Hillary Clinton blames gay activists for election loss.

Wikileaks today released a new tranche of emails between former First Lady Hillary Clinton and John Podesta and other of the leaders of her failed presidential campaign.  Mrs. Clinton has spent the week in interviews in which she has blamed FBI director James Comey, Russian autocrat Vladimir Putin, Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Loretta Lynch, and misogynist American voters, for her election loss.  In the newly released emails Clinton added a new culprit:  gay Democrats.

“At first gay Democrats were our biggest supporters and most reliable donors, which is why I tried to signal this important community by promoting one of their own to manage my campaign,” Clinton writes, referring to Robbie Mook.  “And who else did we have – Donna Brazile, who left Gore in flames, or Bob Shrum, who ran out of town and was never seen again?  We have almost no Democrats who have a consistent record of managing winning gubernatorial and congressional campaigns.  Robbie at least had a few wins.”

“But who knew the Mook Mafia would refuse to send the campaign into any state without the right assortment of gay bars to satisfy all of Robbie’s staff – leathermen, silver daddies, bears and cubs and otters and wolves – so we never made it Pennsylvania, Michigan, or Wisconsin.”

“And I didn’t appreciate the way that the increased gay coloration of the campaign led to so much innuendo about my special friendship with Huma.  Friendships between two women, like all womanly activities, have little in common with male behavior.”

Mrs. Clinton opined that the current Democratic leadership is spending too much time blaming her or forces beyond their control like the Russians, and not learning from the campaign’s failures.  “We needed to get out women voters as well as African American voters – but we also needed to get working class men as well.  Every day during the campaign Americans saw Josh Earnest representing the White House, and Brian Fallon and Robbie Mook representing my campaign.  Pretty, smart enough, but no real men can identify with them and no normal heterosexual woman has the least bit of interest in a metrosexual pajama boy.  Having beaten those bimbos back for years as they threw themselves at Bill, I can tell you they want a bad boy with power, not some smooth crotched Ken doll.”

In another email Mrs. Clinton reprises a recurring Democratic theme, how the existence of FOX News should have been challenged on regulatory grounds before it and other new media allowed a silent majority of unrepresented voters to find a voice.  “As long as Trump is appointing people to the Federal Communications Commission and the Supreme Court, we in the Resistance will have to find other ways to oppose the vast right wing media conspiracy.  Every day that damn Tucker Carlson and the other FOX people have on yet another castrated chihuahua representing the Democrat Party and our media friends – Zach Petkanas, David Tafuri, Jeff Mason, Mark Hannah – these guys make Blumenthal look butch!  As long as there is a right wing media conspiracy to portray the Democratic Party as hostile to everything  masculine, we can’t win elections outside of coastal cities.  It almost makes me pine for the days of real Democratic men, like John Edwards.  Our only hope is to encourage as many harassment and affirmative action suits against every conservative website, talk show, and radio network.”

First Monday Recommended Reading

Trumpertarians claim Johnson votes for a majority (Toledo Blade)

Estonian robots plan to take your women (BusinessInsider)

Democrats: “I see Russian from my mouse!” (Washington Post)

Is the CIA too biased to run the re-education camp?

Published yesterday at Breitbart.

“I can see Russia from my mouse!”

Thus the epitaph for Senator Hillary Clinton’s political career (unless she follows Anthony Weiner, as some rumor she will, in running for Mayor of New York), and indeed for the Clinton dynasty is basically a line stolen from Tina Fey’s mockery of Governor Sarah Palin.

With The View’s Joy Behar telling her  audience of housekeepers and the unemployed that Donald Trump plans to put the hammer and sickle on the American flag, it is perhaps best to quote Karl Marx: “History repeats itself, first as tragedy, then as farce.”

Hillary’s tenure as Secretary of State produced many tragedies; her last campaign for president ends in farce.

Hillary has competed and been rejected twice now; more if you include the race for Bill’s affections.

Team Hillary’s latest plot is to have the Electoral College rounded up and forced to have Democratic Party approved re-education.

It seems they have been unduly influenced by the very same Russian government that in 2012 President Obama pronounced irrelevant when he mocked Mitt Romney: “The 1980’s called; they want their foreign policy back.”

For a while the Democrats were sitting back and waiting for the recounts instigated and fund raised by Green Party Presidential candidate Jill Stein to save them.  Word is still out on whether Dr. Stein will now be buying an even bigger vacation home than Senator Bernie Sanders.  But the Democrats now have proof that Dr. Jill is also a Russian agent and her recount Russian funded – after all, it actually produced bigger margins for Donald Trump!

Clinton campaign chair John Podesta, a lobbyist who profits from steering legislation (his ex wife even represents a for profit university that the federal government did not crack down on, while it did bankrupt I.T.T., a major competitor), wants the Electoral College “briefed” with the correct information about how Russia stole the election from Hillary, according to unnamed persons within the CIA.

One problem for the Clinton narrative is that a Wikileaks associate who is a former British Ambassador, Craig Murray, has now come forward and said the information that Wikileaks published about how the DNC rigged its primaries, etc, was leaked not hacked, and the leaker was not Russian.

Another problem is that the FBI and other intelligence agencies do not agree with the CIA conclusions.

A third problem, observed by independent journalists on the left, like the always informative Michael Tracey, is that the information leaked about Hillary and the Democrats was all true, even if the mainstream media did their best to hide it from the public.

This led to me to reflect on my own experiences, as a long term D.C. resident, with CIA agents and affiliates.

I live in Washington, D.C., where for many years I was a very active realtor. (I worked in both a boutique firm where I was for years the top sales agent, and also in the largest ReMax franchise where one year I won the annual award for the most sales by a sole practitioner.)

Some of my clients, including my repeat clients, were employed at the CIA.

All of my CIA clients were liberal Democrats. I liked them. (My particular CIA clients were all also either women or gay). It’s Washington, D.C., which voted over 90% for Hillary, and 4% for Donald Trump, so it’s not surprising that my CIA clients were also liberal Democrats.

One of my CIA clients bought a house from me in Foxhall Village, a neighborhood just west of Georgetown University, where I lived for a time. The night Kerry was not elected I fell asleep on an enclosed sun porch in a chair in front of the television, thinking John Kerry had been elected.

I awoke to banging on my back door. My CIA client and neighbor was beating on my door, distraught. She had a bottle of white wine. New votes were in, Bush was winning, and she needed to watch the coverage with someone and have a drink she was so upset.  (My liberal clients routinely assumed I was a liberal before I started writing about politics because I am gay.)  (Years later the same client was very proud she went to the White House and did the daily briefing on the middle east one day for President Obama.)

So I thought I’d look at the OpenSecrets site and see to which candidates CIA agents donate.

Of course, most CIA employees do not tell you that’s what they are. They usually say they work for the government. If you dig, sometimes that say they work for the Foreign Broadcast Information Service or some other agency connected to foreign affairs.

But there are people who have donated over $200 to a candidate and listed their employer as the CIA or the Central Intelligence Agency.

If you look them up by employer on OpenSecrets.org for the 2016 election cycle, what you find are donations by CIA employees or people who say they are retired from the CIA.

There is one donation to Ted Cruz.

There are a couple to Donald Trump.

There are almost a dozen to Marco Rubio.

There are a couple not to Gary Johnson but to the Libertarian National Committee.

And there are dozens both to Hillary Clinton and also to the Democratic National Committee.

Are these the people John Podesta wants to have run the re-education camps for the Electoral College?

Ron Paul takes a shot at Gary Johnson?

People who viewed this on FOX tell me it was obvious that the interviewer deliberately interrupted Congressman Paul mid-sentence so it would seem like he was endorsing Jill Stein over Gary Johnson.

This is part of a pattern of media spin to attack Gary Johnson:  he didn’t recognize “Aleppo” as a reference to the Syrian refugee crisis and civil war (which obviously most people refer to as “Syria,” since millions then had to google “Aleppo” after the story was spun); he couldn’t recall Vincente Fox’s name (though he knew the only foreign leader he admired was the President of Mexico who has spoken around the world condemning the drug war) when asked about foreign leaders he admired – and this was spun as not knowing the names of ANY foreign leaders.  Likewise when William Weld said Hillary had paper-qualifications or Trump had not violated any tax laws, the press quoted these sound bites out of context as if they were endorsements.

Ron Paul: Jill Stein is more libertarian than Gary Johnson: Green Party presidential nominee Jill Stein is preferable to Libertarian Party nominee Gary Johnson on at least some issues, former Texas Congressman Ron Paul said Monday. I said if the independents, who don’t know what to do and who should they pick, I say if you tend to lean towards progressivism and liberalism and you’re interested in expressing yourself, you can vote for the Green Party, he said on MSNBC. I think she’s probably best on foreign policy at the moment. But on Gary Johnson, he does not come across with a crisp libertarian message. Related Story: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2584781 Paul, who was the libertarian nominee for president in 1988, stressed that he hasn’t endorsed anyone yet. I have not told any supporters who are interested for whom they should vote, he said.

Clinton Inc.

A shorter version of this was published today at AMI Newswire.

A documentary opening Friday about how Bill and Hillary Clinton’s marriage has powered their political dynasty is the latest entree in a growing menu of politically charged, campaign-season films.

Clinton Inc.,  scheduled to open in Chicago on Friday and around the country by mid-October, casts the Clinton marriage as an unusual arrangement that allows the couple to support each other’s separate political ambitions, and find ways to use their positions to enrich themselves along the way.


Loosely based the 2014 book Clinton Inc. by Daniel Halper, a former Weekly Standard editor who now runs the Washington bureau of the New York Post, the film draws on interviews and archival footage to explore the psychological roots of Bill Clinton’s philandering. It argues that Hillary made herself and their marriage essential to his political career by enabling and covering up his affairs (a territory also explored in the Roger Stone book The Clintons’ War on Women).


The documentary is part of a growing genre of influential and successful films that criticize contemporary politics and politicians. Peter Schweitzer, the author of a book on the Clinton Foundation, “Clinton Cash,” has produced a movie version of his book which anyone can be watched for free on the website of the conservative news outlet, Breitbart. 

A chronicle, by means of interviews and archival footage, of the rise of the Clintons as a nascent political dynasty, Clinton Inc. builds a case that the Clinton marriage is basically an unusual arrangement where Bill and Hillary support each other’s separate political ambitions, and find ways to use their positions to enrich themselves along the way.  Produced on a budget of $1.5 million, the movie is heavy on exploring the psychological roots of Bill Clinton’s philandering, and arguing that Hillary made herself and their marriage essential to his political career by enabling and covering up his affairs (a territory also explored in the Roger Stone book The Clintons’ War on Women)  The film’s producer has released four different trailers on YouTube.

It’s not the first time an explosive documentary has been aimed at the Clintons during an election.  Many have forgotten that the famous Supreme Court case Citizens United, decided in 2010, was also about a movie, another movie about the Clintons, Hillary: The Movie (2008).  A political group, Citizens United, planned to air the movie on TV during the primaries, and Democrats went to court to prevent that, claiming it was advertising that should be regulated under campaign finance law.  The Supreme Court struck down those aspects of laws regulating campaign finance, arguing that they violated the First Amendment guarantees of free speech.

Doug Sain, the producer of Clinton Inc. is no stranger to making political documentaries.  Sain was the executive producer of the 2016: Obama’s America, which was the #1 documentary of 2012 (earning $33.5 million at the box office), the #2 political documentary of all time, and #5 documentary of all time for highest domestic gross box office.  (It also came in second for the most DVDs sold for all movies during its home entertainment release week).

On a less elevated level than the Citizens United case, that Sain doc also ended up in court,  with Sain suing his co-producer of 2016, conservative writer and activist Dinesh D’Souza.  Sain claimed that his ownership should be increased from 25% to 50% and his production company should be paid additional fees for finding investors and other services.

The courts rejected Sain’s case, but he has a chance for a rematch of sorts.  D’Souza went on to produce his own movie about one of the Clintons, Hillary’s America, released this past July.  Starring Jonah Goldberg, an editor at National Review (a conservative rival to the Weekly Standard) and the son of Lucianne Goldberg, the PR pro who helped midwife the outing of Bill Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky.  Hillary’s America netted only $5 million at the box office.  The tightening in the polls might create extra interest in Sain’s later release. 

This election year is seeing a lot of free speech from filmmakers.  Besides Sain’s and D’Souza’s Hillary movies, Peter Schweitzer, the author of a book on the Clinton Foundation, Clinton Cash, also produced a movie version of his book which anyone can watch for free on the web at another conservative news outlet, Breitbart.  (In an echo of the 2008 Citizens United film release, a Clinton campaign spokesperson called in August for shutting down websites like Breitbart.)

A cable network could actually do a pre-election day marathon of campaign 2016 films.  Donald Trump has also become fodder for filmmakers. Johnny Depp’s online mockumentary Donald Trump: The Art of the Deal, released in February, has had over 5 million visits on the Funny or Die, an entertainment industry community produced website which has many takedowns of the Trump candidacy.   A relatively unknown film, One Nation Under Trump, was produced for $25,000 and released last month to bad reviews from the very few who saw it.  And movies about Donald Trump as a public figure, not as a presidential candidate, have been produced every few years, going back to 1991’s Trump: What’s the Deal?

Not to be left out, a movie about Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson’s unprecedented independent challenge, Rigged 2016, with a $1 million budget provided by Overstock.com founder Patrick Byrne, a Johnson supporter, also comes out in October.   And finally a movie somewhat aligned with the Black Lives Matter movement, IncarceratingUS, is available on line and is being shown at law schools, universities, and non-profit venues.  (Hillary Clinton has a cameo she probably didn’t want, clapping for President Bill Clinton when he enacted mandatory minimum sentences for all crimes including non-violent drug offenses.)

Voters this year are despairing their electoral choices.  Someone could organize a film festival for them for entertainment.  Maybe throw in The Manchurian Candidate and Wag The Dog for levity.

After Clinton Cash comes Feinstein Financing

Wes Criddle

· Mineola, TX · 

The US has entered into a contract with a real estate firm to sell 56 buildings that currently house U.S. Post Offices. All 56 were built, operated, and paid for by tax-paying American citizens. Now enjoy reading the rest: The government has decided it no longer needs these buildings, most of which are located on prime land in towns and cities across the country. 

The sale of these properties will fetch about$19 billion! 

A regular real estate commission will be paid to the company that was given the exclusive listing for handling the sales. That company is CRI and it belongs to a man named Richard Blum. 

Richard Blum is the husband of Senator Dianne Feinstein!(Most voters and many of the government people who approved the deal have not made the connection between the two because they have different last names).

Senator Feinstein and her husband stand to make a fortune, estimated at between $950 million and $1.1 BILLION from these transactions! 

His company is the sole real estate agent on the sale! 

CRI will be making a minimum of 2% and as much as 6% commission on each and every sale. All of the properties that are being sold are all fully paid for. They were purchased with U.S. taxpayers’ dollars. 

The U.S.P.S. is allowed free and clear, tax exempt use. The only cost to keep them open is the cost to actually keep the doors open and the heat and lights on. The United States Postal Service doesn’t even have to pay county property taxes on these subject properties. QUESTION? Would you put your house in foreclosure just because you couldn’t afford to pay the electric bill? 

Well, the folks in Washington have given the Post Office the OK to do it! Worse yet, most of the net proceeds of the sales will go back to the U.S.P.S, an organization that is so poorly managed that they have lost $117 billion dollars in the past 10 years! 

No one in the mainstream media is even raising an eyebrow over the conflict of interest and on the possibility of corruption on the sale of billions of dollars worth of public assets. 

How does a U.S. Senator from San Francisco manage to get away with organizing and lobbying such a sweet deal ? Has our government become so elitist that they have no fear of oversight? 

It’s no mere coincidence that these two public service crooks have different last names; a feeble attempt at avoiding transparency in these type of transactions. 

Pass this info on before it’s pulled from the Internet. You can verify it on TruthorFiction and Snopes: 

http://www.truthorfiction.com/…/Blum-Post-Office-Sale-06101…

http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/blum.asp

If this doesn’t upset you, don’t complain about the corruption and the ineptness in D.C.

Hillary, Trump, Luke Sissyfag, and the potty mouth kids -Updated

Published earlier this week at Breitbart.

It’s been a tough month so far for Democratic Party pajama boys.

First they lost Michael Bloomberg over a million dollars in Virginia, failing to take the state senate away from the GOP, after the New Yorker provided almost all the funding for Democrats running for local office in Virginia.

Then they fabricated a hoax at the Democratic Party organ Politico claiming Dr. Ben Carson had lied and had their asses handed to them in a matter of hours, with even “liberal” CNN calling Politico’s veracity into question.  (Kyle Cheney, the Politico reporter who authored the Carson smear, has a history of writing spin for the Obama administration and being called out for it.)

And finally in Houston they were denied the legal right to put on a wig and stockings to pee in the ladies room.

But they still had hope.  Luke Sissyfag to the rescue!

Sissyfag, who has returned to his original legal name of Luke Montgomery, is the founder of the DeportRacism political action committee.  Montgomery, a peripatetic gay rights and AIDS activist known for producing social marketing campaign videos featuring profanity, sometimes voiced by pre-teen children, had been targetting Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, in advance of Trump’s appearance last night on Saturday Night Live.

In the DeportRacism videos an annoyingly douchey 9 year old boy drops the F bomb repeatedly while claiming Donald Trump is racist for advocating border security and the regulation of illegal immigration.

Mr. Montgomery had offered $5,000 to anyone who would disrupt Saturday Night Live, for which Donald Trump was host.

In a surprise move, SNL actually made fun of the DeportRacism campaign, having comedian Larry David heckle Trump, screaming at him from the audience that he was a racist.  Outside, a meager 200 DeportRacism supporters marched from Trump Tower to Rockefeller Center to protest Trump.  Trump’s actual performance was somewhat wooden, but Democrats were clearly disappointed.  On the Sunday morning shows former Democratic staffer Chuck Todd said Trump’s performance was “ok.”  On Fox and Friends Weekend, Tucker Carlson observed that Trump is funnier extemporaneously in interviews than he is in scripted skits.  Mediate reports that DeportRacism will pay up and Larry David will receive the $5,000.

But Luke Sissyfag’s continuation of the pajama boy losing streak may go farther, and may implicate the Hillary Clinton campaign.

Where the $5,000 comes from, and where DeportRacism gets its funding, is not known, as the PAC has only filed initial paperwork, but no financial reports, with the Federal Election Commission.  A perusal of the DeportRacism website indicates at least two other staffers besides Montgomery, a “Miguel” and a “Luciana,” each with a unique email address.  Presumably besides the $5,000 and production costs for videos and merchandise for sale on the website, these staffers are paid.  DeportRacism is already tardy in its FEC filings and has already received a letter reprimanding them for not filing mandatory financial reports.

Part one of an article published by the online magazine Medium by “Anonymous,” a purported IT forensics analyst drawing on an international network of other IT specialists, claims that code on a variety of pro-Hillary and Democratic political websites shows that they are all done by Montgomery and that his allegedly independent expenditure PACS are all guided by the Clinton campaign.  Additionally FEC filings from other Democratic PACS show that Hillary’s campaign paid another Montgomery PAC $275,000 this summer.  “Anonymous” writes:

Hillary’s main PAC, Hillary for America, paid Correct the Record (Luke Montgomery) a whopping $275,615.43 for 3 months of what’s filed as “research”. This report is for 3 months only, so a bill of that magnitude is far too high. Research might be $10–30,000 per month, so anything higher than $90,000 would be fishy. 

Anonymous didn’t publish another part of the article before SNL aired; part one was published less than 24 hours ago.  The article, entitled “Hillary Clinton May Have Just Committed Election Fraud — And the Internet Found Out (Part 1)”, also claims the DeportRacism site was encoded with a “false flag” to make it look like Senator Bernie Sanders is behind its attacks on Trump, and that Montgomery has a history of cheating buyers out of merchandise and of harvesting emails and spamming people.

I emailed Montgomery and the other DeportRacism staff Saturday before writing this, asking for comment, and also sent direct messages via Twitter to Brian Fallon and other official Hillary Clinton spokespeople, and asked for comment.  None has been received.

———————————————————————————————

Post script:

Luke emailed me this two days too late:

From: Miguel <Miguel@deportracism.com>
Date: Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 6:06 PM
Subject: Re: Questions
To: Bruce Majors

Bruce,

If you are writing for an actual website I’d suggest that you say that in your email as to not be dismissed with random questions from tin-foil hat-wearing right wing nuts. Seems like a journalism basic that you should know. Along with capitalized letters at the beginnings of sentences. That’s why I didn’t respond.

1) do you expect anything to actually happen at SNL tonight?

Yeah. I expect pretty awesome major headlines that involve the words “Trump” and “racist” next to each other that validate the killer strategy I conceived to make precisely that happen. (Note: I’m not clairvoyant, I cheated as I just saw this from you and it’s after the fact)

2) what will your next step be if nothing does?

It did 🙂

3) did you see the article claiming you are funded by Hillary?  Any comment?

No but I heard about if from others. Pretty funny considering that you would know that if I were paid anything by a PAC of that supports Hillary because it would be in THEIR report. Why not say I was paid by a unicorn in gold coins stolen from a little man in a green suit at the end of a rainbow if you are just making things up? Also funny, because I’m a Bernie Sanders supporter ever since he entered the race AFTER I had started my pro-Hillary effort BillforFirstLady2016.com.

It’s amusing to see people spin “vast left-wing conspiracy” theories based off the fact that the website template was copied from the BillforFirstLady2016.com site and used for the DeportRacism.com site and some of the code was not changed and still said “Hillary” etc. If I were hiding the fact that I ran both sites why would I, A. File public records stating such, and B. have my name, photo and bio on both sites that were clearly linked to and visible to anyone? Re read that last line again if you didn’t fully get how obvious that was. You also might want to explain to your super-intelligent readers that PACs are not affiliated with candidates and even they can start a PAC supporting any candidate or issue and it does not mean that they are funded by that candidate (which would be against the law.) But just for the record, I’d love $300k from Hillary. Why not?

I’ve LOVED reading Breitbart’s articles on me as they are a real hoot. Attached please find some more shocking photos of me promoting homosexual lesbian marriage with Glee’s Jane Lynch, a photo that shows I’m an Obama-lovin atheist sodomite and one of me holding gun and wearing lipstick which I’m sure your gun nut/homophobe readers will find confusing and bitter sweet. Keep up the good work promoting me.

-Luke Sissyfag (or at least used to be)

The Late Hillary Clinton

This was published yesterday at Breitbart.

Perhaps she was some “way-yaz   tye-ard” from 11 hours of testimony on Benghazi Thursday – Hillary Clinton was 50 minutes late to her rally at Market Square in Old Town, Alexandria yesterday.

Hillary’s Virginia campaign, which has been collecting the 5,000 signatures she needs to be on the Democratic primary ballot, had announced her speech for half past noon, but she showed up at 1:20 pm.

The TSA-like Secret Service metal detectors and table search gates set up at the normally open venue used weekly by a farmer’s market had been open since 11 am.  Even with a two and a half hour advance, the Square on King Street near the Potomac River was less than a third full, with only several hundred Hillaryites- about 85% female and 95% white – waiting to hear Mrs. Clinton.  One hefty, crunchy granola-looking woman waiting in line with me to have her purse searched told her friend the crowd seemed smaller than the weekly farmers’ markets or Christmas fair held at the same venue.

A few people left around 1 pm and a few who stayed asked the organizers for an ETA with a little grumbling.  Old Town was an appropriate venue – the bulk of the crowd were Ladies Who Lunch, 50- and 60-something women, who didn’t seem to have jobs or orher commitments to get back to.  One near me explained to her friends that she worked for herself and could set her own schedule.

The Market Square area (and Old Town generally) is one of the wealthiest D.C. suburban neighborhoods, a business district consisting mainly of banks, real estate firms, restaurants, boutique dress shops, and especially trade and lobbying associations and government contractors.  Only 3 minutes (7/10ths of a mile) away sits the four story waterfront rowhome style mini-mansion Clinton spinner James Carville sold for an even $4 million in June, 2013 before moving to New Orleans.  (It’s a lovely mansion, looking out at a bridge across the Potomac to the National Harbor resort in Maryland – I’ve been to a fundraiser there thrown by Carville’s wife, Republican Mary Matalin.)    The average household income in downtown Alexandria is $146,000, over twice the Virginia state average.

Mrs. Clinton was introduced by Governor Terry McAuliffe, who took credit for new jobs in Virginia and told the small crowd that a Clinton in office could bring the same good fortune to the whole country.  He failed to mention that Virginia ranks first as the biggest recipent of government contracts (Maryland is 4th and DC 5th) with over $51 billion  paid for with money taxed away from other states.  How that model can be generalized was not explained – Mrs. Clinton did not propose taxing Canadians to fund government contracts for all of the 50 states.

Instead, she spoke with a normal cadence, unlike her slow roll speech to the Benghazi committee, and a normal accent, even though she was technically in the south – McAullife had already received applause from the upscale audience by announcing he was the first southern Governor to perform a gay wedding.  Mrs. Clinton was short on policy ideas.  She told personal anecdotes about her grandfather the lace maker and about a little girl who asked her if a girl president would be paid as much as a boy president.  At one point she contrasted how incomes grew under her husband “unlike now,” without noting that increasing inequality and declining incomes have been occurring for 7 years under a Democratic president and a massive expansion of government control of the economy.  Obama was mentioned only once or twice, mainly at the beginning when Mrs. Clinton announced that she was running on her own, not as a third term for either Bill Clinton or for Barack Obama.

A large bleacher was set up for the media, who were about 15% of the people there, shunting most of her other supporters – and interlopers like me – to the sides with obstructed views.  On a riser behind Mrs. Clinton and Governor McAuliffe the supporters picked to be their background for the TV cameras included about half of the dozen African Americans at the event.  The diversity included a light sprinkling of pajama boys and gays and lesbians, if my gaydar was working, but there were virtually no Hispanics or Asians.  And I think no transgenders or indigenous peoples.  After middle aged and older white women, the media were the biggest demographic.

But these old white ladies vote in high percentages, and Mrs. Clinton served up a laundry list of fossilized notions that they all agree with, a subsidy for this and a subsidy for that, stroking every old Democrat button.  That the American economy is collapsing under trillions in debt or that parts of the world are being overrun by savages – anti-woman savages who auction off young girls as sex slaves – because of Mrs. Clinton’s foreign policy failures, and sometimes armed with weapons paid for by the Obama regime – were among the many realities Clinton, McAullife and their fans continued to evade.

Clintons in the Crossfire

Published yesterday at The Daily Caller.

Hillary Clinton is finally facing the sniper fire she “imagined” she caught in Bosnia as First Lady.   Roger Stone’s The Clintons’ War on Women is published today, on the day Hillary finally has to debate the other Democratic candidates – an ordeal the Democratic National Committee and Debbie Wasserman-Schultz have tried to spare her, by cutting down the number of debates from the 28 held in the 2008 primaries to only 6 this time around.

The book recounts the stories of about two dozen women, beginning with one of Bill Clinton’s college classmates, who have stepped forward to claim that President Clinton sexually assaulted them.  Some of the women received settlements of hundreds of thousands of dollars, some of whom claim to have had their pets killed, their jobs terminated, their businesses audited by the IRS, their tires slashed, or to have received odd phone calls or queries from strange bypassing joggers about the health of their children.

That’s just the first 100 pages of the book, which with footnotes and bibliography runs to almost 500 pages.   That only brings us up through Bill Clinton being elected President, and doesn’t even get us to Monica Lewinsky.  Nor to Stone’s narrative on Hillary Clinton and Chelsea Clinton, who he argues are also at war against women.  Nor to tales of drug sales, money laundering, and other chicanery.

But it does raise a question:  what kind of sociopath would actually have a child by a serial rapist?  Or even by someone who seems to be routinely accused of sexual assaults?

According to Stone, Hillary Clinton’s sociopathy isn’t that deep.  Chelsea Clinton is not Bill Clinton’s child, and has had extensive plastic surgery, both to make herself more attractive (were any First Children other than the Fords ever good looking?) and to make herself less the spitting image of her real dad, Web Hubbell.  Stone’s co-author Robert Morrow  asked Chelsea Clinton about this at a book signing this week.  (Chelsea calmly answered him and is now being praised even by Hillary critics like Sean Hannity.)

But Hillary is implicated in the huge apparatus to manage and clean up Bill’s “messes,” something alluded to in the book and movie Primary Colors.  Beginning with Arkansas state troopers who hushed up Clinton’s crimes when he was Governor, reported by then conservative journalist (and now on the Soros payroll and a Hillary flak) David Brock.  (It’s funny to watch “progressives” like the New York Times Frank Rich argue that powerful people don’t use the police to persecute little people who might threaten their rise to power, in a year when the same “progressives” lionize the BlackLivesMatter movement that claims police routinely abuse the powerless.)  Bill Clinton’s sexual appetites seem to require a staff to manage:  volunteers, interns, and employees to be the objects of his lust; state troopers, White House lawyers, and PR flaks to pay off, intimidate, and smear them if they go public; and post-Presidency, billionaire friend Jeffery Epstein to provide young girls on private jets to secluded  estates in the Virgin Islands.

(Coincidentally, about 14 years ago I went to a fundraiser for gay and lesbian Democrats thrown at the Georgetown home of a Clinton appointee.  Bill Clinton had crowed about how he appointed more LGBT people than any president ever had, including Bruce Lehman, the first openly gay Assistant Secretary confirmed by the Senate, James Hormel, the first gay Ambassador, and Bob Hattoy, the first AIDS victim to speak at a Democratic National Convention.    At the time I traveled socially with the LGBT Democratic crowd, selling some Clinton political appointees and staffers houses, and becoming close friends with mainly several of the lesbian LGBT Democrats.

The day after this particular fundraiser, an oddly affect-less bespectacled woman, the executive assistant to the Clinton appointee hosting the festivities, who had been at the event, called to ask if I would be available to go out with Mr. Appointee.  I replied that if he managed to call me himself I would give him an answer.  That may have been too uppity a reply, as I never got that call.  I now wonder if not being able to manage your own social life without a staff was part of the Clinton regime’s culture.  As we know from her emails, Hillary can’t drive, is unable to figure out a fax machine or an Ipad, and doesn’t know how to read TV guide.  So perhaps like Hillary, Bill really needed assistance to manage his affairs.)

It’s a fascinating book about an unseemly topic.  Stone (and co-author Robert Morrow) mention Peter Schweizer’s book Clinton Cash as a companion volume; Stone says he is covering the non-financial crimes of the Clintons.  Some fans of Schweizer’s book will no doubt think Stone is muddying the water with the Clinton’s un-drycleaned laundry.  But Stone details how many courtiers cover up for the Clintons just to advance their careers, and how many major networks and national journalists have shelved or delayed stories about the women Bill is alleged to have assaulted and Hillary is alleged to have threatened, until after various elections or impeachment trials had been decided.  So perhaps it’s really more a companion volume to Marc Leibovich’s fantastic book on D.C.’s political class,  This Town.  Maybe This Town:  After Dark.

Obama’s wager

Published Tuesday at Breitbart.

At Monday’s White House press conference Josh Earnest answered a question about whether President Obama wants Vice President Biden to enter the race by saying Obama thought picking Biden for VP was one of the smartest decisions he ever made.

Some people find it surprising that the Obama administration is moving to take down Hillary’s campaign (as they did in 2008), but it’s just part and parcel of Obama’s fundamental transformation of America.

Obama seeks to centralize and control the political process just as he has centralized and controlled the economy.

So far Obama has succeeded in placing record numbers of Americans on food stamps and disability.  Record numbers are unemployed and underemployed.  Record numbers are dependent on one central paymaster, the federal government, i.e., Barack Obama.

Obama’s policies have also aimed to reduce the number of people in the private sector who create jobs.  Specific industries that lend themselves to independent contractors and small and mid-sized business owners have been under regulatory attack from Obama policies.

Among the first to feel it were automobile dealerships and then doctors and healthcare providers.  This October mortgage brokers will join them and feel the hit when Senator Elizabeth Warren’s Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and its complete overhaul of the real estate settlement process and the settlement sheets (formerly called “HUD-1s”) that buyers and sellers sign in transferring property becomes mandatory.  Implementation of the new CFPB regulations has been delayed for several months –  in the original version the CFPB bureaucrats had forgotten to design forms with signatures lines for both buyers and sellers, among other ridiculous lapses.  In the new version, individual loan officers bear legal liability and can be sued if a buyer’s job situation or the wider economy changes and the loan they made to a home buyer is no longer affordable for them.  And aside from that, increased regulatory costs mean the loan industry will become concentrated to fewer and fewer large firms that can afford lawyers and compliance departments.  Exactly what has already happened in the health insurance industry under Obamacare.

But Obama isn’t just redesigning the American economy to a more concentrated corporatist future.  He’s also redesigning American politics to increase barriers to entry and reduce competition.  As with the economy, he aims to be in control.

Many have noted how Obama has harmed the Democratic Party.  Under Barack Obama’s presidency, Democrats lost Senate and House seats as well as Governors, in 2010 and then again in 2014.

Like an illusionist performing sleight of hand tricks, Democrat media have been yukking it up for months about the “GOP clown car,” the spectacle of 17 people running for the Republican presidential nomination.  This snarking point, and all the coverage of Donald Trump and the other 16 candidates is not about the Republicans.  It’s not even about the Democrats running or that there are so few of them.  It keeps us from noticing how few Democrats could run for president.  Who is left who could run for President as a Democrat?  John Edwards and Harry Reid are both disgraced.  Al Gore seems to have scandals in his closet as well as being viewed, like several other once top Democrats, as a figure of fun.

The Democrats are down to Hillary Clinton and … Joe Biden? Elizabeth Warren? Bernie Sanders?  The Democratic Party is remarkable for its absences.  As Monica Crowley and others have argued, the Obama regime is clearly behind the attacks on Hillary, since its the FBI and the Department of Justice investigating her misuse of classified emails.  Obama wants to control whom, from the dwindling possibilities, becomes the next Democratic nominee.

Another noticeable Democratic absence – no one significant is defending Hillary.  (Is someone telling them not to do so?  Or has her baggage simply become Augean, requiring a PR Hercules?)  This weekend she was defended by relative unknowns Ellen Tauscher and Brian Fallon.

Tauscher is a former Congresswoman and Democratic fundraiser who served under Hillary in the State Department.  Ms. Tauscher had a clownish performance on Fox News Sunday, sweating, looking like she was about to cry, pale, with a face so taut it looked like she had just had an overly severe lift.  More importantly, she evaded Shannon Bream’s questions about why Mrs. Clinton had a private server by instead replying that other Secretaries of State had private email accounts.  I’m sure she’s right about precedents.   If email had been more widely used back during the first Clinton administration, Clinton National Security adviser Sandy Burger would have erased emails too instead of shredding classified documents embarassing to Bill Clinton or hiding them down his pants.

Likewise Fallon, a former Schumer and Holder flak, evaded the issues of a Secretary of State conducting business with classified documents on a private email account on a private server (or now, it may be two private servers) and concentrated on showing his YouTube audience a few specific emails marked unclassified, a performance as lame as Hillary’s miming wiping a server with a cleaning rag.  The campaign would be better off just cracking jokes, telling voters that she didn’t get the question when she said she wasn’t involved with “classified” material because she thought people were asking about Bill’s “casual connections” Craigslist ads.

Hillary and Obama have the same vice, what the classical Greek ethical theorists called pleonexia, grasping for too much so that you lose it all.  Best illustrated in the Aesop’s fable of the boy who reaches into a jar of nuts and grabs such a large handful he cannot get his hand back out.

Hillary has been wheeling and dealing, selling uranium to Putin flunkies etc., all evidence of which must be wiped from her internet records.  The result is that she may not be President, or even the nominee of her party.

Obama’s grasping is broader and more ambitious.  He is willing to risk electoral Armageddon for the Democratic Party, leaving it with fewer and fewer elected officials and weaker and less mainstream presidential candidates, as long as the nominees who emerge are loyal to him and his legacy and ideology.  In seeking to permanently bankrupt and degrade America, will he have overplayed his too full hand?