Browse Day

October 31, 2016

Donna Brazile’s Corrupt Silent Partner

Reading Time: 2 minutes

donna brazile and hillary clinton

Since its revelation in WikiLeaks two weeks ago, Donna Brazile has been justly excoriated for cheating on behalf of Hillary Clinton by passing along a debate question.

However, an important aspect to this story has been overlooked. As the saying goes, it takes two to tango. Yes, Donna Brazile sent a critically beneficial piece of information – but Hillary Clinton accepted it.

Mrs. Clinton accepted it (stealing), used it (cheating), and said nothing (lying). Then, when that moment came, she delivered her perfectly prepared answer to an eager audience in the midst of a hotly contested primary election debate (rigging).

An honest candidate would have immediately refused Ms. Brazile’s illicit offering; perhaps quietly, but certainly firmly.

An honest candidate could have even grandstanded on stage at the debate and said, “Mr. Martin, I cannot in good conscience answer your question, because somehow, I was made aware that you would be asking me that, and so I have an unfair advantage.”

Heck, an honest candidate could have even shared the question with her opponent prior to the debate in order even the playing field.

But none of those things happened.

Two weeks ago, when the revelation of Donna Brazile’s betrayal of democratic principles first came to light, instead of confessing to her wrongdoing and resigning with at least a shred of dignity, she blamed the Russians. It was hard to watch.

And by the way, what did her employers do? Neither the Democratic Party nor CNN did anything. They stood silent – which speaks volumes to their character and trustworthiness.

Today, WikiLeaks fulfilled their promise with the publication of a second wave of Donna Brazile’s corruption in sneaking debate questions to Team Hillary. CNN did what they should have done then, and severed all ties. But the Democrat Party hasn’t (as of this writing).

The friend and allies of Team Hillary – aka the Media – will want to make this story all about “The Dishonesty of Donna Brazile.” But understand that is a distraction.

The villain of this story isn’t Donna Brazile, the sidekick wannabe who offered stolen information. It is Hillary Clinton, the corrupt candidate who repeatedly took the illicit offering, used it, and said nothing.

The bottom line is that once again, Hillary Clinton is empirically proven to be a patently dishonest person who steals, cheats, lies, and rigs. And there is nothing – not a damn thing – that indicates her behavior will change any time soon. Why should it? Up until now, her corruption has consistently been lavishly rewarded by the corporate and political elitists in power.

Americans have had a bellyful of this elitist corruption. On November 8, we will begin in earnest to #DrainTheSwamp.

Seems Like Obama Is Tired of Hillary’s S***

Reading Time: 2 minutes

You might have dated someone who was amazingly good looking. Everything’s great. For awhile. Then you get to know the person. A little too well. Maybe it’s on a weekend trip. Or, God forbid, when you move in together. Then you realize looks aren’t everything.

The same thing can happen in political “marriages.” That surface quality that attracted you—donors, influence, contacts, whatever—sometimes isn’t worth the price.

Just ask Barack Obama.

You probably expected President Obama to jump on the “Comey is Satan” bandwagon. After all, the entire Democrat Nation has been reading from the exact same talking points memo: FBI Director James Comey is trying to throw the election to Donald Trump.

Barack Obama hired Hillary as Secretary of State. Obama defended her throughout the investigation of her rogue email server. He endorsed her. He’s campaigned with her. 

So any logical person would expect Obama to defend Hillary by attacking Comey. Surely, Robbie Mook emailed the President a copy of the talking points memo.

But Obama’s not playing. At least, not yet.

Today, the White House reaffirmed its faith in James Comey’s integrity and professionalism, specifically rejecting the Democrat talking point that Comey is trying to affect the election.

From Presidential spokesman John Earnest via Zerohedge:

“President Obama doesn’t think Comey tried to influence the election.”

and

“Obama still believes Comey has ‘good character'”

Now contrast that with Harry Reid’s accusation. Reid accused Comey of violating the Hatch Act which prohibits federal employees from campaigning for candidates. (If only that law were ever enforced.)

So what gives?

Some people say Obama is simply being Presidential. He’s taking the high ground in public. Maybe Obama asked himself “What would George H.W. Bush do?” If so, Obama got it right. Establishment Republicans always go all squishy.

But do you remember Obama taking the high ground before? 

This is the same Barack Obama who berated the Supreme Court during a State of the Union address. This is the same Obama who mocked the Tea Party. This is the same Obama who inspired an article calling him “abuser in chief.” You’ll find in that article how Obama used frivolous lawsuits to clear his path to election to the Illinois Senate. And that was just the start.

When confronted with a challenge, Obama drops decorum faster than Anthony Weiner drops his pants.

I think Obama, like you and me, has grown sick and tired of Hillary’s crap. He’s trying to build a legacy, yet the Wikileaks show that Hillary sucked her former boss into her web of crime and lies. Obama corresponded with Hillary using an alias. Obama knew the email server was illegal, but he was afraid to cross the woman. So he gave in.

Now, Hillary is destroying his image along with her own. Obama sees that the Clinton stain runs deep. And it stinks. And he’s sick of it. Like so many who’ve worked with the Clintons, Barack Obama is tired of fixing her screw-ups.

So Obama undermined Hillary’s entire narrative. He told the American people “don’t believe what she’s telling you about James Comey.” In the process, he’s signaled his supporters (i.e., young people and blacks) that “you can’t trust this woman.”

No matter how good Hillary looked in 2008, Obama has grown sick of her crap.

 

Have Voters Priced In Clinton’s Criminality?

Reading Time: 1 minutes

You never expect a candidate’s surrogates to tell you their candidate is a crook. But that’s exactly what Hillary’s surrogates are telling you now.

From Bill Richardson to Robby Mook, Clinton surrogates are reciting a strange and disturbing talking point: Voters have “baked in” Clinton’s life of crime.

[FLASHBACK: I gave James Comey the benefit of the doubt in July]

The talking point seems meant to keep Democrats from panicking over the FBI’s re-opened criminal investigation of Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation. I guess the talking point’s author thinks voters are like the stock market. When bad news about the economy strikes, analysts say the news was “priced in” to stocks already, so there’s no need to sell.

Democrats are saying that corruption and crime are synonymous with the Clinton brand, and people are okay with that? People who vote for Hillary know they’re voting for a hardened criminal. Apparently, these people prefer crooks over honest candidates.

That’s terrifying when you think about it. It means that voters, especially women, have no morals or scruples. They’re okay with committing felonies to get what they want.

I think Richardson and Mook are wrong. I think American people, including women, reject crime. And I think huge numbers of American voters will turn against crooked Hillary in the next week. A poll shows that 34 percent of voters are less likely to vote for Hillary because of these crimes.

Good people don’t elect crooks like Clinton, and everybody wants to be a good person, don’t you?