulted, Juanita Broaddrick, Elizabeth Ward Gracen, and Paula Jones among others.
This week’s Post article pulls its punches on both Jones and Broaddrick. In the Post’s account, Jones was “groped” and Broaddrick was the victim of a claimed “sexual assault.” Yes, Clinton did grope Jones, but as she would later testify under oath, “Mr. Clinton then walked over to the sofa, lowered his trousers and underwear, exposed his penis (which was erect) and told me to ‘kiss it.’”
As to Broaddrick, she was not merely assaulted. She was raped. “It was a real panicky, panicky situation,” Broaddrick told NBC’s Lisa Myers in February 1999. “I was even to the point where I was getting very noisy, you know, yelling to ‘Please stop.’ And that’s when he pressed down on my right shoulder and he would bite my lip.”
Immediately afterwards, a colleague found Broaddrick in her hotel room crying and “in a state of shock,” her pantyhose torn and her lip swollen. The Post made no mention of Hillary’s literal hands-on effort to silence Broaddrick. “She threatened me at that fundraiser,” Broaddrick said of an intimidating grip-and-grin with Hillary soon after the rape, “that’s foremost in my mind; I’ll never forget that; I’ll never forget that encounter.”
The Post article in question makes no mention of Gracen. As Iskoff reported in his 1999 book, Uncovering Clinton, Gracen had a one-off with Clinton in 1983 when Clinton was governor and she was serving as Miss America.
To assure Gracen’s silence during the 1992 campaign, Clinton campaign manager Mickey Kantor got together with Clinton’s friend and Hollywood producer, Harry Thomason, and they arranged for her to take a part in a mini-series then filming in Croatia.
There was a reason to get Gracen out of the country. Like Broaddrick, Gracen was married when she was sexually assaulted by Clinton. “It was rough sex,” Isikoff wrote, “Clinton got so carried away that he bit her lip, Gracen later told friends. But it was consensual.”
Writing before Broaddrick’s prime-time confession, Isikoff missed the lip-biting MO. He also failed to acknowledge that at least one of Gracen’s friends, Judy Stokes, had told the Paula Jones legal team that the sex was not consensual at all.
“Do you believe Clinton raped her?” investigator Rick Lambert asked her. “Absolutely,” Stokes replied. “He forced her to have sex. What do you call that?”
In April 1998, Gracen came to the embattled Clinton’s aid, this time by recanting an earlier lie that she had never had sex with Clinton. In a television interview, Gracen said of the 1983 encounter with Clinton, “What I did was wrong, and I feel very bad about it now.” Gracen denied that the sex was coerced and said almost laughably of Hillary, “I’ll apologize to her now. It was wrong.”
After her 1998 TV interview, fearing a subpoena from prosecutor Ken Starr, Gracen flew to the Caribbean where she went island hopping for several months. “She had no interest being drawn into the case,” wrote Isikoff. “She had already lied for Clinton once.”
Then as now, the media had no interest in discovering who arranged for Gracen’s faux apology or her sun-drenched flight from justice.
Despite her decades-long sexist and classist war on women, Hillary had confidence enough in the major media to tweet in November 2015, “Every survivor of sexual assault deserves to be heard, believed, and supported.”
Every survivor, that is, except Bill’s “bimbos.” Although she had yet to coin the term, Hillary had apparently assigned these women to the ranks of the “deplorable.” If clarification were needed, Clinton aide James Carville provided it on national TV in 1996. “Drag a hundred-dollar bill through a trailer park,” said Carville for the ages, “you never know what you’ll find.”
NY Times opinion | Hillary Clinton’s Everywoman Moment
September 28, 2016Hillary Clinton’s Everywoman Moment, NY Times Editorial Board, September 27, 2016
(Trump has even said that has said women don’t deserve equal pay unless they do as good a job as men. Dear me! Please see also, Hillary’s ‘Body-Shamed’ Beauty Queen Accused of Being Accomplice to Attempted Murder and Threatening Judge. — DM)
The direct confrontation between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton over Mr. Trump’s treatment of women didn’t come until the final moments ofMonday night’s debate. But in many ways, the entire event played out as a big-screen version of what women encounter every day.
There were plenty of aha moments for any woman who is the sole female member of her company’s management team, a female sportscaster, bartender, cop, construction worker, law partner or, yes, a beauty queen. And maybe for the sole female presidential candidate, too.
Mrs. Clinton leads Mr. Trump by double digits among women and minorities. But non-college-educated white women are one of the biggest groups of undecided voters, and her campaign has been wooing them for months, toggling between portraying her as a tough potential commander in chief and a champion of women and girls.
Credit Damon Winter/The New York Times
On Monday night, those women got to see Mrs. Clinton stand up to that common hazard of working while female: the sexist blowhard, the harasser.
When Mr. Trump began by addressing Mrs. Clinton as “Secretary Clinton,” saying, “yes, is that O.K.?,” Mrs. Clinton laughed off the condescension. But she wasn’t playing along — she was awaiting her moment. After nearly 90 minutes, it came.
Lester Holt, the NBC News anchor who moderated the debate, asked what Mr. Trump meant when he had said in a rally that Mrs. Clinton doesn’t have a “presidential look.”
“She doesn’t have the look,” he said. “She doesn’t have the stamina.”
Mrs. Clinton’s response: “Well, as soon as he travels to 112 countries and negotiates a peace deal, a cease-fire, a release of dissidents, an opening of new opportunities in nations around the world or even spends 11 hours testifying in front of a congressional committee, he can talk to me about stamina.”
When Mrs. Clinton finally got to unload what felt like the pent-up frustration of Everywoman, it was powerful. “This is a man who has called women pigs, slobs and dogs, and someone who has said pregnancy is an inconvenience to employers, who has said women don’t deserve equal pay unless they do as good a job as men,” she said. “And one of the worst things he said was about a woman in a beauty contest. He loves beauty contests, supporting them and hanging around them. And he called this woman ‘Miss Piggy.’ Then he called her ‘Miss Housekeeping,’ because she was Latina. Donald, she has a name. Her name is Alicia Machado.”
Mr. Trump blustered, but didn’t deny any of it. Instead, he dug himself in deeper by saying that Rosie O’Donnell, the comedian who was the target of some of those epithets, “deserves it.”
Mr. Trump’s misogyny is unlikely to turn off his core supporters. And his bullying of Mrs. Clinton — as well as his critique of her reversal on the Trans-Pacific Partnership and his remarks on the effect of globalization on jobs — may play well with white men reeling from technological change, job losses and addiction. Amid this upheaval, some have come to believe that when minorities, immigrants and women make gains, it pushes them further behind.
The debate’s clash over gender was telling for both candidates, and it may have helped establish Mrs. Clinton as a standard-bearer for more than Democrats.
After First Debate, ‘Nobody Knows Anything’
September 27, 2016After First Debate, ‘Nobody Knows Anything’ PJ Media, Roger L Simon, September 26, 2016
I can’t say I’m surprised, as others have noted (okay I took a few peaks), that moderator Lester Holt asked no questions about Hillary’s emails, Benghazi, or the Clinton Foundation. That’s what the mainstream media are paid for — to be silent and practice omertà concerning anything embarrassing to Democrats. (Ironically, this leaves a big opening for one person — Julian Assange. And don’t think he doesn’t know it.)
***********************
In his Adventures in the Screen Trade, screenwriter William Goldman famously wrote of Hollywood that “Nobody knows anything.”
He was mostly right about the movie business, except that sequels of Star Warsdo tend to make a lot of money (until they don’t).
But applied to politics, his words are one hundred percent correct. Nobody does know anything. Nevertheless, as in Hollywood, a lot of people are paid big bucks to pretend they do.
Goldman’s was the first phrase that came to my mind after watching the Greatest Debate That Ever Lived or whatever anyone wants to call the extravaganza Monday night that turned out not to be nearly as dramatic as some were expecting.
Who won? Beats me. Does it matter? Also beats me. (Well, I do have a suspicion, but I’ll get to that in a minute.)
I do notice that as of this moment (8:20PM PT) the Drudge Report is showing Donald up 90% to 10% in its online poll. That’s basically meaningless considering the source. If Drudge’s poll had shown Trump winning by less that 80% it would have spelled disaster.
As for the pundits, I can’t stand watching them. They make my head explode. And they’re basically useless. No one is more disconnected from the American public than a television pundit. When have you ever heard one say something you haven’t thought of a hundred times before? Well, maybe once in a blue moon. (You’re free to dial off me now. I’m no better.)
But, being a good pundit, I will say the painfully obvious. Both candidates basically got what they wanted. Hillary didn’t have a coughing fit or fall over. Donald seemed plausibly presidential. He didn’t assault Clinton or bite her head off (not that she didn’t deserve it). In the end, he may have gotten more. (As I said, more of that in a moment)
I can’t say I’m surprised, as others have noted (okay I took a few peaks), that moderator Lester Holt asked no questions about Hillary’s emails, Benghazi, or the Clinton Foundation. That’s what the mainstream media are paid for — to be silent and practice omertà concerning anything embarrassing to Democrats. (Ironically, this leaves a big opening for one person — Julian Assange. And don’t think he doesn’t know it.)
What did surprise me is that Trump barely brought much of this up himself. He had a huge opportunity when the subject of cyber security came up but didn’t take it. Was this deliberate or an oversight? If the former, and I suspect it largely is, it’s a clever strategy. Everyone knows about Hillary’s email/Foundation veracity issues. Trump didn’t have to make a big deal about them, especially if his goal was to appear presidential, to not seem crazy or mean to those few remaining independent voters who are not attracted to Hillary but want to be reassured about Trump. And we have to remember, the polls at this moment show him practically even or ahead and surging, a great position.
Interestingly, as I continue to write, Drudge has abandoned his own poll and is linking to another online poll being run by Time magazine. It is currently showing Trump ahead 60-40 with well over 540,000 votes cast. That’s a significant number with a big spread and, unlike Drudge, Time is no conservative icon.
What does this mean? Well, there was a link from Drudge and it may be his fans coming over. As I said, “Nobody knows anything.” Another round of polls will be coming out in a few days and we will be told what to think.
Meanwhile there’s this: Trump concentrated his fire on Hilary actually having done nothing of substance in her 30 (later corrected to 26) years of public service — just talk talk talk. That approach may ultimately prove more lethal than the more obvious “Crooked Hillary.” I wonder if it was poll-tested. We’ll have to ask Kellyanne.
But before I sign off, I have to comment on what I think was the most significant moment of the debate and it came at the end. Hillary had just gone after Donald on the sexism issue — the beauty contest nonsense, etc. — and it seemed for a moment that Trump was going to come back at her on her dreadful family life the whole world knows about. But then he stopped himself. He didn’t turn into the mean Donald and turn off a whole bunch of people.
On Fox, immediately after the debate, Trump explained his decision to Sean Hannity. The candidate saw Chelsea in the audience and decided it was the wrong thing to do. Well done, Donald. This is the moment that may resonate in the weeks to come.
So now I have one last online poll to report. It’s from the ultra-liberal Slate and shows Trump in the lead by 9% with 42,000 votes cast. I assumed there were no Drudge links, but I checked anyway. There weren’t.
So did Trump win? Possibly. He seems not to have lost anyway, which was all he needed.
But remember, in 2012, after the first debate, the pundits (mostly the same ones) were pronouncing Obama dead. All together now, “Nobody knows anything.”
Hillary Calls NYC Explosion ‘Bombings,’ Slams Trump for ‘Bomb’
September 18, 2016Hillary Calls NYC Explosion ‘Bombings,’ Slams Trump for ‘Bomb’, Breitbart, Joel B. Pollak, September 17, 2016
(Here’s a video of Hillary’s press conference.
Trump’s remarks are at the end of the video.– DM)
Liz Kreutz / Twitter / Screen shot
Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton referred to the explosions in New York City as “bombings,” then attacked her Republican rival, Donald Trump, for using the word “bomb” before authorities had publicly confirmed the facts of the attack.
Clinton was speaking with reporters on her campaign airplane, reacting to an explosion inside a dumpster in the Chelsea neighborhood in Manhattan that injured nearly 30 people. Another explosive device was reportedly found elsewhere in the city. A pipe bomb had exploded earlier in the day in New Jersey, and a mass stabbing attack had taken place in Minnesota.
Trump told a campaign rally in Colorado Springs, Colorado: “Just before I got off the plane, a bomb went off in New York and nobody knows exactly what’s going on.” Journalists pounced on the statement:
(Video, apparently of the NY City Mayor at the link. I could not get it to load. — DM)
The Latest on NYC blast: Donald Trump declared “bomb went off” in Chelsea before officials released any details. https://t.co/T1Hbd5wRB2
— The Associated Press (@AP) September 18, 2016
CNN commented (in a news story): “Typically, national political figures use caution when describing unfolding situations and law enforcement actions.”
The following exchange, tweeted by ABC News’ Liz Kreutz, then occurred between Clinton and campaign reporters:
Hillary Clinton, on her campaign plane, responds to explosion in NYCpic.twitter.com/4tfyUE2vNc
— Liz Kreutz (@ABCLiz) September 18, 2016
Clinton: I’ve breen briefed about the bombings in New York and New Jersey, and the attack in Minnesota. Obviously, we need to do everything we can to support our first responders, also to pray for the victims. We have to let this investigation unfold. We’ve been in touch with various officials, including the mayor’s office in New York, to learn what they are discovering as they conduct this investigation. And I’ll have more to say about it when we actually know the facts?
Reporter: Secretary Clinton, Do you have any reaction to the fact that Donald Trump, immediately upon taking the stage tonight, called the explosion in New York a “bomb” … ?
Clinton: Well, I think it’s important to know the facts about any incident like this. That’s why it’s critical to support the first responders, the investigators who are looking into it, trying to determine what did happen.
She then added: “I think it’s always wiser to wait until you have information before making conclusions because we are just in the beginning stages of trying to determine what happened.”
However, as Politico (to its credit) noted: “… the Democrat used similar words in her initial public remarks about Saturday night’s explosion in Manhattan.”
The New York explosions appear to have been caused by improvised explosive devices. The second device found in Manhattan was reportedly a pressure cooker, apparently similar to the type used in the Boston Marathon bombing in 2013.
anneinpt
artaxes
danmillerinpanama
davidking1530
Peter Hofman
Joseph Wouk
Peter
Louisiana Steve
WarSclerotic 
Recent Comments