The 2016 US Election (Part III)

[Guardsman Bass]

TPM has an interesting piece on the financial connection of Trump and his adviser set to pro-Putin Russian businessmen:

2. Post-bankruptcy Trump has been highly reliant on money from Russia, most of which has over the years become increasingly concentrated among oligarchs and sub-garchs close to Vladimir Putin. Here's a good overview from The Washington Post, with one morsel for illustration ...

Read both articles: After his bankruptcy and business failures roughly a decade ago Trump has had an increasingly difficult time finding sources of capital for new investments. As I noted above, Trump has been blackballed by all major US banks with the exception of Deutschebank, which is of course a foreign bank with a major US presence. He has steadied and rebuilt his financial empire with a heavy reliance on capital from Russia. At a minimum the Trump organization is receiving lots of investment capital from people close to Vladimir Putin.

4. Then there's Paul Manafort, Trump's nominal 'campaign chair' who now functions as campaign manager and top advisor. Manafort spent most of the last decade as top campaign and communications advisor for Viktor Yanukovych, the pro-Russian Ukrainian Prime Minister and then President whose ouster in 2014 led to the on-going crisis and proxy war in Ukraine. Yanukovych was and remains a close Putin ally. Manafort is running Trump's campaign.

5. Trump's foreign policy advisor on Russia and Europe is Carter Page, a man whose entire professional career has revolved around investments in Russia and who has deep and continuing financial and employment ties to Gazprom.

. . . . .

7. Here's where it gets more interesting. This is one of a handful of developments that tipped me from seeing all this as just a part of Trump's larger shadiness to something more specific and ominous about the relationship between Putin and Trump. As TPM's Tierney Sneed explained in this article, one of the most enduring dynamics of GOP conventions (there's a comparable dynamic on the Dem side) is more mainstream nominees battling conservative activists over the party platform, with activists trying to check all the hardline ideological boxes and the nominees trying to soften most or all of those edges. This is one thing that made the Trump convention very different. The Trump Camp was totally indifferent to the platform. So party activists were able to write one of the most conservative platforms in history. Not with Trump's backing but because he simply didn't care. With one big exception: Trump's team mobilized the nominee's traditional mix of cajoling and strong-arming on one point: changing the party platform on assistance to Ukraine against Russian military operations in eastern Ukraine. For what it's worth (and it's not worth much) I am quite skeptical of most Republicans call for aggressively arming Ukraine to resist Russian aggression. But the single-mindedness of this focus on this one issue - in the context of total indifference to everything else in the platform - speaks volumes.

To put this all into perspective, if Vladimir Putin were simply the CEO of a major American corporation and there was this much money flowing in Trump's direction, combined with this much solicitousness of Putin's policy agenda, it would set off alarm bells galore. That is not hyperbole or exaggeration.

[Ralin]

Wow, that's some high grade conspiracy theory bullshit.

To recap, Trump has:

1) received 'capital' from people who are 'close to Vladmir Putin.' Which in this case means that they live in Russia and are rich, with the vague implication that they're...what? Taking orders from him on what businesses they invest in and who they loan money to? Agree with his policies and support him politically? Are we at war with Russia or something?

2) Employed a campaign manager who previously worked for a head of state (which was not Russia) who supports Putin. The horror.

3) Pushed a pro-Putin position on one issue, when outlining what the Republican Party will theoretically support if he wins.

None of which is in any way criminal, mind you. So no, not impressed. If Putin was the head of an American corporation I wouldn't even raise an eyebrow at 'evidence' like this.

[Gaidin]

No it's not legally impressive. It's a fun brick to throw back at the other side though if that's the only way he can fund his own company though if Trump wants to bitch about the Clinton Foundation though.

[Mr Bean]

No it's not legally impressive. It's a fun brick to throw back at the other side though if that's the only way he can fund his own company though if Trump wants to bitch about the Clinton Foundation though.

It's a fun brick except Secretary Clinton oversaw several Russian deals that were of course highly questionable. Things is something for a SP to raise not for her campaign to do so. It's like the infidelity things, Secretary Clinton can't exactly raz Trump on cheating on his wife as long as Bill is on the same planet as her without providing a easy obvious counter.

[Ralin]

It's like the infidelity things, Secretary Clinton can't exactly raz Trump on cheating on his wife as long as Bill is on the same planet as her without providing a easy obvious counter.

What kind of logic is that? Cheating and being cheated on are not equivalent.

[Gaidin]

Nah, let me be clear. I don't want Clinton to throw that around. I'm more talking about just the internet. An informal setting. I mean, when Trump's business literally gets blackballed by american banks he's going to go somewhere and it's going to start a chain of events to something. And look what happened. No politician is truly even going after Clinton for the same thing Trump is because she's not legally in control of the Clinton Foundation and hasn't been in a position to be for how long now? But that's just Trump's style. So now it's also being thrown around by the same conspiratorial nuts vaguely on some forums here and there on the internet. So that little bit about Trump is a nice, "well, you like these connect the dots bits...here you go". Not that they'll pay attention to it at all...

[Mr Bean]

What kind of logic is that? Cheating and being cheated on are not equivalent.

Political logic, Bill is a well know womanizer, he cheated on his wife multiple times and she stayed with him. In political psychology reminding people of this fact puts the WEAK label on Secretary Clinton.

After all if you get cheated on multiple times by your signifcant other what percentage of the population sees that as a STRONG act? The answer is not many, reminding people about infidelity reminds people about Bill's infidelity and the bad video's of Hillary attacking those women who said Bill had sexuality assaulted them and those women who simply said Bill had sex with them all as liars.

Culturally in our screwed up way, we accept cheaters more than we accept those who are cheated on but stay with their other. Either way it does not make Secretary Clinton sound more presidential so they sure as hell won't mention Trumps affairs.

*Edit to put it another way

Trump
Slept with multiple women
Cheated on his wife
Dumped wife for current hot wife
He's a cheater, he does not respect marriages and he likes banging hot women

Clinton
Called everyone crazy who said her husband was cheating
Personally attacked the women who said they had slept with her husband
Said publicly that Lewoinski was lying several times and she trusted her husband
Then the infamous dress comes out, she is shocked and chagrined
Forgives Bill
Still accuses all the other women of being liars

That's the extra bit, bringing it up reminds you that hey didn't Bill get accused of sexual misconduct as well as cheating?

[The Romulan Republic]

Following the email leak, Debbie Wasserman Schutlz appears to have been sacked as convention chair:

http://www.npr.org/2016/07/24/487242426 ... ot-a-shock

Amid furor over an email leak that revealed a bias against Bernie Sanders inside the Democratic National Committee, Debbie Wasserman Schultz is out as chair of the convention.

In an email to NPR, the office of Rep. Marcia Fudge said she "has been named permanent chair of the Democratic National Convention."

Sen. Bernie Sanders featured heavily in the hacked Democratic National Committee emails released by WikiLeaks Friday.
THE TWO-WAY
Leaked Democratic Party Emails Show Members Tried To Undercut Sanders
The emails, which were released by WikiLeaks just days before the party's convention launches in Philadelphia, appear to show top DNC officials trading ideas on how to hurt Sanders at the polls.

Philly.fyi Executive Director Billy Taylor holds permits to most of the park across from the convention.
POLITICS
Rallies, Marches And A 'Fart-In': Philadelphia Gets Ready For The DNC
In one email out of the 20,000 leaked, the committee's Chief Financial Officer Brad Marshall appears to float an idea to question Sanders' Jewish faith.

Bernie Sanders has called for DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz to resign for months, saying the committee always favored Clinton's campaign.
Bernie Sanders has called for DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz to resign for months, saying the committee always favored Clinton's campaign.
Richard Drew/AP
In an interview with CNN, Sanders, once again, called on Schultz to resign.

"It goes without saying the function of the DNC," Sanders said, "is to represent all of the candidates to be fair and even-minded."

Sanders also called the emails an "outrage" and "sad" but also that they do not come as "a great shock." He believes that the DNC was "at opposition to our campaign" all along, he said Sunday morning.

"I mean there's no question to my mind and I think no question to any objective observer's mind that the DNC was supporting Hillary Clinton, and was at opposition to our campaign," Sanders said.

Sanders also reiterated that he believes DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz should resign, something he's said for months. She should step down, he said, "not only because of the prejudice I think [the DNC] showed during the campaign but also because I think we need new leadership that will open up that party" to working people, young people and "have the kind of vitality we need."

Clinton has had a long-standing relationship with the DNC and Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Schultz was the co-chair of her 2008 bid for president. Sanders is a relative newcomer to the Democratic party and the DNC, having long served as an independent in the Senate.

Still, Sanders and others feel that the DNC chair should remain neutral during a nominating process.

"It goes without saying the function of the DNC," he continued, "is to represent all of the candidates to be fair and even-minded."

On NBC's Meet The Press, Sanders wouldn't say whether Schultz should be forced to resign before the Democratic convention begins. But some of his supporters went there — commentator and activist Van Jones tweeted that he'll speak out until she steps down:


She will not have a speaking role at this week's convention, according to several reports.

Blowback to the emails came from all corners of the political world Sunday — including Clinton supporters and Donald Trump.

Former DNC Chair and Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, who is a Clinton supporter, called the leak "very disturbing" if true and told NPR that the chair's job should be "to remain neutral."

"I sat in that chair in 2004 trying to navigate all the different candidates we had," he said. "But if you had people in there who were trashing one of the candidates, I can tell you this, if I were still chairman they wouldn't be working there. I mean, that is just totally unacceptable behavior," he said.

Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook also called the emails "disturbing" and something that "voters need to reflect on."

Donald Trump also blasted the emails via Twitter, saying they would make it hard for Sanders to continue supporting Clinton:



But Sanders maintained that his support for Clinton is strong, saying his immediate message to his supporters now is that "disastrous" Donald Trump must be defeated. "My second message is that we continue the political revolution."

Edit: Fixed quotes.

[The Romulan Republic]

Breaking news:

Shultz has resigned as party chair. She will remain through the convention, apparently, and will then stand down.

I'm loath to use CNN as a source, but they seem to be the only major organization reporting on it yet.

www.cnn.com/2016/07/22/politics/dnc-wikileaks-emails/

(CNN)Debbie Wasserman Schultz announced Sunday she is stepping down as chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee at the end of the party's convention, which is set to begin here Monday.

The Florida congresswoman's resignation -- under pressure from top Democrats -- comes amid the release of leaked emails that show DNC staffers favoring Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders in the party's 2016 primary contest.
Wasserman Schultz announced her resignation in a statement Sunday afternoon, saying she remains committed to seeing Clinton elected president. She talked with both President Barack Obama and Clinton before making her announcement.
"Going forward, the best way for me to accomplish those goals is to step down as Party Chair at the end of this convention," Wasserman Schultz said in the statement.
"As Party Chair, this week I will open and close the Convention and I will address our delegates about the stakes involved in this election not only for Democrats, but for all Americans," she continued. "We have planned a great and unified Convention this week and I hope and expect that the DNC team that has worked so hard to get us to this point will have the strong support of all Democrats in making sure this is the best convention we have ever had."
Wasserman Schultz had faced intense pressure this weekend to quit her post, several Democratic leaders told CNN, urging her to quell a growing controversy threatening to disrupt Clinton's nominating convention.
DNC Vice Chair Donna Brazile will serve as interim chair through the election, it was announced Sunday. She is a CNN political commentator.
Separately, a Democratic operative said Hispanic leaders close to Clinton and her high command were discussing Housing Secretary Julian Castro as a possible successor to Wasserman Schultz at the DNC helm.
Chants of "Debbie is don!e" and "Debbie resigned!" broke out at a pro-Sanders rally in Philadelphia after the news was announced.
Party officials decided Saturday that Wasserman Schultz would not have a major speaking role or preside over daily convention proceedings this week. The DNC Rules Committee has named Rep. Marcia Fudge, D-Ohio, as permanent chair of the convention, according to a DNC source. She will gavel each session to order and will gavel each session closed.
"She's been quarantined," another top Democrat said of Wasserman Schultz, following a meeting Saturday night but before her announcement that she was leaving.
Earlier Sunday, David Axelrod, a former top adviser to Obama's presidential campaigns and a CNN senior political commentator, said Wasserman Schultz should resign.
"I would ask her to step aside. I would ask her to step aside because she's a distraction in a week that is Hillary Clinton's week," Axelrod told CNN's Jake Tapper on "State of the Union."
After she announced she was resigning, Axelrod tweeted, "I find this quibbling over whether @DWStweets leaves now or Friday silly. What difference does it make? She's out. She's leaving. Move on!"
Obama issued a statement, saying, "For the last eight years, Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz has had my back. This afternoon, I called her to let her know that I am grateful."
"Her leadership of the DNC has meant that we had someone who brought Democrats together not just for my re-election campaign, but for accomplishing the shared goals we have had for our country," the president added.
And Clinton thanked Wasserman Schultz for her leadership of the party.
"I am grateful to Debbie for getting the Democratic Party to this year's historic convention in Philadelphia, and I know that this week's events will be a success thanks to her hard work and leadership," Clinton said.
Donald Trump also weighed in, tweeting and misspelling Wasserman Schultz's name, "Today proves what I have always known, that @Reince Priebus is the tough one and the smart one, not Debbie Wasserman Shultz (@DWStweets.)"
DNC hack: What you need to know
Wasserman Schultz had reluctantly agreed to relinquish her speaking role at the convention here, a sign of her politically fragile standing. But party leaders urged the Florida congresswoman to vacate her position as head of the party entirely in the wake of leaked emails suggesting the DNC favored Clinton during the primary and tried to take down Sanders by questioning his religion.
Wasserman Shultz had previously said she had no plans to seek re-election to her post as party leader when her term ends in January 2017.
Her stewardship of the DNC has been under fire through most of the presidential primary process, but her removal from the convention stage comes following the release of nearly 20,000 emails.
One email appears to show DNC staffers asking how they can reference Sanders' faith to weaken him in the eyes of Southern voters. Another seems to depict an attorney advising the committee on how to defend Hillary Clinton against an accusation by the Sanders campaign of not living up to a joint fundraising agreement.
Sanders: No question DNC was supporting Hillary Clinton

Sanders: No question DNC was supporting Hillary Clinton 02:08
Sanders on Sunday told Tapper the release of the DNC emails that show its staffers working against him underscores the position he's held for months: Wasserman Schultz needs to go.
"I don't think she is qualified to be the chair of the DNC, not only for these awful emails, which revealed the prejudice of the DNC, but also because we need a party that reaches out to working people and young people, and I don't think her leadership style is doing that," Sanders told Tapper on "State of the Union," on the eve of the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia.
"I am not an atheist," he said. "But aside from all of that, it is an outrage and sad that you would have people in important positions in the DNC trying to undermine my campaign. It goes without saying: The function of the DNC is to represent all of the candidates -- to be fair and even-minded."
He added: "But again, we discussed this many, many months ago, on this show, so what is revealed now is not a shock to me."
'It's gas meets flame'
The publication of the emails comes just a weekend before the start of the Democratic convention, where a major objective for Clinton will be to unify the Democratic party by winning over Sanders' voters.
Several Democratic sources told CNN that the leaked emails are a big source of contention and may inflame tensions between the Clinton and Sanders camps.
"It could threaten their agreement," one Democrat said, referring to the deal reached between Clinton and Sanders about the convention, delegates and the DNC. The party had agreed to include more progressive principles in its official platform and, as part of the agreement, Sanders dropped his fight to contest Wasserman Schultz as the head of the DNC.
"It's gas meets flame," the Democrat said.
The issue surfaced on Saturday at Clinton's first campaign event with Tim Kaine as her running mate, when a protester was escorted out of Florida International University in Miami. The protester shouted "DNC leaks" soon after Clinton thanked Wasserman Schultz for her leadership at the DNC.
The DNC has previously had its files hacked by an individual named "Guccifer 2.0" that may have had ties to the Russians.
Hackers stole opposition research on Donald Trump from the DNC's servers in mid-June. Two separate Russian intelligence-linked cyberattack groups were both in the DNC's networks.
This story is being updated frequently with new developments and additional information.
CNN's Dana Bash, Theodore Schleifer, Eugene Scott, Chris Frates, Elizabeth Landers, Brianna Keilar, Dan Merica, Ziris Savage and Betsy Klein contributed to this report.

Mixed feelings here. On the one hand, as a Sanders supporter, good fucking riddance to that disgrace to the Democratic Party, and I hope that she loses her primary.

On the other hand, this is a nice little clusterfuck to have going right into the convention.

She should have resigned long ago.

Also of grave concern is the possibility that the DNC was hacked by the Russian government. Putin is known to be friendly toward Trump (no surprise, given that Trump is talking about withdrawing from NATO and not defending our NATO allies), and this leak seems very well timed to hurt the Clinton campaign.

[Crown]

Seriously she had to go; if she stayed on Trump could just read from the leaked emails all day long and watched as Bernie supporters either stayed home, or worse turned out to vote for him.

*slow clap* for the DNC.

[Wild Zontargs]

...And she's straight into the (honorary) chair of the entire Hillary Clinton campaign. Officially this time, I mean.

Statements on the Resignation of Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman (emphasis mine)

Hillary Clinton issued the following statement:

"I want to thank my longtime friend Debbie Wasserman Schultz for her leadership of the Democratic National Committee over the past five years. I am grateful to Debbie for getting the Democratic Party to this year's historic convention in Philadelphia, and I know that this week's events will be a success thanks to her hard work and leadership. There's simply no one better at taking the fight to the Republicans than Debbie--which is why I am glad that she has agreed to serve as honorary chair of my campaign's 50-state program to gain ground and elect Democrats in every part of the country, and will continue to serve as a surrogate for my campaign nationally, in Florida, and in other key states. I look forward to campaigning with Debbie in Florida and helping her in her re-election bid--because as President, I will need fighters like Debbie in Congress who are ready on day one to get to work for the American people."

[Simon_Jester]

Well, she was apparently doing a great job as Hillary's campaign committee chair while heading the DNC, so she's clearly qualified to do the job!

[Gaidin]

Meh, if I were to keep her around for sheer "it's the same year" reasons I'd have at least done it as a ghost adviser instead of being so damn blatant about it.

[Block]

Is this really the best the party of the supposed intellectual elite can do? I mean, why not just hand Donny a hatchet and put your head on the block? Talk about cronyism.

[The Romulan Republic]

...And she's straight into the (honorary) chair of the entire Hillary Clinton campaign. Officially this time, I mean.

Statements on the Resignation of Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman (emphasis mine)

Hillary Clinton issued the following statement:

"I want to thank my longtime friend Debbie Wasserman Schultz for her leadership of the Democratic National Committee over the past five years. I am grateful to Debbie for getting the Democratic Party to this year's historic convention in Philadelphia, and I know that this week's events will be a success thanks to her hard work and leadership. There's simply no one better at taking the fight to the Republicans than Debbie--which is why I am glad that she has agreed to serve as honorary chair of my campaign's 50-state program to gain ground and elect Democrats in every part of the country, and will continue to serve as a surrogate for my campaign nationally, in Florida, and in other key states. I look forward to campaigning with Debbie in Florida and helping her in her re-election bid--because as President, I will need fighters like Debbie in Congress who are ready on day one to get to work for the American people."

Un-fucking-believable.

Clinton has just pissed in the faces of every Sanders supporter and reinforced every fear that she is corrupt, dishonest, and not dealing in good faith with progressives, even as Bernie is doing all he can to help her bring his supporters on board. And yet I have no doubt that if Clinton looses, people like Shultz will pin the blame on Bernie and his supporters and demand that the party go further to the Right, not the Left.

This doesn't even make sense. Its just so fucking stupid. It honestly makes me wonder if Shultz has blackmail material on Clinton, because otherwise this just doesn't fucking make sense. I mean, I knew Clinton was corrupt, but I didn't know that she was this stupid.

I can practically promise an ugly convention and a surge in Bernie or Bust now. I'll still vote for Clinton, because I feel morally obligated to do what I can to stop Trump from destroying our democracy, but on the off-chance that Clinton manages to still beat Trump after this insane, self-destructive stupidity, she could be the best President since FDR and I'd feel compelled to support a primary challenge in four years.

[The Romulan Republic]

You know, if it wasn't a nut like Trump on the other side, I would take this moment to tell the Clinton campaign to go fuck itself and go for a write-in. But I can't, because when there's a fascist in play, everything else is secondary.

[Grumman]

This doesn't even make sense. Its just so fucking stupid. It honestly makes me wonder if Shultz has blackmail material on Clinton, because otherwise this just doesn't fucking make sense. I mean, I knew Clinton was corrupt, but I didn't know that she was this stupid.

I can practically promise an ugly convention and a surge in Bernie or Bust now. I'll still vote for Clinton, because I feel morally obligated to do what I can to stop Trump from destroying our democracy, but on the off-chance that Clinton manages to still beat Trump after this insane, self-destructive stupidity, she could be the best President since FDR and I'd feel compelled to support a primary challenge in four years.

"If it's stupid but it works, it isn't stupid."

As long as you're willing to vote her into power, why should she care what you think of her? How is she stupid for slapping you in the face if you'll still go out of your way to make her President?

[The Romulan Republic]

Because while I will vote for her regardless, there are others who won't.

Its really not hard to understand.

I suspect that, following Sanders' endorsement, she foolishly concluded that she could take progressive/Sanders voters for granted.

My concern (and yes, its a concern, because how much I dislike Clinton for this shit I loath Trump a hell of a lot more) is that this was a premature conclusion.

Edit: I suppose we'll see when the next round of polls come out weather this'll just blow over, or weather she'll have to start from scratch, minus a lot of time and credibility, on winning over doubtful Sanders supporters.

[Alyrium Denryle]

This doesn't even make sense. Its just so fucking stupid. It honestly makes me wonder if Shultz has blackmail material on Clinton, because otherwise this just doesn't fucking make sense. I mean, I knew Clinton was corrupt, but I didn't know that she was this stupid.

A) she's not that corrupt. Good job drinking the GOP Kool Aid.
B) Shultz has had shit thrown at her for two years. Even the leaked emails were in real terms of little consequence. They're like the fucking climate-gate emails in terms of their actual substance.

You mean the DNC establishment does not like the guy who is trying to tear down their political baby with open accusations of corruption and a hostile takeover? SHOCK AND SURPRISE! You mean they spit-balled (admittedly shameful) strategies they ended up never using? Holy Shit! That NEVER HAPPENS. Oh wait. It happens all the time. I am rather confident that if someone hacked into Sanders Campaign emails and leaked them, we would find all kinds of rancid crap.

C) Of all people, Hillary Clinton knows what it is like to be dragged through the mud. It might not be a smart move, but reaching out to cushion someone's fall from grace due to a bullshit scandal? That is totally understandable.

[The Romulan Republic]

This doesn't even make sense. Its just so fucking stupid. It honestly makes me wonder if Shultz has blackmail material on Clinton, because otherwise this just doesn't fucking make sense. I mean, I knew Clinton was corrupt, but I didn't know that she was this stupid.

A) she's not that corrupt. Good job drinking the GOP Kool Aid.

I consider this misrepresentative and insulting.

I don't give two shits what the Republicans say about her.

I do care about her pattern of apparent dishonesty toward progressives, her race-baiting against Obama in 2008, and the well-documented misconduct (even if it didn't rise to a level of warranting a criminal conviction) in the email scandal. Among other things.

Its not just Republicans who have concerns about Clinton's integrity any more.

B) Shultz has had shit thrown at her for two years. Even the leaked emails were in real terms of little consequence. They're like the fucking climate-gate emails in terms of their actual substance.

You mean the DNC establishment does not like the guy who is trying to tear down their political baby with open accusations of corruption and a hostile takeover? SHOCK AND SURPRISE! You mean they spit-balled (admittedly shameful) strategies they ended up never using? Holy Shit! That NEVER HAPPENS. Oh wait. It happens all the time. I am rather confident that if someone hacked into Sanders Campaign emails and leaked them, we would find all kinds of rancid crap.

Probably. And for what its worth, I think that there are some people who probably should have been let go from the Sanders campaign.

But will you at least acknowledge that regardless of weather you feel the hostility towards Schultz is merited, this seems politically tone-deaf on Clinton's part?

C) Of all people, Hillary Clinton knows what it is like to be dragged through the mud. It might not be a smart move, but reaching out to cushion someone's fall from grace due to a bullshit scandal? That is totally understandable.

Perhaps.

But frankly, of all the people she could stick her neck out for, freaking Schultz?

Even a lot of people who aren't Sanders supporters seem to dislike her.

[Knife]

I don't know, it looks like she is just expecting the massive splits in the GOP to put her into office and ignoring the split going on in the Dem side. I'm not sure that is wise. Sure, the Democratic party isn't coming apart at the seems like the GOP is, but there is still some serious pressure and in fighting going on and alienating some of your base isn't going to help come November. I guess a lot of people aren't going to vote for crazy but either being or appearing super corrupt isn't going to make it easy for a lot of people to decide either.

If she loses there will be a lot of 'you didn't vote for her because she's a woman' but then a lot of people will point to this, the DNC, the email scandal (as bullshit as it was), and various other things and go 'fuck off with that shit'. I'm still having a hard time deciding what I'll do in November.

[The Romulan Republic]

They won't just blame sexism if she loses. They'll blame Bernie, blame progressives, and potentially the party will swing to the Right to try to "compete" with Republicans. That's one of the things I fear the most.

Edit: Its also one of the reasons why it is essential for progressives and Sanders supporters to back her wholeheartedly.

[FireNexus]

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5794c ... 80b52f4bed

POLITICS
Trump Threatens To Pull The U.S. Out Of The World Trade Organization
Add it to the list.
22 hours ago | Updated 22 hours ago
Sam Stein Senior Politics Editor, The Huffington Post

ASSOCIATED PRESS
Donald Trump doesn’t like international institutions.
Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump said on Sunday that he would consider pulling the United States out of the World Trade Organization should he end up winning the election.

The comments, made to NBC’s “Meet the Press,” are the latest in a series of Trump threats to pull the U.S. away from international institutions and compacts. Trump’s disgust for trade deals is well-known. And in the midst of his convention in Cleveland, he reiterated to The New York Times that he would not come to the aid of NATO allies if they hadn’t fully paid their dues to the organization.

Trump’s distaste for the WTO appears to be based on his view that it’s helped create a trade imbalance for the United States ― though he doesn’t explicitly say that; he merely calls the organization “a disaster.”

Trump said that he would like to levy a tax of somewhere between 15 and 35 percent on the products of U.S. companies that move their production jobs overseas. When “Meet the Press” host Chuck Todd told him that some of those hikes “aren’t going to get through” the WTO, the Republican nominee responded in kind.

“Then we’re going to renegotiate or we’re going to pull out,” he said. “These trade deals are a disaster, Chuck. You know, the World Trade Organization is a disaster.”

This is getting to be some Special Circumstances shit. I half expect Diziet Sma to appear on Meet The Press and endorse Bernie Sanders at this point.

[Alyrium Denryle]

I consider this misrepresentative and insulting.

I don't give two shits what the Republicans say about her.

Gee, that is a shock, because you and a significant chunk of our fellow democrats have swallowed the "Hillary is Corrupt" bullshit hook, line, and sinker.

I do care about her pattern of apparent dishonesty toward progressives

Reference needed.

her race-baiting against Obama in 2008

You mean the Birther thing that did not start with her campaign, but rather the loony fringe of her supporters? That one. That thing she repeatedly repudiated?

I will admit, my memory could be in error there. Please correct if warranted.

and the well-documented misconduct (even if it didn't rise to a level of warranting a criminal conviction) in the email scandal.

You mean the private email server that had been pretty much standard practice for every SecState since the advent of email, that was necessary to do the job?

Protip: If the rules and regulations make it impossible to perform the duties listed in your job description, and those duties are necessary, the problem is not with whatever workarounds you create. It is with the regulations. No misconduct.

Or would you rather the CIA have unlimited drone target authority without state department oversight?

.....

And none of the above, even if I grant your entire argument, constitutes corruption. Other things yes. Corruption no. Corruption is something very specific.

But will you at least acknowledge that regardless of weather you feel the hostility towards Schultz is merited, this seems politically tone-deaf on Clinton's part?

Oh of course it is tone-deaf. No one rational will argue it is not tone-deaf. When I saw it I literally beat my head into my desk.

[Wild Zontargs]

The DNC may have violated Federal law by offering special consideration for federal appointments to their top donors.

18 U.S. Code § 599 - Promise of appointment by candidate

Whoever, being a candidate, directly or indirectly promises or pledges the appointment, or the use of his influence or support for the appointment of any person to any public or private position or employment, for the purpose of procuring support in his candidacy shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if the violation was willful, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.

18 U.S. Code § 600 - Promise of employment or other benefit for political activity

Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment, position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit, provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress, or any special consideration in obtaining any such benefit, to any person as consideration, favor, or reward for any political activity or for the support of or opposition to any candidate or any political party in connection with any general or special election to any political office, or in connection with any primary election or political convention or caucus held to select candidates for any political office, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

Leaked DNC Documents Show Plans To Reward Big Donors With Federal Appointments

Democratic National Committee documents recently released by WikiLeaks include spreadsheets and emails that appear to show party officials planning which donors and prominent fundraisers to provide with appointments to federal boards and commissions.

The documents, which were circulated among top DNC officials in April, could raise legal questions for the party, says Ken Boehm, the chairman of the National Legal and Policy Center, a government watchdog group.

“The disclosed DNC emails sure look like the potential Clinton Administration has intertwined the appointments to federal government boards and commissions with the political and fund raising operations of the Democratic Party,” Boehm told The Daily Caller.

“That is unethical, if not illegal.”

The records, which WikiLeaks released along with nearly 20,000 hacked DNC emails and other documents on Friday, also expose one of the Beltway’s worst kept secrets: that wealthy politicos can often buy their way to presidential appointments.

President Obama has been criticized for appointing dozens of top fundraisers — called “bundlers” in the political fundraising realm — to ambassadorships and other cushy federal positions.

The spreadsheet — which was accompanied by emails sent between officials with the DNC’s finance team — contains 23 names of little-known corporate executives and professional fundraisers who have donated to the committee and various Democratic political action committees.

The proposed appointments also provide more evidence that the DNC favored Clinton over her former primary challenger, Bernie Sanders.

Most of the donors listed on the spreadsheet have given to Clinton’s campaign. None gave to Sanders.

DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz was forced to resign on Sunday because of the anti-Sanders bias that showed up in documents released by WikiLeaks.


It is unclear from the DNC spreadsheet if any of the people on the list made specific requests for federal appointments.

But one tip-off that the document is detailing a quid pro quo is an entry next to the name of David Shapira, the executive chairman of grocery store chain Giant Eagle, Inc.

“USPS” — a likely reference to the U.S. Postal Service — is entered on the spreadsheet.

President Obama nominated Shapira for a position on the USPS’ board of governors last year but the retail executive did not take the position because congressional Republicans held up his nomination.

Shapira and his wife Cynthia have donated heavily to Clinton, the DNC and other Democratic and liberal political action committees.

They have given the $2,700 maximum to Clinton. In 2014, Shapira contributed $100,000 to American Unity PAC, a political action committee that supports pro-LGBT candidates.

Cynthia Shapira has given $33,400 to the DNC this cycle and $58,400 to the Hillary Victory Fund since last year.

The Shapiras did not respond to a request for comment.

The donor spreadsheet is included in an email chain in which Jordan Kaplan, DNC’s national finance director, asks other officials to provide names of donors they want to propose for federal commissions.

“Last call for boards and commissions,” Kaplan wrote on April 20.

“If you have someone, send to [DNC finance chief of staff Scott] Comer – full name, city, state, email and phone number. Send as many as you want, just don’t know how many people will get to.”

The email confused at least one official involved in the exchange.

“Boards and commissions? Sorry, I’m lost,” wrote Jordan Vaughn, the national finance director for the DNC’s African American Leadership Council.

Comer explained: “Any folks who you’d like to be considered to be on the board of (for example) USPS, NEA, NEH. Basically anyone who has a niche interest and might like to serve on the board of one of these orgs.”

“I should say, though, that the likelihood of landing a spot on ones as prestigious as NEA/USPS is unlikely,” Comer added, referring to the National Endowment for the Arts and the U.S. Postal Service.

“It’s much more likely they’ll get something like ‘President’s Commission on the Celebration of Women in American History.’ (no shade to women) But when you submit your names, we don’t need specific designations,” he continued.

Luis Miranda, the DNC’s communications director and Wasserman Schultz’s right-hand man, did not respond to a request for comment on the email chain and the spreadsheet.

Boehn, who once served as chairman for the political action committee Citizens for Reagan, says that the fact that Democrats are lining up appointments to federal committees months before the general election is strong evidence of a quid pro quo.

“Having participated in the boards and commissions work for President-elect Reagan, I know there’s no need to involve partisans months before the election,” he told TheDC. “These appointments are made on a staggered basis so there’s no rush.”

“As with so much associated with the Clinton operations, there is an appearance that these appointments have been pressed into service as a device to raise funds.”

The DNC list also includes David Trone. He’s the wine and beer retailer from Maryland who made national news earlier this year when he spent $13 million of his own money on an unsuccessful campaign for a U.S. House seat.

He has maxed out his donations to Clinton and has given $334,000 to the Democratic Hope Fund. He also gave the maximum $33,400 to the DNC in November.

Martin Elling is named in the document. He’s a senior partner at the consulting firm McKinsey & Company. He’s given maximum donations to the DNC as well as to the Clinton campaign. He has also contributed $10,000 to super PAC supporting Clinton.

Another notable name is A. Robert Pietrzak. He’s global co-ahead law firm Sidley Austin’s securities and shareholder litigation practice. In that role he defends clients against securities class action lawsuits.

He has previous experience as a member of a federal commission. He once served on the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s Financial Products Advisory Committee.

He has maxed out to Clinton as well as to the DNC.

Wayne Jordan, a real estate developer from northern California, is also on the list. He has donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to various Democratic groups.

He gave $337,400 to the Hillary Victory Fund in December.

One person on the list appears to already hold a committee spot in the Obama administration.

Wade Randlett serves on the Advisory Committee for Trade Policy and Negotiations. A prominent donor to the DNC, the Clinton campaign and other Democratic PACs, he is CEO of General Biofuels.

A redacted summary of the email chain (original contained personal information):

The donor spreadsheet is included in an email chain in which Jordan Kaplan, DNC’s national finance director, asks other officials to provide names of donors they want to propose for federal commissions.

“Last call for boards and commissions,” Kaplan wrote on April 20.

“If you have someone, send to [DNC finance chief of staff Scott] Comer – full name, city, state, email and phone number. Send as many as you want, just don’t know how many people will get to.”

The email confused at least one official involved in the exchange.

“Boards and commissions? Sorry, I’m lost,” wrote Jordan Vaughn, the national finance director for the DNC’s African American Leadership Council.

Comer explained: “Any folks who you’d like to be considered to be on the board of (for example) USPS, NEA, NEH. Basically anyone who has a niche interest and might like to serve on the board of one of these orgs.”

“I should say, though, that the likelihood of landing a spot on ones as prestigious as NEA/USPS is unlikely,” Comer added, referring to the National Endowment for the Arts and the U.S. Postal Service.

“It’s much more likely they’ll get something like ‘President’s Commission on the Celebration of Women in American History.’ (no shade to women) But when you submit your names, we don’t need specific designations,” he continued.