MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE by Michael Wolraich Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop |
Beneath the Spin * Eric L. Wattree
ABC News reports that “A majority of Americans disapprove of the FBI's recommendation not to charge Hillary Clinton with a crime over her handling of email while secretary of state, and a similar number in a new ABC News/Washington Post poll say the issue leaves them worried about how she would handle her responsibilities as president if elected . . . But 28 percent say it leaves them less likely to support her, versus 10 percent who say it makes them more likely to do so . . . “Reactions to the decision are highly political, with partisanship factoring heavily in people's views. Yet Democrats don't back Clinton up on the issue nearly as much as Republicans criticize her, and independents side more with Republicans . . . Overall, 56 percent disapprove of FBI Director James Comey's recommendation not to charge Clinton, while just 35 percent approve. Similarly, 57 percent say the incident makes them worried about how Clinton might act as president if she is elected, with most very worried about it. Just 39 percent feel the issue isn't related to how she would perform as president.”
.
So Hillary Clinton has become a serious liability for the Democratic party, and for the Democrats to allow her to carry their banner into battle would be insane. I pointed out the following in a previous article, “Hillary Clinton: “I’m Not A Crook!!!” Yeah, But You’re Still A Liability”:
.
“It's going to be an absolute circus, because the GOP knows it's their only chance of winning. They’re going to bring up former President Bill Clinton’s “impromptu” meeting with Attorney General Lynch during the climax of an FBI investigation into his wife, Hillary, and just days before she was interviewed by the FBI. They're going to bring up the fact that President Obama not only endorsed, but began to schedule campaign events with Hillary even before the FBI investigation was complete, and they’re going to bring up the fact that according to a NY Times report Hillary insiders let it be known that she intends to retain AG Lynch as her Attorney General if she's elected president - quite a timely leak. In addition, there’s the lawsuits currently pending against Hillary and the Democratic National Committee for the election fraud that was allegedly committed against a fellow Democrat, and the Republicans are going to congressional hearings into the FBI investigation of Hillary, giving them access to over a year of FBI reports into her activities. For those who insist that Hillary's clean so it's no big deal, you should ask yourself why her IT expert, Bryan Pagliano, found it necessary to take the 5th amendment over 125 in a 2 hour deposition. What was he worrying about incriminating himself of? And again, all of this is going to be paraded before the American people right in the middle of a general election - and Hillary already has atrocious disapproval ratings. So once more, Hillary Clinton has become a gross liability for the Democratic party.
.
I also pointed out in a previous article that for months Clinton Supporters have been saying that all true Democrats have a responsibility to the liberal cause, the Democratic Party, and to America to get behind Hillary Clinton in order to prevent Donald Trump from becoming President of the United States. They've been lecturing Bernie Sanders supporters incessantly on how important it is to do the "responsible thing" and put their partisanship aside in support of the bigger picture. Well, now we’re going to see if they were actually sincere in their selfless, and supposedly, single-minded effort to save America, or if it was just a lot of political posturing in an effort to gain support for Hillary.
HILLARY'S GONNA LOSE. THE PEOPLE HATE HER.
Comments
Barney Sanders says Hillary Clinton should be our next President.
by rmrd0000 on Tue, 07/12/2016 - 5:27pm
Yes, it is true. Bernie says she should be President. Wattree disagrees, He will say that Bernie, like all people is imperfect. Maybe Bernie supporters might be imperfect too, because they seem to be so intolerant in general.
by CVille Dem on Tue, 07/12/2016 - 6:02pm
Bernie is smart. He's endorsing Hillary in an attempt to reunite the party. He sees the numbers. Hillary's negatives are skyrocketing. If it keeps on at the rate it's going it's going to reveal who she really is - is she REALLY concerned about America, or just her own ambition? As her supporters are so fond of saying, "Liberals have got to put politics aside and all focus on just saving America from Hitler in a wig." Well, now we're going to see how dedicated Hillary is to that proposition, because if she is, with all of her baggage, and all of the trouble for the Democratic party that she's going to introduce into the mix, if she truly cares more about America than she does herself, she's gonna have to step aside, "due to health concerns."
.
The Republican party had all but written this election completely off, but Hillary Clinton has single-handedly revived them in a way that they could never have imagined - and they may also finally get the opportunity to taint the legacy of President Obama in the process. I don't know how Obama could be so dumb as to let himself get caught up in Hillary's stupidity. All he had to do was just sit back and let the process play itself out. But now it's going to seem like the Republicans have been right all along. He's just as corrupt as she is. I mean, REALLY!!! To endorse her and schedule campaign appearances with her while she was still under criminal investigation!!!? How transparent can you be!!!?
.
.
I used to be a diehard Bill Clinton supporter. Then I turned on him after he humiliated his wife before the world. That's when I started researching him, and that's also when I found out about both he, and Hillary. They deserve one another - and America doesn't deserve either one of them. They both have serious character flaws that should have been addressed in childhood.
.
“On his now-shuttered website, Zeifman said, Hillary Clinton is ethically unfit to be either a senator or president — and if she were to become president, the last vestiges of the traditional moral authority of the party of Roosevelt, Truman and Johnson will be destroyed.’
“Specifically, Zeifman contends that Rodham and others wanted Richard Nixon to remain in office to bolster the chances of Sen. Ted Kennedy or another Democrat being elected president [sounds like a cover story to protect Nixon].
“Zeifman said that in 1974 a young lawyer who shared an office with Clinton came to him to apologize that he and Clinton had lied to him. The lawyer, John Labovitz, is quoted as saying that he was dismayed with ‘… her erroneous legal opinions and efforts to deny Nixon representation by counsel — as well as an unwillingness to investigate Nixon.’
“Zeifman charges that Rodham regularly consulted with Ted Kennedy’s chief political strategist, a violation of House rules.
“Hillary Rodham’s conduct, according to Zeifman, also was the result of not wanting Nixon to face an impeachment trial because Democrats worried that Nixon might bring up abuses of office by President John Kennedy [sounds like another cover story to protect Nixon].
“Zeifman — ironically, a consultant to a member of the Judiciary Committee that impeached President Bill Clinton — said Democrats feared putting Watergate break-in mastermind E. Howard Hunt on the stand. Hunt, Zeifman said, might report on his knowledge of nefarious activities in the Kennedy administration ‘including Kennedy’s purported complicity in the attempted assassination of Fidel Castro.”’
“Zeifman also asserts that Rodham joined Burke Marshall, Ted Kennedy’s chief counsel in the Chappaquiddick affair and Rodham’s former law professor; special counsel John Doar; and senior associate special counsel (and future Clinton White House counsel) Bernard Nussbaum in trying to gain enough votes on the Judiciary Committee to change House rules and deny counsel to Nixon.
“In order to pull this off, Zeifman said that Rodham wrote a fraudulent legal brief, and confiscated public documents.
“After the Nixon impeachment investigation was finished, Zeifman fired Rodham and said he refused to give her a letter of recommendation.”
by Wattree on Tue, 07/12/2016 - 9:51pm
Watergate was an excuse by right wing Republicans to serve up Nixon to a bunch of self congratulating obliging Democrats and the establishment press. Deep throat was Hoover's #2 man who saw more violations of the law and the Constitution in a week under Hoover than a dozen Watergates. He was passed over when Hoover died by Nixon and had a grudge to fulfill. Nixon was very liberal - EPA OSHA, Clean Water Act, China....'
Nixon's Sec Labor also demanded unions open up to minorities establishing minority quotas.
Nixon also put on price controls. Big business and corporations hated him and Democrats were only too willing to do the work of the right by getting rid of him while Deep Throat, who remained anonymous, and was Hoover's right hand man, was played by the WaPo as an all American idealistic hero fighting tyranny.
Raygun's 'the government is the problem', October Surprise,-hostages in Iran, the secret Iran/Contra war was more the GOP style.
That Zeifman helped the GOP impeach Bill is not at all ironic. He was a tool of the right and it is in Hillary's favor he hated her. She was already on to their games then.
by NCD on Wed, 07/13/2016 - 1:51pm
It's amazing to me to see the fanatical Sanders supporters using failed republican lies designed as red meat for the most ignorant of the republican base.
Hillary Clinton was not fired from the House Judiciary Committee's Watergate investigation by Chief Counsel Jerry Zeifman.
whatever Zeifman may have thought of Hillary and her work during the investigation, he was not her supervisor, neither he nor anyone else fired her from her position on the Impeachment Inquiry staff (Zeifman in fact didn't have the power to fire her, even had he wanted to do so), his description of her conduct as "unethical" and "dishonest" is his personal, highly subjective characterization, and the "facts" on which he based that characterization were ones that he contradicted himself about on multiple occasions.
by ocean-kat on Wed, 07/13/2016 - 11:18am
Why did Bernie Sanders endorse Hillary Clinton? Let's ask Bernie!
by barefooted on Wed, 07/13/2016 - 4:48pm
Why did Hillary endorse Obama?
Because she cares about the policy and the team needed to get it through congress. Obama's win, however slim, made him the leader of the party that had best policies to move us forward. Hillary endorsed that.
Why did Sanders endorse Hillary?
Because he saw he was losing support from both the Hillary voters and the majority of his own voters who are not fanatical followers. He gave up his quixotic quest to steal the nomination from the person who won in a landslide because Hillary supporters and pragmatic Sanders supporters were turning against him.
by ocean-kat on Wed, 07/13/2016 - 12:00am
Why did Hillary endorse Obama
and
why did Sanders endorse Hillary?
Because they thought that was the right thing to do.
by Flavius on Wed, 07/13/2016 - 9:42pm
TO HILLARY CLINTON FANS:
See More.
WELL, HILLARY FANS, HOW IMPORTANT IS IT FOR US TO BEAT TRUMP NOW? AND IF YOU THINK THIS IS BAD, JUST WAIT UNTIL THE REPUBLICANS START DRAGGING OUT ALL OF THE DIRT IN THE FBI HEARINGS AND THE SEVERAL LAWSUITS START COMING OUT ON VOTER FRAUD RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE GENERAL ELECTION.
.
FACE IT. AMERICA NEITHER LIKE, NOR TRUST, HILLARY CLINTON. SO IF SHE’S THE NOMINEE, WE’RE GOING TO HAVE A PRESIDENT TRUMP!!!...
.
HILLARY CLINTON: A DEMOCRATIC DISASTER JUST WAITING TO HAPPEN.
,
http://wattree.blogspot.com/…/hillary-clinton-democratic-di…
by Wattree on Wed, 07/13/2016 - 9:54am
Good point. Let's have them deny her the nomination at the convention and put up Sanders instead because his poll numbers won't go up and down.
by Michael Maiello on Wed, 07/13/2016 - 10:28am
Hillary's poll numbers are constantly going down, and her disapproval rate is on a steep incline - and that's BEFORE the dirt from the FBI congressional hearings and the election fraud lawsuits come out. Like I said, this woman is a Democratic disaster just waiting to happen. Her supporters need to wake up and do a little thinking instead of feeling. Isn't that what they told the Bernie Sanders supporters to do?
by Wattree on Wed, 07/13/2016 - 8:20pm
Polls are often unreliable. For example, Gallup had Obama and Romney tied just prior to the November 22 election. The poll was grossly in error.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/158519/romney-obama-gallup-final-election-sur...
by rmrd0000 on Thu, 07/14/2016 - 8:42am
You know, Eric, you are going to be very disappointed when Clinton wins in a landslide. And the only reason you will feel sad is because it will prove you wrong.
by CVille Dem on Wed, 07/13/2016 - 10:34am
No, CVille,
You're obviously making the mistaken assumption that I think like you do. I don't. I would be happy and very relieved that Trump didn't win, but sad to know that Hillary isn't much better. I don't think in terms of personally winning or losing a debate. I see the big picture, and think in terms of society as a whole. Thinking in terms of winning or losing a debate is petty, immature, and childish. We should engage in debates to gain knowledge, not treat it like it's a hockey match. So I try my best (though not always successfully) not to think that way, because immature thinking gets in the way of efficient thought, and efficient thought is what I'm about - it's my basketball, baseball, or football. So your assessment of me falsely assumes that you're significant enough to me to put my efforts into trying to beat you. You're not. And I don't meant to imply that you're insignificant, because every human being is, but not when it comes to my thoughts.
by Wattree on Wed, 07/13/2016 - 4:35pm
I predict that Hillary Clinton's unfavorables are going to skyrocket. Let's see if I'm right.
by Wattree on Wed, 07/13/2016 - 4:38pm
Ironic considering your response to me above. You deny that your ego is involved at all. Why then do you repeat, repeat, repeat, cut & paste, cut & paste, cut & paste your own words over and over and over?
Edited to add: People who think in immature and childish ways never recognize it in themselves. Also:
Self-awareness much? BTW, if this seems personally critical, it seems fair after the "I don't think like you do." Stuff.
by CVille Dem on Wed, 07/13/2016 - 5:28pm
CVille,
I do all of the things you mentioned above because I think they're necessary. Call them what you will.
by Wattree on Wed, 07/13/2016 - 5:36pm
Many things can be justified by one's ego.
I think Flavius put it best when he said that we all supported out candidates for positive reasons, according to each of us. There is no reason to feel bad about who we chose. We all did it for the right reasons.
You said that I was wrong above when I said you would be sorry that Clinton won, and You said that she is better than Trump, but seemingly? Reluctantly.
So your continuous negative comments about Hillary don't make any sense from a person who thinks (obviously) differently than you do. I don't say my thoughts are superior to yours, as you imply about mine, but your comments don't square with your conclusions.
by CVille Dem on Wed, 07/13/2016 - 6:20pm
Of course your thoughts are superior to wattree's. Wattree occupies a rare position here. He's not defending his subjective analysis, his opinion, against yours. He's factually wrong. When someone posts lies that have been thoroughly debunked years ago, like Hillary was fired from the Watergate investigation by Zeifman and the Mena myth, then anyone who acknowledges the facts has the superior argument.
The question here is not whether Hillary was fired from the Watergate investigation, she wasn't. The question is does wattree believe the lies he posts or if not, who is he trying to con?
by ocean-kat on Wed, 07/13/2016 - 6:38pm
[Comment removed for ToS violation]
by Wattree on Wed, 07/13/2016 - 7:59pm
Eric, I know for a fact that you know this is a ToS violation. What are you trying to do here?
by Ramona on Wed, 07/13/2016 - 9:00pm
Eric, this is your final warning. If there is another violation, you will be suspended from dagblog.
by Michael Wolraich on Wed, 07/13/2016 - 9:22pm
What are you talking about, Man!!!? Please send me a copy of the "offending" comment.
by Wattree on Wed, 07/13/2016 - 10:08pm
HILLARY'S GONNA LOSE. THE PEOPLE HATE HER.
by Wattree on Wed, 07/13/2016 - 8:13pm
Does Jill Stein have a life beyond running for president every four years? This is the only time I ever hear anything about her. What has she done in the past four or eight years that would make me want to vote for her? She can SAY anything. What has she actually done?
by Ramona on Wed, 07/13/2016 - 8:28pm
Jill Stein platform:
Abolish nuclear weapons (unilaterally?)
Cancel student debt (1.1 trillion)
Free college for all
Cut Pentagon by 50%
and.....then.......miracles happen....$80,000 or even $800,000 gets her elected, Greens sweep Congress?
by NCD on Wed, 07/13/2016 - 8:57pm
Talk is cheap. Anyone can stand on a soapbox every four years and shout to the crowds. Is she out there in the trenches week after week, month after month, year after year? Why is it her name only comes up when she wants to be president?
by Ramona on Wed, 07/13/2016 - 8:58pm
That's not the point of my article, Ramona.
The point of the article is that Hillary Clinton is "A Democratic Diaster Just Waiting To Happen," that she's not a suitable candidate to carry the Democratic banner into battle against the Republicans, and that she's the most likely candidate to dump Donald Trump in our laps. Thus, I asked the question of Clinton supporters (who are now in the minority) "do they still believe that the most important issue in this campaign is to defeat Donald Trump, or was that just a lot of rhetoric?" So what anyone else represents is meaningless to that issue:
Poll Finds Emails Weighing on Hillary Clinton, Now Tied With Donald Trump
By AMY CHOZICK and DALIA SUSSMAN JULY 14, 2016
Hillary Clinton in Atlantic City, N.J., last week. Credit Eric Thayer for The New York Times
Hillary Clinton has emerged from the F.B.I. investigation into her email practices as secretary of state a wounded candidate with a large and growing majority of voters saying she cannot be trusted, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.
As Mrs. Clinton prepares to accept the Democratic Party’s nomination at the convention in Philadelphia this month, she will confront an electorate in which 67 percent of voters say she is not honest and trustworthy. That number is up five percentage points from a CBS News poll conducted last month, before the F.B.I. released its findings.
Mrs. Clinton’s six-percentage-point lead over the presumptive Republican nominee, Donald J. Trump, in a CBS News poll last month has evaporated. The two candidates are now tied in a general election matchup, the new poll indicates, with each receiving the support of 40 percent of voters.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/15/us/politics/hillary-clinton-donald-tru...
by Wattree on Thu, 07/14/2016 - 9:01am
The accuracy of polling is being called into question. In 2012 Gallup predicted a close race between Obama and Romney. The Gallup prediction was flat out wrong. Gallup is not publishing detailed polling data this year because they are not confident that there measurement techniques are accurate.
http://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2015/10/gallup-gives-up-pollin...
by rmrd0000 on Thu, 07/14/2016 - 9:22am
I'm supporting Hillary Clinton proudly and happily. You may find that hard to understand but I really don't need to explain my support to anyone any longer. I've done it many times and, as far as I know, I've never changed a single mind. Just as you have never changed a single mind here on Dag.
I don't feel the need to keep pushing my views, as if they're the only ones worth pushing. I also don't need to justify my support for her.
My comment was about Jill Stein, not Hillary. The point of your article is the same as the point of all of your articles lately. I'm just not interested. But I do wonder why anybody would vote for Jill Stein when she has no track record whatsoever.
by Ramona on Thu, 07/14/2016 - 12:58pm