Tag Archives: Hillary Clinton

Donna Brazile confesses: yes, she gave questions to Hillary Clinton

Posted on by

All along Donna Brazile, CNN, Hillary Clinton, the Demorats, the DNC, Debbie Wassermann Schultz, John Podesta, the American Media Maggots insisted and maintained that Donna Brazile did not provide debate questions in advance to Hillary Rodham Clinton, so that she would have a tactical debate advantage over Donald Trump during the presidential candidacy.

We knew that was false, and so did Donald Trump. Concurrently, the “mainstream media” — what I term the American Media Maggots — was wounded and bled martyrdom by insisting the only fake news in town was everyone but them.

Now we discover two very important things:

  • Donna Brazile was in fact lying, and
  • The MSM continues to confirm they are Fake News

From the WashingtonExaminer.com:

Donna Brazile finally admits she shared debate questions with Clinton campaign

by Eddie Scarry

Veteran Democratic operative Donna Brazile finally admitted that she used her former position as a CNN commentator to relay questions ahead of debates to Hillary Clinton during the Democratic primary.

For months, Brazile has avoided confirming that hacked emails from the campaign showed her forwarding the questions, which were asked at separate debates. But in a new essay for Time magazine looking back on the hackings, she said it was true.

“[I]n October, a subsequent release of emails revealed that among the many things I did in my role as a Democratic operative and [Democratic National Committee] Vice Chair prior to assuming the interim D.N.C. Chair position was to share potential town hall topics with the Clinton campaign,” she said.

Of course you did. Anyone halfway paying attention or possessing half a wheelhouse — oh wait, sorry, that leaves out the majority of Demorats and all Leftists, progressives and anarchists — could intuit, considering history, that Donna Brazile was lying her arse off. She continued to lie whilst holding the position of temporary DNC chair, following the problems with Debbie Wasserman Schultz under whose guidance a leak of internal DNC emails occurred, which clearly showed Demorats obviously favoring Hillary Clinton during the presidential primary and plotting against Clinton’s rival, Bernie Sanders.

Guess who won the nomination? It wasn’t Bernie Sanders.

And who had a front row, primary seat in this corruption?

Correct. Donna Brazile.

Brazile herself refuted the claim every time she was pressed on the issue.

“My job was to make all our Democratic candidates look good, and I worked closely with both campaigns to make that happen,” she said. “But sending those emails was a mistake I will forever regret.”

Brazile has since resigned from CNN.

Notice how, when Demorats are corrupt, cheat or do something wrong or illegal, it’s simply a “mistake.” A “miscalculation.” An “error.” A “prevarication.” It’s seldom if ever a lie. But those of us familiar with the English language know a lie when we see or hear one.

Is Donna Brazile ashamed or mortified? Of course not. From TheHill.com (h/t to Well Seasoned Fool):

For the good of the party: It’s time for Donna Brazile to go

by Norman Soloman

It’s time for Donna Brazile to go.

Like Debbie Wasserman Schultz before her, Brazile has lost credibility as an honest broker at the Democratic National Committee. The DNC chair should be evenhanded — but, thanks to leaked emails, Brazile’s cover is blown.

Cover. Interesting choice of words. “Cover.”

At the same time that Brazile was publicly claiming to be neutral in the fierce Clinton-Sanders primary battle, she was using her job as a CNN political analyst to give the Clinton campaign advance notice of questions that would be asked during a CNN debate between the two candidates.

Yet Brazile seems tone deaf about her integrity breach — just as the Democratic Party establishment has been tone deaf about the corrosive effects of servicing Wall Street and wealthy contributors. 

“Tone deaf.” Again, interesting choice of words. Me, I think I’d exchange those two words for one word: liar. But hell, that’s just my bias about the truth coming through.

As the Washington Post reported a week ago, “Donna Brazile is not apologizing for leaking CNN debate questions and topics to the Hillary Clinton campaign during the Democratic primary. Her only regret, it seems, is that she got caught.”

Correct; just like, hmmm, well, let’s see. Hillary Clinton, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, John Podesta, the DNC, I could go on and on. But here’s the best part.

Consider Brazile’s response after the email hack exposed the chasm between her public claims of being evenhanded and her furtive effort to help Clinton gain an improper debate advantage over Sanders. “My conscience, as an activist, as a strategist — my conscience is very clear,” Brazile said in a radio interview, adding that “if I had to do it all over again, I would know a hell of a lot more about cybersecurity.”

What did she learn? To cheat more efficiently. What did the DNC learn? To cheat more efficiently. What did the Demorats learn in general?

It’s seldom if ever their fault. The Demorats and Leftists no more possess the attribute of introspection or self-examination than does the average paramecium. Even a single mecium.

Frankly, I’m surprised this was even revealed at all.

BZ

 

 Share

DEMOCRATS meet with and LOVE RUSSIANS

Posted on by

Little Chuckie Schumer loves the Russians.

Drudge Powers Trump Counter-Attack on Russia

by Gideon Resnick

On Friday afternoon, President Trump tweeted an image of Senator Chuck Schumer standing next to Russian President Vladimir Putin. It depicts the two men seemingly cordially holding coffee and donuts.

Let’s be honest  Who knows what kind of communications may have occurred sub rosa between Schumer and Russia’s leader himself? Even President Trump himself hasn’t yet physically met with Vladimir Putin. Schumer did. Why was that? Why? Was it a clandestine meet in plain sight? What messages were passed? Can you tell me? Does anyone know?

Nancy Pelosi said she hadn’t met with any Russians. Despite there being Russian Hill in San Francisco. Was Nancy Pelosi a liar? Yes, apparently she was. Here is the photo.

Then, from Politico.com:

Photo contradicts Pelosi’s statement about not meeting Kislyak

by Kyle Cheney

The Democratic House leader sat with the Russian ambassador and other officials in 2010.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Friday that she’s never met with the current Russian ambassador, Sergey Kislyak.

“Not with this Russian ambassador, no,” Pelosi told POLITICO’s Jake Sherman and Anna Palmer during a Playbook interview, when asked whether she had ever met with the Russian envoy.

But wait, there’s more.

But a file photo from Pelosi’s 2010 meeting with Russian President Dmitriy Medvedev shows Kislyak at the table across from Pelosi — then House speaker — and Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.). Medvedev had been in the country for a meeting with President Barack Obama a day earlier and stopped in on Capitol Hill to meet with congressional leaders as well.

Fine. But let’s look at the video where Nancy Pelosi, in all her stilted Katherine Helmond/ Lewy Body/Alzheimers glory, attempted to refute the obvious (kudos to the movie Brazil by Terry Gilliam).

Remember, this is the same Nancy Pelosi who held a secret fundraiser for Islamists and Hamas-linked groups in 2012, from the DailyCaller.com:

Democratic leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi headlined a high-dollar fundraiser in May that was attended by U.S.-based Islamist groups and individuals linked by the U.S. government to the Hamas jihad group and to the Egypt-based Muslim Brotherhood movement.

The donors at the undisclosed May 16 event included Nihad Awad, the co-founder of the Council on American Islamic Relations, according to data provided by the nonpartisan Investigative Project on Terrorism.

The CAIR group was named an unindicted conspirator in a 2007 trial of a Hamas money-smuggling group.

A covertly-taken photograph provided by the IPT shows Pelosi standing near Awad at the fundraiser. Roughly 30 people attended the fundraiser, according to the IPT (International Project on Terrorism, whose story and link can be found here.)

Stop. Wasn’t it Barack Hussein Obama who said, in 2008, sotto voce, to then Russian President Medvedev, that he would be more conciliatory to Russia upon re-election?

The words were: “This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.”

Then there was the proverbial “Russian Reset” by an ignorant Obama administration represented by Hillary Rodham Clinton who got the words WRONG on the physical “Russian Reset” button itself.

Nancy Pelosi loves the Russians. Little Chuckie Schumer loves the Russians.

The Demorats love the Russians.

And it wasn’t just one Demorat embracing the Rooskies.

Flashback: Numerous Dems, Obama Also Met with Russian Ambassador

While Democrats feverishly sought Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ resignation after he was revealed to have had encounters with Russian diplomats, photos and records show dems also met with the same Russian ambassador to little fanfare.

In fact the Russian ambassador whom Sessions is accused of meeting visited the Obama administration White House no less than 20 times, and even sat with Democrats at Trump’s congressional address Tuesday.

You might find this a bit troubling to locate because of all the advertisement-ridden flotsam that currently exists between yourself and way too many so-called “conservative” websites courtesy of the “make me wait five seconds” monetizers.

But not on BZ, because I don’t exist to make cash. I exist to bring you the unmitigated truth. You have not and will never see ONE advertisement on BZ.

Photos from earlier this week show Russia’s US ambassador Sergey Kislyak preparing to sit among democrats at the president’s first address to Congress.

Fox News reports that seven other Democrat senators also previously met with Kislyak, one of whom had claimed she had never met with any Russian ambassadors during her time on the Armed Services Committee.

Really?

I’d suspect quite so.

Then again, media bias? I’d suspect not so much but, in retrospect, I’d be way wrong. Because in terms of media bias, I have this from NewsBusters.org:

HYPOCRISY: 7X More Coverage for Sessions Debacle than Holder Contempt

by Mike Ciandella and Rich Noyes

If you ever doubted that the media see the news through a partisan prism, consider this: in less than two days, ABC, CBS and NBC devoted nearly 7 times as much coverage to Jeff Sessions meeting with the Russian Ambassador in his role as a U.S. Senator than they did when then-Attorney General Eric Holder was held in contempt of Congress in June 2012.

On March 2, Democrats accused Sessions of misleading Congress by not disclosing that he met with the Russian ambassador to the United States twice while he was serving as Senator. Despite admitting that the statements Sessions made to Congress “would not be considered false under the law” (Jan Crawford, CBS Evening News, March 2), ABC, CBS and NBC devoted more than 1 hour and 12 minutes to this topic, just on the morning and evening shows of March 2 and the morning shows of March 3.

Imagine that.

Add it all up, and the unprecedented contempt charge against Obama’s Attorney General earned only 10 minutes, 38 seconds of network airtime, or only slightly more than one-seventh of that spent in 1.5 days over Sessions’ meeting with the Ambassador.

Finally, from the UKDailyMail.com, two days ago.

SIX more Democratic leaders are revealed to have met with Russian Ambassador amid campaign to discredit Trump’s aides for doing the same

by Karen Ruiz

  • Six Democratic leaders were revealed to have been in a meeting with Russia’s Ambassador with Claire McCaskill 
  • Democratic Senator McCaskill denied ever meeting with Russian Ambassador 
  • Old tweets proved the lawmaker had met with Sergey Kislyak in 2013 
  • Attorney General Jeff Sessions failed to disclose during his confirmation hearing that he spoke with Russia’s ambassador twice last year 
  • McCaskill and other Democratic leaders including Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer called for Sessions’ resignation

As Democratic Senator Claire McCaskill’s claims that she had never met with Sergey Kislyak were proven to be untrue, six more Democrats have been revealed to have met with the Russian Ambassador.

Senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Maria Cantwell of Washington, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Jack Reed of Rhode Island, Robert Casey of Pennsylvania and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island sat in on the meeting with Kislyak and McCaskill, Fox News reported. 

The seven Democratic leaders met with the ambassador to discuss the blockade of US adoptions in Russia in 2013.

Lies and more lies on the part of Demorats.

On the other hand — worse for each and every Leftist — Trump is now at a 53% approval rating.

Let’s just say: it would be accurate to state the Demorats have met the hell out of the Russians.

BZ

 

 Share

CIA to Trump: we have you in our gunsights

Posted on by

As with many things in politics, you have to possess the ability to read between the lines. A new story from the WaPo made me conduct such an examination.

First, the story from the WashingtonPost.com:

Intelligence chiefs briefed Trump and Obama on unconfirmed claims Russia has compromising information on president-elect

by Greg Miller

A classified report delivered to President Obama and President-elect Donald Trump last week included a section summarizing allegations that Russian intelligence services have compromising material and information on Trump’s personal life and finances, U.S. officials said.

The officials said that U.S. intelligence agencies have not corroborated those allegations, but believed that the sources involved in the reporting were credible enough to warrant inclusion of their claims in the highly classified report on Russian interference in the presidential campaign.

If true, the information suggests that Moscow has assembled damaging information — known in espionage circles by the Russian term “kompromat” — that conceivably could be used to coerce the next occupant of the White House. The claims were presented in a two-page summary attached to the full report, an addendum that also included allegations of ongoing contact between members of Trump’s inner circle and representatives of Moscow.

I recommend you read the rest of the article. The information being revealed between the lines of the story indicates, to me, a rocky road coming for President-elect Trump.

Some history, then a conclusion.

It’s no surprise that I remain skeptical concerning the “Russian hacking” of the American election, resulting in the defeat of Hillary Rodham Clinton.

The Demorats tried throwing every excuse imaginable onto the political wall in order to see what would stick, to include recounts for Hillary Clinton under the pretext of their being for Jill Stein, talk radio and Fox News, the Electoral College, FBI Director James Comey, misogyny on the part of females (of all things), and fake news — to encompass the Drudge Report, which is nothing more than an aggregator of news and frequently features sites such as CNN, the Washington Post, the New York Times, the Baltimore Sun, Boston Globe, LA Times and more. If Drudge is “fake” then most certainly those other outlets are as well. They have also been saying “Russia Russia Russia” every day since November 8th.

The corollary glory of it all is that, particularly with regard to fake news, much of it has blossomed in the other direction. Time and again the true purveyors of fake news have been proven to be the American Media Maggots and not alternative news sources. The AMM have lost their “gatekeeper” status and desperately seek to lock it back up. They are quaking and frightened to their very core because they are losing control and cash.

That said, the theme that somehow Russia hacked the election and not only favored but enabled Donald Trump to win has its proponents and its detractors. Proponents would obviously include Hillary Clinton, Demorats and the American Media Maggots because, in their minds, it certainly had nothing to do with the quality of the candidate herself or the way the campaign was managed.

Detractors or skeptics would include myself and, well, a few other tens of thousands of persons.

First, I developed information from one source (corroborated by a similar intelligence source on the opposite coast) that the NSA was responsible (read here please) for the hacks, and this was supported by Judge Andrew Napolitano — from HRC’s mishandling of GAMMA class intelligence. Read this.

Then Julian Assange (he of Wikileaks creation) came out and straight-up stated that Russia was not connected to the hacking of the DNC and Podesta’s emails at all. Assange, being the recipient of the trove of materials should, one may conclude, know. The release of the information appealed to Assange because, after all, Hillary Rodham Clinton stated she would like to have had him killed with a drone strike. That would certainly seem sufficient to take HRC off Assange’s Christmas card list.

The FBI said the Russians were not responsible. Then Obama said the Russians were not responsible. A UK diplomat said it wasn’t the Russians. Who to believe?

Now they are responsible. The party line is that “17 intelligence agencies say Russia was the source.” With, again, little or no clear evidence to back up the claims.

There was another person along the way with a healthy skepticism about the Russians being involved in the DNC hack and the hacking of the US presidential election. Donald Trump.

The meme is that the CIA, the DNI and the rest of the US Intelligence Community would not politicize intelligence except that, well, yes they would. And have. All the time. This is not finger-pointing at the line-level agents, processors or analysts. This is finger-pointing at the upper echelons of the Intelligence Community. As in: they decide what information to release to those who base policy and decisions upon intelligence take.

It’s no secret that Donald Trump has angered the lofty halls of the US Intelligence Community. They don’t care to have their character or their veracity questioned or second-guessed.

So Tuesday’s WaPo article — which contained, they admit, much speculation and little fact, could be a cautionary tale, a little sub-frequency IC message to President-elect Donald Trump: you’re in our gunsights.

One has to think that the source of whatever information “Russia may possess” about Trump personally could be the USIC itself.

Charles Krauthammer said on Tuesday:

“When you get these spy-vs-spy leaks, you can’t believe anybody because they’re all lying and that’s what they do for a living, so you never know which side is lying. But I think that the very fact this story has surfaced, is a way for the CIA to be telling Trump: you mess with us, we have a lot of information we can mess with you.”

Then, for God’s sake, there is this.

The bottom line is: there are so many political machinations on so many levels for so many mixed and cross-purposed reasons that it is all very clear.

As clear as mud.

Still and all: Donald Trump, beware.

BZ

 

 Share

Thanks to Jill Stein, Hillary Clinton & Demorats

Posted on by

Because your demands for recounts and investigations of various states and precincts have, in fact, revealed election fraud biased towards Demorats, Greens and Leftists.

Not Donald Trump.

Stuart Varney also had kind words for Jill Stein:

Myself as well. Because, being me, I love it when a great Leftist plan goes awry.

From BizPacReview.com:

Stein’s recount backfires bigtime as ‘major ballot box fraud’ discovered in Hillary-heavy Detroit

by Michael Dorstewitz

People everywhere are saying, “Thanks, Jill!”

Former Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein‘s recount efforts in Michigan indicate that there was indeed voter fraud in the Great Lake State — but it favored Hillary Clinton.

The evidence of shenanigans was discovered in more than one-third of the voting precincts situated within the Democrat controlled city of Detroit. Machines in those precincts tabulated more votes than what they should have.

This is just one area. In just one state. Stein contested three states to include Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — then had her cases shot down by federal judges in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. The recount is done.

So I say: let’s make sure we do in fact open invetigations into election fraud in major urban rat cages around America. Because one clear thing will be found: rampant fraud on the Left in favor of the Demorats.

BZ

 

 Share

“It’s the Russians.” FBI says: no it’s not

Posted on by

What makes the situation particularly delicious is the fact that the SOURCE of the story is the New York Times. And that they knew it back in late October of this year. Yet no one seems to remember the story. Let us refresh:

Investigating Donald Trump, F.B.I. Sees No Clear Link to Russia

by Eric Lichtblau and Steven Lee Myers

WASHINGTON — For much of the summer, the F.B.I. pursued a widening investigation into a Russian role in the American presidential campaign. Agents scrutinized advisers close to Donald J. Trump, looked for financial connections with Russian financial figures, searched for those involved in hacking the computers of Democrats, and even chased a lead — which they ultimately came to doubt — about a possible secret channel of email communication from the Trump Organization to a Russian bank.

Law enforcement officials say that none of the investigations so far have found any conclusive or direct link between Mr. Trump and the Russian government. And even the hacking into Democratic emails, F.B.I. and intelligence officials now believe, was aimed at disrupting the presidential election rather than electing Mr. Trump.

How incredibly odd that no one is referencing this article now. Does that not make you wonder just a teensy-weensy bit? Isn’t the following just a little odd also?

Hillary Clinton’s supporters, angry over what they regard as a lack of scrutiny of Mr. Trump by law enforcement officials, pushed for these investigations.

So the FBI clears Hillary Clinton and, additionally, responds to her request to look into Trump’s connection with the Russians?

Supporters of Mrs. Clinton have argued that Mr. Trump’s evident affinity for Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin — Mr. Trump has called him a great leader and echoed his policies toward NATO, Ukraine and the war in Syria — and the hacks of leading Democrats like John D. Podesta, the chairman of the Clinton campaign, are clear indications that Russia has taken sides in the presidential race and that voters should know what the F.B.I. has found.

And yet, where is the evidence that the Russians were responsible? The FBI didn’t find it.

Still, they have said that Mr. Trump himself has not become a target. And no evidence has emerged that would link him or anyone else in his business or political circle directly to Russia’s election operations.

Then there is this link, mostly ignored by the American Media Maggots because it does not follow the meme of “Russians” and “Trump.” That is to say, the NSA. Hillary Clinton outed the NSA and compromised GAMMA level security. They were not pleased. It is, after all, the NSA that has the thousands of square feet of Cray XK supercomputers.in its basements at Fort Meade and elsewhere. But where was the NSA in this? Conspicuously silent.

So let me see if I’ve got this right. When the FBI cleared Hillary Rodham Clinton and said there was insufficient cause to seek an indictment with regard to her emails, that was a good and valid decision.

Yet, when the FBI says there is no evidence to suggest the Russians are involved with Donald Trump or the presidential campaign, they are not to be believed?

And isn’t it odd that everyone — ahem, excuse me, the Demorats and Leftists — want to shoot whatever messenger there may be and not recognize the importance of the messages themselves?

That Hillary Rodham Clinton, her staffers, her campaign, was rife with corruption, cheating and endless lies?

Apparently Leftists think we have no memory or internet access.

BZ

 Share