Connect with us

Latest

News

Staff Picks

The AP Leak and Hillary’s Victory Night

AP’s announcement of Hillary Clinton’s victory on the eve of the California primary contradicts the whole essence of democracy.

Kevin Henderson

Published

on

876 Views

On June 6th, 2016,  a modern political heist was viewed by thousands of Americans on the Internet in real time.

The moment I saw the AP’s “breaking story”, via a Zero Hedge post, I had a sinking feeling in my heart, the kind I get watching burning skyscrapers crumble into their footprints. A crime of the political season was taking place. In a few minutes, the MSN spin machine would wash the dirt away and declare the crime “official.” I wrote the following notes the night of June 7th, unable to find the Californian primary results that were supposed to matter. California is, of course the primary where, years ago, Bobby Kennedy pulled off a surprising win and was then shot to death. California has had special primary baggage ever since (indeed, Clinton made a strange reference to Kennedy in a previous campaign), and was perhaps the perfect place for the DNC and willing assistants at AP and other media allies to pull a full blown heist in under twenty minutes.

Whoever did this timed the act to make California’s vote moot before the day of the primary. According to the newswires, this was an astonishing success.

The first post that appeared from AP was around 8pm on June 6th, the night before  the primaries. AP’s article was then shared on Zero Hedge. The full  AP “story” has apparently disappeared down a Memory Hole, but you can read it here.

This article was brazen propaganda, and something new:  A declaration of fait accompli victory the night before a single June 7th primary vote was cast.

The AP story is peculiar.  The theme is past tense and capital-H Historic — the final confirmation of the first woman presidential nominee ever. It reads like it was written by the Clinton campaign itself, or a DNC lackey; it certainly does not read like the product of a neutral news organization:

“Campaigning as the loyal successor to the nation’s first black president, Clinton held off a surprisingly strong challenge from Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders. He mobilized millions with a fervently liberal message and his insurgent candidacy revealed a deep level of national frustration with politics-as-usual, even among Democrats who have controlled the White House since 2009.” Keep in mind this is a day before the CA primary.

According to AP, this pre-primary “victory story” was based entirely on anonymous interviews with some or many “Super Delegates”, all of whom apparently whispered their secrets to loyal AP operatives.

I knew that within the seconds the AP meme would spread to CNN, Fox News, ABC/NBC/CBS, the New York Times, and Washington Post, as indeed it did. Within an hour it was everywhere.

This was a new variety of sleazy campaign tricks for a political candidate, and a propaganda coup for the AP.  Why not just leak a proclamation of something, let the wires pick it up, and then, voilá, declare victory the night before?

Late night on the 6th, The New York Times, Politico, Huffington Post and various other Clinton supporters, many with established financial and PR interests in the investment (I mean candidate) were smugly proclaiming victory. Very interestingly, the talking points raised in the AP “story”, and similar prose in the New York Times and Politico, re-appeared, in very similar language, in Hillary’s “Acceptance Speech” the next night.  The agitprop wasn’t subtle: This is the First Woman President; this is Historic; Sanders had done a good job “mobilizing millions”; that, hey, it was tough for those tough but loveable Bernie-Bots to lose; but the Democrats must forget the differences between Sanders and Clinton and “Come Together, Right Now”. (Incredibly, a HuffPo editorial brought a deceased John Lennon into this fiasco.)

The next afternoon, Hillary’s campaign declared “History Made” on her Twitter feed, and prepared to present the speech. She’d won New Jersey, you see. Not a single vote from California had been counted.

Hilary Clinton’s “Victory Speech” the evening of June 7th was quite a performance: planned, big-time, with the usual ugly color scheme typical of whitehouse.gov presentations.

There was a pre-game, so to speak, for a few minutes.

There was no way to tell how many people were in the mid-sized auditorium, but at least half seemed to be stacked up behind the podium. A young woman sang The Star Spangled Banner, as though this were Inauguration Day, seven months in advance. The people behind the podium began to wave little American flags – doubtlessly dispensed by a patriotic gnome backstage. The lights dimmed – this was show business after all. Over loudspeakers come the voices of unknown supporters, interspersed with “classic” quotations from that great successor of all humanitarians, Hillary Clinton.

The lights came up and The Great Leader beamed in what appeared to be a joyous emotional orgasm, but Hillary’s eyes were peculiar. Behind the smiles I heard the voice of a woman who, upon learning that Gaddafi had been ritually murdered, happily exclaimed “We came, we saw, he died”.

Her demeanor displayed a forgone conclusion:  Hillary Clinton is already the President!

Then there was a bit of a letdown – Hillary started to speak and the microphone was off.  A sound person attempted to find a fader on a mixing board. Then there was a scream of feedback, but Hillary didn’t even wince. She knew. This was her moment. The sound stayed bad for the entire thing; the engineer couldn’t balance the levels. With all of their Clinton Cash, between the chintzy flags and bad sound (not to mention previous choice of IT professionals for private servers) this was a typically cheap public Clinton production: Hot dogs, not caviar, for the troops.

I can’t report on the Speech, because I record sounds myself, and there are some voices that really grate on you. When Hillary gets that self-righteous bullhorn going, we must follow Dante and abandon the wife of the boy from Hope. However, one can observe the aesthetics of the thing. The narcissism of our current Great Leader is well documented, but Hillary is something else. She took credit for many vague successes and appropriated the triumphant struggles of everything from feminism to the civil rights movement. And she promised her followers, without a hint of $300,000 G-Sachs irony, hey, we’re really gonna go after those big banks. Best of all, Hillary talked “street”: “I’ve got your back,” she thundered. With enough drinks in them, the audience, along with Beltway cronies getting tanked right now, might actually believe this.

Reflecting on the above, I wonder if Trump even has a chance. He’s got a million topics to grill Hillary over (Iraq, an FBI indictment, Benghazi, Libya, Syria, targeting victims of her husband’s sexual harassment, etc.). Every American should read Roger Morris’ “Partners in Power” (1996) and learn about dozens more. “Crooked Hillary” is no mere libel — there are public records of too many things.

But in spite of Trump’s talent for hard debate and asking politically incorrect questions, I wonder if Trump is a mere amateur compared to this Clinton Cosa Nostra. The Clintons not only have their cash, via the Clinton Foundation, Goldman Sachs, Soros, and other banks and philanthropists, but they also have the willing support and love of all the media who participated in the heist last night – from the BBC/ABC/NBC/CBS, to Politico and the Huffington Post, etc. The Clintons have powerful friends who will control the echo chamber.

For millions of Americans of all shades of political grey, and for the democratic process in this country, the Clintons and AP showed complete contempt.

It’s interesting to speculate on some Clinton protegés who might end up with high ranks in a Hillary Clinton administration.

This week, Victoria Nuland was speaking to some Senators about some kind of alternate world in which the evil Russians are winning the propaganda wars over issues like “U.S. Assets in Ukraine.”

To the average American, such topics make little sense. The average American is concerned with obtaining or keeping a decent job, or receiving another paycheck of any kind. Many worry about the next couch to crash on. Russia is far away and generally not considered important business, certainly not to anyone with a life who’s trying to survive.

Victoria Nuland, political mastermind that she is, was actually telling the Senators what a shame it is that Radio Liberty, Radio Free Europe, et al, cannot compete with Russia Today (RT).  Nuland was among the masterminds who helped engineer the tragic civil wars/coups in Libya and the Ukraine.

[Off topic: If I could address the Congress on behalf of millions of American viewers: perhaps it’s not that RT is the perfect propaganda machine; perhaps instead RT is a) aesthetically more interesting than CNN, b) insults the viewer’s intelligence way, way less than CNN.]

State department types, along with the CIA and other Responsibility to Protect-ors,  are encouraging NATO allies to conduct “war games” and stir up anti-Russian sentiment in the likes of Latvia, while installing missiles right up to the Russian border. Provoking the Russian Bear seems insane and pathetic to most people, and I wonder if anyone outside a drunk tank inside the Beltway takes it seriously.

(Paul Craig Roberts has described this crazy rhetoric here).

Neo-liberal neo-cons like Victoria Nuland are the folks who may well get the keys to the castle in a Hillary presidency. Not only do neo-cons behave irresponsibly;  they are often arrogant and ignorant, a particularly bad combo in foreign affairs with a nuclear state like Russia which is armed to the teeth. Consequences, to the neo-cons,  are for the little people. As Nuland said, “f*ck the EU!”

There were still no California results on midnight of the 7th. The DNC, one assumes, had all night to process and perhaps fix any, ahem, “unfortunate” outcomes. They did such a great job suppressing voters in Arizona, Kentucky, Nevada, and New York, the DNC certainly can’t call itself unskilled in this line of work. Indeed, later news stories reported this to have been the case in California.

So-called left-liberals made a real stink over voter suppression when the Bush-era Republicans did it.

I hope the Sanders campaign will continue their difficult and noble struggle. Unfortunately, Sanders supporters will face the cops in DNC-run Philly, along with probable armies of paid provocateurs.  Still, despite the help of generous friends like the AP, the Clinton campaign in 2016 will be no cakewalk. There are too many scandals; we are living in strange and interesting times.  Finally, I don’t see Hillary’s support numbers planting flags on Mount Everest any time soon. The Clintons had to pull off this 24 hour California fiasco to silence a 74 year old Socialist Senator from Vermont, who fills real venues with really impassioned supporters, most of whom actually believe in something more than power, money, and the Clinton’s patron saint, Machiavelli.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of

Latest

Some Russian monarchists want Tsar Vladimir Putin

Latest news from Russian monarchists highlight the debate over bringing the Russian Empire back to life in modern times.

Seraphim Hanisch

Published

on

A December 13 report in The Wall Street Journal shone light on a notion that has been afoot in the Russian Federation since the fall of Communism in 1991 – the restoration of the Monarchy as the form of government, complete with a new Tsar of all the Russias.

Of course, some of these monarchists have a top contender in mind for that post, none other than President Vladimir Putin himself.

This idea has long been used in a pejorative light in the West, as various shadowy and not-so-shadowy elements in the American media speculated over the years that Mr. Putin was actually aspiring to become Tsar. This was thrown around until probably the time that the Russian president spoke, lamenting the fall of Communism, and since then the prime accusation has been that President Putin wants to bring back the Soviet Union.

This is not true. It also does not appear to be the case that the Russian president wants to be Tsar. But the monarchists are not fazed in the slightest. Here is excerpted material from the WSJ piece, with emphases added:

The last time term limits forced Russian leader Vladimir Putin to step down from the presidency, he became prime minister for a few years.

This time around, a group of pro-Kremlin activists have a different idea: Proclaim him Czar Vladimir.

“We will do everything possible to make sure Putin stays in power as long as possible,” Konstantin Malofeyev, a politically active businessman, said recently to thunderous applause from hundreds of Russian Orthodox priests and members of the country’s top political parties gathered at a conference outside Moscow. They were united by one cause—to return the monarchy to Russia…

Even among those who want a monarchy, however, there are splits over what kind it should be. Is an absolute monarchy better than a constitutional monarchy? Should a blood line be established or should the czar be elected? For those who favor male succession, would it be a problem that Mr. Putin reportedly only has two daughters? Some have even suggested others besides Mr. Putin should accede to the throne.

There is a very keen interest indeed among some in Russia that propose various options as to who might best become Tsar in the event that the Monarchy is restored.

Grand Duke George Mikhailovich Romanov and his mother, Grand Duchess Maria Vladimirovna of Russia, together with Metropolitan Hilarion Alfeyev, head of the Russian Orthodox Church Department of External Relations

One candidate that has received significant attention is a man by the name of George Mikhailovich Romanov. He is an actual member of the Royal family, the heir apparent to Maria Vladimirovna Romanova, Grand Duchess of Russia. There are other heir apparents as well, and the issue as to who it should be has not been settled among the surviving members of the Romanov family.

The restoration of the Russian monarchy is unique because to carries strong religious significance. As far back as the 8th and 9th centuries, A.D., a host of saints and prophets appear to have foreseen the advent of the Soviet times and the restoration of the Tsar after their conclusion.

Some such prophecies are attributed to anonymous sources, but some are named. Here are two with rather extensive editing, so please go to the site linked for the fullest description of the prophecies.

Monk Abel the Prophet (+1831).

In a conversation with Tsar Paul I (+1801), after prophesying the destinies of all the Tsars from Paul I to Nicholas II:

“What is impossible for man is possible for God. God delays with His help, but it is said that He will give it soon and will raise the horn of Russian salvation. And there will arise a great prince from your race in exile, who stands for the sons of his people. He will be a chosen one of God, and on his head will be blessing. He will be the only one comprehensible to all, the very heart of Russia will sense him. His appearance will be sovereign and radiant, and nobody will say: ‘The Tsar is here or there’, but all will say: ‘That is him’. The will of the people will submit to the mercy of God, and he himself will confirm his calling. His name has occurred three times in Russian history. Two of the same name have already been on the throne, but not on the Tsar’s throne. But he will sit on the Tsar’s throne as the third. In him will be the salvation and happiness of the Russian realm.”

“Russian hopes will be realized upon [the cathedral of Hagia] Sophia in Tsargrad [Constantinople]; the Orthodox Cross will gleam again; Holy Rus will be filled with the smoke of incense and prayer, and will blossom like a heavenly lily.”

And from one of the most famous saints in Russian history:

St. John of Kronstadt (+1908):

“I foresee the restoration of a powerful Russia, still stronger and mightier than before. On the bones of these martyrs, remember, as on a strong foundation, will the new Russia we built – according to the old model; strong in her faith in Christ God and in the Holy Trinity! And there will be, in accordance with the covenant of the holy Prince Vladimir, a single Church! Russian people have ceased to understand what Rus is: it is the footstool of the Lord’s Throne! The Russian person must understand this and thank God that he is Russian.”

“The Church will remain unshaken to the end of the age, and a Monarch of Russia, if he remains faithful to the Orthodox Church, will be established on the Throne of Russia until the end of the age.”

What may surprise those in the West is that there are a great many people in Russia and in Orthodox Christian countries in general who take these prophecies quite seriously.

Interestingly enough, when the idea of restoring the monarchy was brought to President Putin’s attention, he regarded the idea as “beautiful” according to Lt. General Leonid Reshetnikov, but also expressed concern that it would lead to stagnation within the country.

A second statement, this one by Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov, noted that President Putin does not like the idea of bringing back the monarchy, but offered no comment on the conversation with Mr. Reshetnikov.

The idea of restoring the monarchy is not completely absurd. Britain overthrew its own monarchy in 1649 during that country’s Civil War, but it was restored shortly afterwards under King Charles II. Spain cast aside its monarchy in 1931, with its king, Alfonso XIII going into exile, but after sixteen years this monarchy, too, was restored.

Both of these monarchies have become largely ceremonial, with most governing functions carried out through some kind of Parliament and Prime Minister. It is therefore not clear what a ruling monarchy in Russia would look like.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

US confirms pullout from INF treaty, Moscow will respond if missiles placed in Europe – deputy FM

Moscow will respond to possible attempts to place short and intermediate range nuclear-capable missiles in Europe if the US decides to go on with this plan.

RT

Published

on

By

Via RT…


Washington has confirmed its decision to withdraw from the INF treaty is final, Russia’s deputy foreign minister said, adding that Moscow will ‘take measures’ if American missiles that threaten its security are placed in Europe.

“Washington publicly announced its plans to withdraw from the treaty (the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces) already in October. Through the high-level bilateral channels it was confirmed to us that this decision was final and wasn’t an attempt to initiate dialogue,” Sergey Ryabkov told the Kommersant newspaper.

The Deputy FM said that Moscow will respond to possible attempts to place short and intermediate range nuclear-capable missiles in Europe if the US decides to go on with this plan.

“We’ll be forced to come up with effective compensating measures. I’d like to warn against pushing the situation towards the eruption of new ‘missile crises.’ I am convinced that no sane country could be interested in something like this,” he said.

Russia isn’t threatening anybody, but have the necessary strength and means to counter any aggressor.
Back in October, President Donald Trump warned that Washington was planning unilateral withdrawal from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty because “Russia has not adhered to the agreement.” The US leader also promised that the country would keep boosting its nuclear arsenal until Russia and China “come to their senses.”

Earlier this month, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced that Washington will suspend its obligations under the treaty within 60 days if Russia does not “return to compliance.”

Signed in late 1988, the INF agreement was considered a milestone in ending the arms race between the US and the USSR.

In recent years, Moscow and Washington have repeatedly accused each other of violating the INF deal. While the US has alleged that Russia has developed missiles prohibited by the treaty, Russia insists that the American anti-missile systems deployed in Eastern Europe can actually be used to launch intermediate-range cruise missiles.

The deputy FM said that Washington “never made a secret” of the fact that its INF treaty pullout “wasn’t so much about problems between the US and Russia, but about the desire of the Americans to get rid of all restrictions that were inconvenient for them.”

The US side expressed belief that the INF deal “significantly limits the US military’s capabilities to counter states with arsenals of medium-range and shorter-range ground-based missiles,” which threaten American interests, he said. “China, Iran and North Korea” were specifically mentioned by Washington, Ryabkov added.

“I don’t think that we’re talking about a new missile crisis, but the US plans are so far absolutely unclear,” Mikhail Khodarenok, retired colonel and military expert, told RT, reminding that the Americans have avoided any type of “meaningful discussion” with Moscow in regards to its INF deal pullout.

While “there’ll be no deployment of [US missiles] in Europe any time soon,” Moscow should expect that Washington would try to void other agreements with Russia as well, Khodarenok warned.

The INF deal “just stopped being beneficial for the US. Next up are all the other arms control treaties. There’ll be no resistance from the NATO allies [to US actions],” he said.

“The neocons who run Trump’s foreign policy never have liked arms reduction treaties,” former Pentagon official Michael Maloof told RT. “The new START treaty which comes up for renewal also could be in jeopardy.”

“The risk of a new nuclear buildup is really quite obvious” if the US withdrawals from the INF treaty, Dan Smith, the director of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, told RT.

“I think the relations between the great powers – the US and Russia as well as the US and China – are more difficult than they’ve been for a long time,” he added.

However, with Washington having indicated that it wants China to be part of the new deal, “there are still possibilities for negotiations and agreement,” according to Smith. Nonetheless, he warned that following this path will demand strong political will and tactical thinking from the leadership of all three countries.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

US Pressures Germany To Ditch Huawei Over ‘Security Concerns’

This news will likely not go over well in Beijing, which is still struggling with the US and Canada over the arrest of Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhou in Vancouver.

Published

on

Via Zerohedge


First it was Australia, New Zealand and Japan, now the US is pressing the German government to refuse to use equipment manufactured by Chinese telecom giant Huawei as Europe’s largest economy seeks to build out its 5G infrastructure.

According to Bloomberg, a US delegation met on Friday with German Foreign Ministry officials in Berlin to talk about the security risks presented by Huawei’s equipment, which the US says is vulnerable to spying. The meeting in Germany follows a report from late last month claiming the US had launched an “extraordinary outreach campaign” to warn its allies against using Huawei equipment (while its vulnerability to Chinese spying has been cited as the reason to avoid Huawei, it’s also worth noting that the US and China are locked in a battle for who will dominate the global 5G space…a battle that Huawei is currently winning).

Germany is set to hold an auction early next year to find a supplier to help expand its 5G network. The Berlin meeting took place one day after Deutsche Telekom said it would reexamine its decision to use Huawei equipment.

US officials are optimistic that their warnings are getting a hearing, though any detailed talks are in early stages and no concrete commitments have been made, according to one of the people.

The US pressure on Germany underscores increased scrutiny of Huawei as governments grapple with fears that the telecom-equipment maker’s gear is an enabler for Chinese espionage. The Berlin meeting took place a day after German carrier Deutsche Telekom AG said it will re-evaluate its purchasing strategy on Huawei, an indication that it may drop the Chinese company from its list of network suppliers.

France is also reportedly considering further restrictions after adding Huawei products to its “high alert” list. The US has already passed a ban preventing government agencies from using anything made by Huawei. But the telecoms equipment provider isn’t taking these threats to its business lying down.

U.S. warnings over espionage are a delicate matter in Germany. Revelations over the scale of the National Security Agency’s signals intelligence, including reports of tapping Merkel’s mobile phone, are still fresh in Berlin five years after they came to light.

Huawei is pushing back against the accusations. The company’s rotating chairman warned this week that blacklisting the Chinese company without proof will hurt the industry and disrupt the emergence of new wireless technology globally. Ken Hu, speaking at a Huawei manufacturing base in Dongguan, cited “groundless speculation,” in some of the first public comments since the shock arrest of the company’s chief financial officer.

This news will likely not go over well in Beijing, which is still struggling with the US and Canada over the arrest of Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhou in Vancouver. In an editorial published Sunday, the Global Times, an English-language mouthpiece for the Communist Party, warned that China should retaliate against any country that – like Australia – takes a hard line against Huawei. So, if you’re a German citizen in Beijing, you might want to consider getting the hell out of Dodge.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending