My Response to A Clinton Apologist

Conclusive remark from my friendly debate partner: "Take that shit somewhere else, man."

My Response:

In very simple terms the 2016 election was rigged. It was rigged against the progressive point of view. Even Liz Warren agreed to this.

Clinton is not a progressive. She comes down good on god, gay (even though late to the table) and gun issues -- that's about it. Fundamentally, she is a corporate Democrat with lots of insider political and media connections.

Those in power -- including longtime corporations, bureaucrats and the ownership of the media -- preferred Clinton because she would have been smooth for keeping corporate power as the guiding light in politics. But this does not mean that those in power haven't also done very well with Trump even though he's rough around the edges.

It's like John Lennon wrote in Working Class Hero: "There's room at the top they're telling you still. But, first, you must learn how to smile as you kill, if you want to be like the folks on the hill."

Fact is the oligarchy that the 2014 Princeton Study highlighted remains in good standing with either a Clinton Democrat or a Trump Republican in power. Sadly, it only comes down to which political party's oligarchs get the best treatment!

Had Obama kept his community organizer shoes on, instead of trading 'em in for Clinton-like CitiGroup wingtips, 2016 would have been a very successful year for the Democrats and they would have taken back Congress. Overthrowing or attempting to overthrow the secular governments of Libya and Syria, bombing in seven nations at a rate of over 25,000 bombs a year and allowing 95% of all wealth generated in America to go to the fat cats at the top were not good policies for Democrats, especially with labor and income inequality begging for solutions.

Clinton was very much involved in Obama's decision-making. What Clinton and her political operatives did is what Clinton and her political operatives did -- don't blame folks like me who are critical! Anyone wanting to become her apologist, to me, is surprising. But we all hold prerogatives.

The fact is Clinton politics have finally fractured the Democratic Party! Were it not for Obama the confrontation would have come sooner. The FDR principles of Democrats would become blessed were Clinton to announce as a third party candidate--lol!

I observed the 2016 election extremely closely -- it's why I finished #3 out of 220,000 contestants in the CNN's Political Prediction contest. Here are five of my conclusions:

• The Democratic Primary was rigged, plain and simple. Don't take my word for it, see Liz Warren's response when she was asked directly was the primary rigged. As Webb, Chaffee or O'Malley who also tried to run reasonable campaigns!

• The Clinton Campaign controlled the DNC, both tactically and monetarily -- it still does! Much of this will eventually come out from the lawsuit appeal against the DNC, now in the Florida Federal Court and from other lawsuits.

• The DNC, i.e., the Clinton Campaign, limited and ill-scheduled the debates, frontloaded the southern primary states and used inside media connections to put blackouts on her competitive candidates.

On a parallel, they built Trump up as a "pied piper" to break out of the GOPwinger pack to become her Republican opponent, this in a belief she'd easily defeat him. The operatives were very concerned HRC had too much political baggage and thus she needed an easy opponent in order to win.

• The wrinkles in her rug were many and it was not only her email FOIA violation (which Bernie Sanders had graciously forgiven) problem. She was also weak on her Wall Street speaking fees, Clinton Foundation problems where IRS paperwork kept being changed and free money provided to either her husband or the Foundation from Russia, United Arab Emirates, pay-to-play schemes, etc.

Her problems were already deep and they became more complicated when the rigging of the primary became so obvious from the inside that it contributed to an inside leak of DNC data to Wikileaks. Hence, Seth Rich and the mystery of the media's manner of reporting about this.

Everything began reeking of cover-up ... the stench continues to permeate!

Thus, the plaguing anti-Russian narrative table was set. It got supported by Obama's Administration (staining his legacy), DNC-hired tech-consulting firms Crowdstrike and Fusion GPS and from massive messaging by inside main media connections. This resulted in the content of the Wikileaks exposures becoming obscured as 'the Russian's hacked and meddled' became the countertransference issue.

• I suppose my final conclusion is that Saudi Arabia has its Khashoggi, a murder which effects the trillion dollar Aramco IPO and billions in arms sales; and America has its Seth Rich which impacted the US presidency! Julian Assange of Wikileaks and his associate Craig Murray should be able to offer testimony in America free from fear of criminal sanctions. Why hasn't this happened yet?